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, 2011
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 1-31507
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
94-3283464
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|
|
|
2295 Iron Point Road, Suite 200, Folsom, CA
|
|
95630 |
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip code) |
(916) 608-8200
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
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 þ 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):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
þ Large accelerated filer
|
|
o Accelerated filer
|
|
o Non-accelerated filer
|
|
o Smaller reporting company |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock:
As of April 15, 2011: 113,578,838 shares of common stock
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
FORM 10-Q
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
Item 1. |
|
Financial Statements |
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and equivalents |
|
$ |
11,093 |
|
|
$ |
9,873 |
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful
accounts of $4,548 and $5,084 at March 31, 2011
and December 31, 2010, respectively |
|
|
149,485 |
|
|
|
152,156 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
12,233 |
|
|
|
20,130 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
33,546 |
|
|
|
33,402 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
206,357 |
|
|
|
215,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
1,318,704 |
|
|
|
1,337,476 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
928,632 |
|
|
|
927,852 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
377,092 |
|
|
|
381,475 |
|
Restricted assets |
|
|
27,716 |
|
|
|
30,441 |
|
Other assets, net |
|
|
23,902 |
|
|
|
23,179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,882,403 |
|
|
$ |
2,915,984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
66,753 |
|
|
$ |
85,252 |
|
Book overdraft |
|
|
12,380 |
|
|
|
12,396 |
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
96,380 |
|
|
|
99,075 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
54,408 |
|
|
|
54,157 |
|
Current portion of long-term debt and notes payable |
|
|
2,678 |
|
|
|
2,657 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
232,599 |
|
|
|
253,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt and notes payable |
|
|
872,282 |
|
|
|
909,978 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
47,658 |
|
|
|
47,637 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
348,777 |
|
|
|
334,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,501,316 |
|
|
|
1,545,566 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock: $0.01 par value per share; 7,500,000
shares authorized; none issued and outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock: $0.01 par value per share; 150,000,000
shares authorized; 113,578,009 and 113,950,081 shares
issued and outstanding at March 31, 2011 and December
31, 2010, respectively |
|
|
1,136 |
|
|
|
1,139 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
488,710 |
|
|
|
509,218 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
(3,095 |
) |
Retained earnings |
|
|
886,911 |
|
|
|
858,887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Waste Connections equity |
|
|
1,377,239 |
|
|
|
1,366,149 |
|
Noncontrolling interests |
|
|
3,848 |
|
|
|
4,269 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity |
|
|
1,381,087 |
|
|
|
1,370,418 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,882,403 |
|
|
$ |
2,915,984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
Page 1
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
331,468 |
|
|
$ |
307,540 |
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of operations |
|
|
187,066 |
|
|
|
176,990 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
38,838 |
|
|
|
35,658 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
33,037 |
|
|
|
31,444 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
3,977 |
|
|
|
3,585 |
|
Loss (gain) on disposal of assets |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
68,575 |
|
|
|
59,606 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(8,833 |
) |
|
|
(12,262 |
) |
Interest income |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income tax provision |
|
|
60,270 |
|
|
|
47,677 |
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
(23,477 |
) |
|
|
(19,863 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
36,793 |
|
|
|
27,814 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to
noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(254 |
) |
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Waste
Connections |
|
$ |
36,539 |
|
|
$ |
27,574 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per common share attributable
to Waste Connections common
stockholders: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in the per share
calculations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
113,519,266 |
|
|
|
116,560,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
114,401,304 |
|
|
|
118,014,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends per common share |
|
$ |
0.075 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
Page 2
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2011
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waste Connections Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Paid-In |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Noncontrolling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
(Loss) |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Interests |
|
|
Total |
|
Balances at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
113,950,081 |
|
|
$ |
1,139 |
|
|
$ |
509,218 |
|
|
$ |
(3,095 |
) |
|
$ |
858,887 |
|
|
$ |
4,269 |
|
|
$ |
1,370,418 |
|
Vesting of restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
510,060 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax withholdings related to net share settlements of
restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(175,871 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(5,167 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,169 |
) |
Equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,996 |
|
Exercise of stock options and warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,744 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
437 |
|
Excess tax benefit associated with equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,838 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,838 |
|
Repurchase of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(751,005 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(20,606 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,613 |
) |
Cash dividends on common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,515 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,515 |
) |
Amounts reclassified into earnings, net of taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
654 |
|
Changes in fair value of swaps, net of taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,923 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,923 |
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(675 |
) |
|
|
(675 |
) |
Net income |
|
$ |
36,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,539 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
36,793 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
5,770 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax effect of other comprehensive income |
|
|
(2,193 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
40,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(254 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income attributable to Waste Connections |
|
$ |
40,116 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
113,578,009 |
|
|
$ |
1,136 |
|
|
$ |
488,710 |
|
|
$ |
482 |
|
|
$ |
886,911 |
|
|
$ |
3,848 |
|
|
$ |
1,381,087 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
Page 3
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2010
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waste Connections Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Paid-In |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Noncontrolling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
(Loss) |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Interests |
|
|
Total |
|
Balances at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
117,898,624 |
|
|
$ |
786 |
|
|
$ |
625,173 |
|
|
$ |
(4,892 |
) |
|
$ |
732,738 |
|
|
$ |
3,231 |
|
|
$ |
1,357,036 |
|
Vesting of restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
475,083 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax withholdings related to net share settlements of
restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(164,724 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3,513 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,514 |
) |
Equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,940 |
|
Exercise of stock options and warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
503,438 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4,949 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,952 |
|
Excess tax benefit associated with equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,478 |
|
Repurchase of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,266,551 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(49,781 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,796 |
) |
Amounts reclassified into earnings, net of taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,349 |
|
Changes in fair value of swaps, net of taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,732 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,732 |
) |
Net income |
|
$ |
27,814 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,574 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
27,814 |
|
Other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(643 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax effect of other comprehensive loss |
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
27,431 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income attributable to Waste Connections |
|
$ |
27,191 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,445,870 |
|
|
$ |
776 |
|
|
$ |
582,243 |
|
|
$ |
(5,275 |
) |
|
$ |
760,312 |
|
|
$ |
3,471 |
|
|
$ |
1,341,527 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
Page 4
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
36,793 |
|
|
$ |
27,814 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss (gain) on disposal of assets |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
257 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
33,037 |
|
|
|
31,444 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
3,977 |
|
|
|
3,585 |
|
Deferred income taxes, net of acquisitions |
|
|
20,068 |
|
|
|
5,935 |
|
Amortization of debt issuance costs |
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
848 |
|
Amortization of debt discount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,245 |
|
Equity-based compensation |
|
|
2,996 |
|
|
|
2,940 |
|
Interest income on restricted assets |
|
|
(121 |
) |
|
|
(133 |
) |
Closure and post-closure accretion |
|
|
484 |
|
|
|
441 |
|
Excess tax benefit associated with equity-based compensation |
|
|
(1,838 |
) |
|
|
(2,478 |
) |
Net change in operating assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions |
|
|
(7,235 |
) |
|
|
11,782 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
88,378 |
|
|
|
83,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for acquisitions, net of cash acquired |
|
|
(914 |
) |
|
|
(1,819 |
) |
Capital expenditures for property and equipment |
|
|
(19,528 |
) |
|
|
(26,754 |
) |
Proceeds from disposal of assets |
|
|
789 |
|
|
|
802 |
|
Decrease (increase) in restricted assets, net of interest income |
|
|
2,846 |
|
|
|
(379 |
) |
Decrease (increase) in other assets |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(349 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(16,771 |
) |
|
|
(28,499 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from long-term debt |
|
|
54,000 |
|
|
|
60,000 |
|
Principal payments on notes payable and long-term debt |
|
|
(91,674 |
) |
|
|
(63,613 |
) |
Change in book overdraft |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(981 |
) |
Proceeds from option and warrant exercises |
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
4,952 |
|
Excess tax benefit associated with equity-based compensation |
|
|
1,838 |
|
|
|
2,478 |
|
Payments for repurchase of common stock |
|
|
(20,613 |
) |
|
|
(49,796 |
) |
Payments for cash dividends |
|
|
(8,515 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Tax withholdings related to net share settlements of restricted stock units |
|
|
(5,169 |
) |
|
|
(3,514 |
) |
Distributions to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(675 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(70,387 |
) |
|
|
(50,474 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and equivalents |
|
|
1,220 |
|
|
|
4,707 |
|
Cash and equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
9,873 |
|
|
|
9,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
11,093 |
|
|
$ |
14,346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash financing activity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities assumed and notes payable issued to sellers of businesses acquired |
|
$ |
452 |
|
|
$ |
312 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
Page 5
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND SUMMARY
The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements relate to Waste Connections, Inc.
and its subsidiaries (WCI or the Company) for the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and
2010. In the opinion of management, the accompanying balance sheets and related interim statements
of income, cash flows and equity and comprehensive income include all adjustments, consisting only
of normal recurring items, necessary for their fair presentation in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Preparing financial statements requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and
expenses. Examples include accounting for landfills, self-insurance, income taxes, allocation of
acquisition purchase price and asset impairments. An additional area that involves estimation is
when the Company estimates the amount of potential exposure it may have with respect to litigation,
claims and assessments in accordance with the accounting guidance on contingencies. Actual results
for all estimates could differ materially from the estimates and assumptions that the Company uses
in the preparation of its condensed consolidated financial statements.
Interim results are not necessarily indicative of results for a full year. The information
included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the financial
statements and notes thereto included in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2010.
2. RECLASSIFICATION
Certain amounts reported in the Companys prior periods financial statements have been
reclassified to conform with the 2011 presentation.
3. FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The Companys financial instruments consist primarily of cash, trade receivables, restricted
assets, trade payables, debt instruments, interest rate swaps and fuel hedges. As of March 31,
2011 and December 31, 2010, the carrying values of cash, trade receivables, restricted assets, and
trade payables are considered to be representative of their respective fair values. The carrying
values of the Companys debt instruments, excluding the 6.22% Senior Notes due 2015 (the 2015
Notes) and the 5.25% Senior Notes due 2019 (the 2019 Notes), approximate their fair values as of
March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, based on current borrowing rates for similar types of
borrowing arrangements. The Companys 2015 Notes had a carrying value of $175,000 and a fair value
of approximately $194,548 and $198,300 at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively, based
on quotes of bonds with similar ratings in similar industries. The Companys 2019 Notes had a
carrying value of $175,000 and a fair value of approximately $188,598 and $191,316 at March 31,
2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively, based on quotes of bonds with similar ratings in similar
industries. For details on the fair value of the Companys interest rate swaps and fuel hedges,
refer to Note 11.
4. LANDFILL ACCOUNTING
At March 31, 2011, the Company owned 35 landfills, and operated, but did not own, four
landfills under life-of-site operating agreements and five landfills under limited-term operating
agreements. The Companys landfills had site costs with a net book value of $746,284 at March 31,
2011. With the exception of two owned landfills that only accept construction and demolition and
other non-putrescible waste, all landfills that the Company owns or operates are municipal solid
waste landfills. For the Companys five landfills operated under limited-term operating
agreements, the owner of the property (generally a municipality) usually owns the permit and the
Company operates the landfill for a contracted term, which may be the life of the landfill. Where
the contracted term is not the life of the landfill, the property owner is generally responsible
for final capping,
closure and post-closure obligations. The Company is responsible for all final capping,
closure and post-closure liabilities at three of the four landfills that it operates under
life-of-site operating agreements.
Page 6
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The Companys internal and third-party engineers perform surveys at least annually to estimate
the remaining disposal capacity at its landfills. Many of the Companys existing landfills have
the potential for expanded disposal capacity beyond the amount currently permitted. The Companys
landfill depletion rates are based on the remaining disposal capacity, considering both permitted
and probable expansion airspace, at the landfills it owns, and certain landfills it operates, but
does not own, under life-of-site agreements. Expansion airspace consists of additional disposal
capacity being pursued through means of an expansion that is not actually permitted. Expansion
airspace that meets certain criteria is included in the estimate of total landfill airspace. The
Companys landfill depletion rates are based on the terms of the operating agreements at its
operated landfills that have capitalized expenditures.
Based on remaining permitted capacity as of March 31, 2011, and projected annual disposal
volumes, the average remaining landfill life for the Companys owned landfills and landfills
operated under life-of-site operating agreements is estimated to be approximately 41 years. As of
March 31, 2011, the Company is seeking to expand permitted capacity at seven of its owned landfills
and one landfill that it operates under a life-of-site operating agreement, and considers the
achievement of these expansions to be probable. Although the Company cannot be certain that all
future expansions will be permitted as designed, the average remaining life, when considering
remaining permitted capacity, probable expansion capacity and projected annual disposal volume, of
the Companys owned landfills and landfills operated under life-of-site operating agreements is 52
years, with lives ranging from 1 to 189 years.
During the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company expensed $8,941 and $8,389,
respectively, or an average of $2.92 and $2.97 per ton consumed, respectively, related to landfill
depletion at owned landfills and landfills operated under life-of-site agreements.
The Company reserves for final capping, closure and post-closure maintenance obligations at
the landfills it owns and landfills it operates under life-of-site operating agreements. The
Company calculates the net present value of its final capping, closure and post-closure commitments
by estimating the total obligation in current dollars, inflating the obligation based upon the
expected date of the expenditure and discounting the inflated total to its present value using a
credit-adjusted risk-free rate. Any changes in expectations that result in an upward revision to
the estimated undiscounted cash flows are treated as a new liability and are inflated and
discounted at rates reflecting current market conditions. Any changes in expectations that result
in a downward revision (or no revision) to the estimated undiscounted cash flows result in a
liability that is inflated and discounted at rates reflecting the market conditions at the time the
cash flows were originally estimated. This policy results in the Companys capping, closure and
post-closure liabilities being recorded in layers. At January 1, 2011, the Company decreased its
discount rate assumption for purposes of computing 2011 layers for final capping, closure and
post-closure obligations from 6.5% to 5.75%, in order to more accurately reflect the Companys
long-term cost of borrowing as of the end of 2010. The Companys inflation rate assumption is 2.5%
for the years ending December 31, 2010 and 2011. The resulting final capping, closure and
post-closure obligations are recorded on the balance sheet along with an offsetting addition to
site costs, which is amortized to depletion expense as the landfills airspace is consumed.
Interest is accreted on the recorded liability using the corresponding discount rate. During the
three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company expensed $484 and $441, respectively, or an
average of $0.16 per ton consumed for each period, related to final capping, closure and
post-closure accretion expense.
Page 7
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The following is a reconciliation of the Companys final capping, closure and post-closure
liability balance from December 31, 2010 to March 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
Final capping, closure and post-closure liability at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
28,537 |
|
Adjustments to final capping, closure and post-closure liabilities |
|
|
(1,403 |
) |
Liabilities incurred |
|
|
514 |
|
Accretion expense |
|
|
484 |
|
Closure payments |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Final capping, closure and post-closure liability at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
28,107 |
|
|
|
|
|
The adjustments to final capping, closure and post-closure liabilities primarily consisted of
an increase in estimated airspace at one of the Companys landfills at which an expansion is being
pursued. The Company performs its annual review of its cost and capacity estimates in the first
quarter of each year.
At March 31, 2011, $25,369 of the Companys restricted assets balance was for purposes of
securing its performance of future final capping, closure and post-closure obligations.
5. LONG-TERM DEBT
Long-term debt consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Revolver under Credit Facility, bearing interest ranging from
0.87% to 3.25%* |
|
$ |
473,600 |
|
|
$ |
511,000 |
|
2015 Notes, bearing interest at 6.22% |
|
|
175,000 |
|
|
|
175,000 |
|
2019 Notes, bearing interest at 5.25% |
|
|
175,000 |
|
|
|
175,000 |
|
Tax-exempt bonds, bearing interest ranging from 0.22% to 0.44%* |
|
|
39,420 |
|
|
|
39,420 |
|
Notes payable to sellers in connection with acquisitions, bearing
interest at 2.50% to 10.35%* |
|
|
8,937 |
|
|
|
9,159 |
|
Notes payable to third parties, bearing interest at 6.7% to 10.9%* |
|
|
3,003 |
|
|
|
3,056 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
874,960 |
|
|
|
912,635 |
|
Less current portion |
|
|
(2,678 |
) |
|
|
(2,657 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
872,282 |
|
|
$ |
909,978 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Interest rates in the table above represent the range of interest rates incurred during
the three month period ended March 31, 2011. |
6. ACQUISITIONS
Acquisitions are accounted for under the acquisition method of accounting. The results of
operations of the acquired businesses have been included in the Companys consolidated financial
statements from their respective acquisition dates.
Page 8
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
During the three months ended March 31, 2011, the Company acquired one individually immaterial
non-hazardous solid waste collection business. During the three months ended March 31, 2010, the
Company acquired five individually immaterial non-hazardous solid waste collection businesses. The
acquisitions completed during the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, were not material to
the Companys results of operations, either individually or in the aggregate. As a result, pro
forma financial information has not been provided. The Company expects these acquired businesses
to contribute towards the achievement of the Companys strategy to expand through acquisitions.
The following table summarizes the consideration transferred to acquire these businesses and
the amounts of identified assets acquired and liabilities assumed associated with businesses
acquired at the acquisition date for acquisitions consummated in the three months ended March 31,
2011 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
Acquisitions |
|
|
Acquisitions |
|
Fair value of consideration transferred: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
$ |
814 |
|
|
$ |
1,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized amounts of identifiable assets acquired
and liabilities assumed: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Property and equipment |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
277 |
|
Long-term franchise agreements and contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
Customer lists |
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
425 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(279 |
) |
Deferred revenue |
|
|
(374 |
) |
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total identifiable net assets |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
749 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill |
|
$ |
780 |
|
|
$ |
1,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The goodwill is attributable to the synergies and ancillary growth opportunities expected to
arise after the Companys acquisition of these businesses. Goodwill acquired during the three
months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, is expected to be deductible for tax purposes.
The fair value of acquired working capital related to four acquisitions completed during the
last 12 months is provisional pending receipt of information from the acquiree to support the fair
value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Any adjustments recorded relating to
finalizing the working capital for these four acquisitions are not expected to be material to the
Companys financial position.
The gross amount of trade receivables due under contracts acquired during the period ended
March 31, 2011, is $239, of which $56 is expected to be uncollectible. The gross amount of trade
receivables due under contracts acquired during the period ended March 31, 2010, is $342, of which
$3 is expected to be uncollectible. The Company did not acquire any other class of receivable as a
result of the acquisition of these businesses.
Page 9
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
A reconciliation of the Fair value of consideration transferred, as disclosed in the table
above, to Payments for acquisitions, net of cash acquired, as reported in the Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
Acquisitions |
|
|
Acquisitions |
|
Cash consideration transferred |
|
$ |
814 |
|
|
$ |
1,819 |
|
Payment of contingent consideration |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for acquisitions, net of cash acquired |
|
$ |
914 |
|
|
$ |
1,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company incurred $671 and
$151, respectively, of acquisition-related costs. These expenses are included in Selling, general
and administrative expenses in the Companys Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income.
7. INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Intangible assets, exclusive of goodwill, consisted of the following at March 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Carrying |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
Net Carrying |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
Amount |
|
Amortizable intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term franchise agreements and contracts |
|
$ |
189,726 |
|
|
$ |
(26,977 |
) |
|
$ |
162,749 |
|
Customer lists |
|
|
63,079 |
|
|
|
(19,693 |
) |
|
|
43,386 |
|
Non-competition agreements |
|
|
9,414 |
|
|
|
(6,094 |
) |
|
|
3,320 |
|
Other |
|
|
21,236 |
|
|
|
(2,518 |
) |
|
|
18,718 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
283,455 |
|
|
|
(55,282 |
) |
|
|
228,173 |
|
Nonamortized intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indefinite-lived intangible assets |
|
|
148,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible assets, exclusive of goodwill |
|
$ |
432,374 |
|
|
$ |
(55,282 |
) |
|
$ |
377,092 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average amortization period of customer lists acquired during the three months
ended March 31, 2011 was 5.0 years.
Page 10
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
Intangible assets, exclusive of goodwill, consisted of the following at December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Carrying |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
Net Carrying |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
Amount |
|
Amortizable intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term franchise agreements and contracts |
|
$ |
190,489 |
|
|
$ |
(25,255 |
) |
|
$ |
165,234 |
|
Customer lists |
|
|
62,885 |
|
|
|
(17,867 |
) |
|
|
45,018 |
|
Non-competition agreements |
|
|
9,414 |
|
|
|
(5,982 |
) |
|
|
3,432 |
|
Other |
|
|
21,236 |
|
|
|
(2,364 |
) |
|
|
18,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
284,024 |
|
|
|
(51,468 |
) |
|
|
232,556 |
|
Nonamortized intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indefinite-lived intangible assets |
|
|
148,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible assets, exclusive of goodwill |
|
$ |
432,943 |
|
|
$ |
(51,468 |
) |
|
$ |
381,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average amortization period of long-term franchise agreements and contracts
acquired during the year ended December 31, 2010 was 9.1 years. The weighted-average amortization
period of customer lists acquired during the year ended December 31, 2010 was 6.4 years.
Estimated future amortization expense for the next five years of amortizable intangible assets
is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ending December 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
15,776 |
|
For the year ending December 31, 2012 |
|
$ |
15,174 |
|
For the year ending December 31, 2013 |
|
$ |
13,676 |
|
For the year ending December 31, 2014 |
|
$ |
13,045 |
|
For the year ending December 31, 2015 |
|
$ |
12,422 |
|
8. SEGMENT REPORTING
The Companys revenues are derived from one industry segment, which includes the collection,
transfer, recycling and disposal of non-hazardous solid waste. No single contract or customer
accounted for more than 10% of the Companys total revenues at the consolidated or reportable
segment level during the periods presented.
The Company manages its operations through three geographic operating segments, which are
also the Companys reportable segments. Each operating segment is responsible for managing several
vertically integrated operations, which are comprised of districts. The segment information
presented herein reflects the realignment of certain of the Companys districts between operating
segments in the first quarter of 2010. For the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and
2010, the Companys Western Region was comprised of operating locations in California, Idaho,
Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and western Wyoming; the Companys Central Region was comprised
of operating locations in Colorado, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota,
Utah and eastern Wyoming; and the Companys Southern Region was comprised of operating locations in
Alabama, Arizona, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
The Companys Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM) evaluates operating segment
profitability and determines resource allocations based on operating income before depreciation,
amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets. Operating income before depreciation,
amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets is not a measure of operating income, operating
performance or liquidity under GAAP and may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported
by other companies. The Companys management uses operating income before depreciation,
amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets in the evaluation of segment operating
performance as it is a profit measure that is generally within the control of the operating
segments. A reconciliation of operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss)
on disposal of assets to income before income tax provision is included at the end of this Note 8.
Page 11
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
Summarized financial information concerning the Companys reportable segments for the
three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, is shown in the following tables:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before Depreciation, |
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and |
|
Ended |
|
Gross |
|
|
Intercompany |
|
|
Net |
|
|
Gain (Loss) on |
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
Revenues |
|
|
Revenues(b) |
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
Disposal of Assets(c) |
|
Western |
|
$ |
197,466 |
|
|
$ |
(22,901 |
) |
|
$ |
174,565 |
|
|
$ |
54,453 |
|
Central |
|
|
80,070 |
|
|
|
(8,032 |
) |
|
|
72,038 |
|
|
|
23,917 |
|
Southern |
|
|
101,605 |
|
|
|
(16,740 |
) |
|
|
84,865 |
|
|
|
28,471 |
|
Corporate(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,277 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
379,141 |
|
|
$ |
(47,673 |
) |
|
$ |
331,468 |
|
|
$ |
105,564 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before Depreciation, |
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and |
|
Ended |
|
Gross |
|
|
Intercompany |
|
|
Net |
|
|
Gain (Loss) on |
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
Revenues |
|
|
Revenues(b) |
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
Disposal of Assets(c) |
|
Western |
|
$ |
188,514 |
|
|
$ |
(21,512 |
) |
|
$ |
167,002 |
|
|
$ |
50,446 |
|
Central |
|
|
73,368 |
|
|
|
(7,786 |
) |
|
|
65,582 |
|
|
|
20,553 |
|
Southern |
|
|
90,187 |
|
|
|
(15,231 |
) |
|
|
74,956 |
|
|
|
23,974 |
|
Corporate(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(81 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
352,069 |
|
|
$ |
(44,529 |
) |
|
$ |
307,540 |
|
|
$ |
94,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Corporate functions include accounting, legal, tax, treasury, information
technology, risk management, human resources, training and other administrative
functions. |
|
(b) |
|
Intercompany revenues reflect each segments total intercompany sales,
including intercompany sales within a segment and between segments. Transactions
within and between segments are generally made on a basis intended to reflect the
market value of the service. |
|
(c) |
|
For those items included in the determination of operating income before
depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets, the accounting
policies of the segments are the same as those described in the Companys most recent
Annual Report on Form 10-K. |
The following tables show changes in goodwill during the three months ended March 31,
2011 and 2010, by reportable segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Southern |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance as of December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
313,038 |
|
|
$ |
305,774 |
|
|
$ |
309,040 |
|
|
$ |
927,852 |
|
Goodwill acquired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
576 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
Goodwill divested |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
313,038 |
|
|
$ |
306,350 |
|
|
$ |
309,244 |
|
|
$ |
928,632 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 12
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Southern |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance as of December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
291,781 |
|
|
$ |
313,366 |
|
|
$ |
301,563 |
|
|
$ |
906,710 |
|
Goodwill transferred |
|
|
20,295 |
|
|
|
(20,295 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill acquired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,070 |
|
Goodwill adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Goodwill divested |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of March 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
312,076 |
|
|
$ |
294,086 |
|
|
$ |
301,553 |
|
|
$ |
907,715 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the first quarter of 2010, the Company realigned certain of the Companys districts
between operating segments. This realignment resulted in the reallocation of goodwill among its
segments which is reflected in the Goodwill transferred line item in the above table.
The Company has no accumulated impairment losses associated with goodwill.
A reconciliation of the Companys primary measure of segment profitability (operating income
before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets for reportable segments) to
Income before income tax provision in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Operating income before depreciation,
amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of
assets |
|
$ |
105,564 |
|
|
$ |
94,892 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
(33,037 |
) |
|
|
(31,444 |
) |
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
(3,977 |
) |
|
|
(3,585 |
) |
Gain (loss) on disposal of assets |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(257 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(8,833 |
) |
|
|
(12,262 |
) |
Interest income |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income tax provision |
|
$ |
60,270 |
|
|
$ |
47,677 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 13
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The following table shows, for the periods indicated, the Companys total reported revenues by
service line and with intercompany eliminations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Collection |
|
$ |
239,437 |
|
|
$ |
229,070 |
|
Disposal and transfer |
|
|
109,560 |
|
|
|
100,699 |
|
Intermodal, recycling and other |
|
|
30,144 |
|
|
|
22,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
379,141 |
|
|
|
352,069 |
|
Less: intercompany elimination |
|
|
(47,673 |
) |
|
|
(44,529 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
$ |
331,468 |
|
|
$ |
307,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The Company recognizes all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value. All of the
Companys derivatives have been designated as cash flow hedges; therefore, the effective portion of
the changes in the fair value of derivatives will be recognized in accumulated other comprehensive
income (loss) until the hedged item is recognized in earnings. The ineffective portion of the
changes in the fair value of derivatives will be immediately recognized in earnings. The Company
classifies cash inflows and outflows from derivatives within operating activities in the Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
One of the Companys objectives for utilizing derivative instruments is to reduce its exposure
to fluctuations in cash flows due to changes in the variable interest rates of certain borrowings
issued under its credit facility. The Companys strategy to achieve that objective involves
entering into interest rate swaps that are specifically designated to the Companys credit facility
and accounted for as cash flow hedges.
At March 31, 2011, the Companys derivative instruments included two interest rate swap
agreements as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed |
|
|
Variable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
|
|
Date Entered |
|
Amount |
|
|
Rate Paid* |
|
|
Received |
|
Effective Date |
|
Expiration Date |
November 2007 |
|
$ |
50,000 |
|
|
|
4.29 |
% |
|
1-month LIBOR |
|
June 2009 |
|
June 2011 |
March 2009 |
|
$ |
175,000 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
% |
|
1-month LIBOR |
|
February 2011 |
|
February 2014 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Plus applicable margin. |
Another of the Companys objectives for utilizing derivative instruments is to reduce its
exposure to fluctuations in cash flows due to changes in the price of diesel fuel. The Companys
strategy to achieve that objective involves entering into fuel hedges that are specifically
designated to certain forecasted diesel fuel purchases and accounted for as cash flow hedges.
Page 14
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
At March 31, 2011, the Companys derivative instruments included two fuel hedge agreements as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diesel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Paid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Fixed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in gallons |
|
|
(per |
|
|
Diesel Rate Received |
|
|
|
Expiration |
Date Entered |
|
per month) |
|
|
gallon) |
|
|
Variable |
|
Effective Date |
|
Date |
December 2008 |
|
|
400,000 |
|
|
$ |
2.950 |
|
|
DOE Diesel Fuel Index* |
|
January 2011 |
|
December 2011 |
December 2008 |
|
|
400,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.030 |
|
|
DOE Diesel Fuel Index* |
|
January 2012 |
|
December 2012 |
|
|
|
* |
|
If the national U.S. on-highway average price for a gallon of diesel fuel (average
price), as published by the Department of Energy, exceeds the contract price per gallon, the
Company receives the difference between the average price and the contract price (multiplied by
the notional number of gallons) from the counterparty. If the average price is less than the
contract price per gallon, the Company pays the difference to the counterparty. |
The fair values of derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges as of March 31,
2011, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Designated as Cash |
|
Asset Derivatives |
|
|
Liability Derivatives |
|
Flow Hedges |
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Interest rate swaps |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Accrued liabilities(a) |
|
|
$ |
(4,696 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
|
(3,094 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel hedges |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets(b) |
|
|
|
5,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets, net |
|
|
|
3,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives
designated as cash
flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,568 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(7,790 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Represents the estimated amount of the existing unrealized losses on interest rate
swaps as of March 31, 2011 (based on the interest rate yield curve at that date), included in
accumulated other comprehensive income expected to be reclassified into pre-tax earnings within
the next 12 months. The actual amounts reclassified into earnings are dependent on future
movements in interest rates. |
|
(b) |
|
Represents the estimated amount of the existing unrealized gains on fuel hedges as of
March 31, 2011 (based on the forward DOE diesel fuel index curve at that date), included in
accumulated other comprehensive income expected to be reclassified into pre-tax earnings within
the next 12 months. The actual amounts reclassified into earnings are dependent on future
movements in diesel fuel prices. |
Page 15
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The fair values of derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges as of December
31, 2010, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Designated as Cash |
|
Asset Derivatives |
|
|
Liability Derivatives |
|
Flow Hedges |
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Interest rate swaps |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
$ |
(4,988 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
|
(4,734 |
) |
Fuel hedges |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
$ |
2,469 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets, net |
|
|
|
2,261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives
designated as cash
flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(9,722 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the impact of the Companys cash flow hedges on the
results of operations, comprehensive income and accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
(AOCIL) as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized in AOCIL on |
|
|
|
|
Amount of (Gain) or Loss |
|
Derivatives |
|
Derivatives, |
|
|
|
|
Reclassified from AOCIL into |
|
Designated as Cash |
|
Net of Tax (Effective |
|
|
Statement of Income |
|
Earnings, Net of Tax (Effective |
|
Flow Hedges |
|
Portion)(a) |
|
|
Classification |
|
Portion) (b),(c) |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Interest rate swaps |
|
$ |
41 |
|
|
$ |
(2,354 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
1,157 |
|
|
$ |
1,438 |
|
Fuel hedges |
|
|
2,882 |
|
|
|
(378 |
) |
|
Cost of operations |
|
|
(503 |
) |
|
|
911 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,923 |
|
|
$ |
(2,732 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
654 |
|
|
$ |
2,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
In accordance with the derivatives and hedging guidance, the effective portions of
the changes in fair values of interest rate swaps and fuel hedges have been recorded in equity
as a component of AOCIL. As the critical terms of the interest rate swaps match the underlying
debt being hedged, no ineffectiveness is recognized on these swaps and, therefore, all
unrealized changes in fair value
are recorded in AOCIL. Because changes in the actual price of diesel fuel and changes in
the DOE index price do not offset exactly each reporting period, the Company assesses whether
the fuel hedges are highly effective using the cumulative dollar offset approach. |
|
(b) |
|
Amounts reclassified from AOCIL into earnings related to realized gains and losses on
interest rate swaps are recognized when interest payments or receipts occur related to the swap
contracts, which correspond to when interest payments are made on the Companys hedged debt. |
|
(c) |
|
Amounts reclassified from AOCIL into earnings related to realized gains and losses on
fuel hedges are recognized when settlement payments or receipts occur related to the hedge
contracts, which correspond to when the underlying fuel is consumed. |
The Company measures and records ineffectiveness on the fuel hedges in Cost of operations
in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income on a monthly basis based on the difference
between the DOE index price and the actual price of diesel fuel purchased, multiplied by the
notional number of gallons on the contracts. There was no significant ineffectiveness recognized
on the fuel hedges during the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010.
See Note 12 for further discussion on the impact of the Companys hedge accounting to its
consolidated Comprehensive income and AOCIL.
Page 16
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
10. NET INCOME PER SHARE INFORMATION
The following table sets forth the calculation of the numerator and denominator used in the
computation of basic and diluted net income per common share attributable to the Companys common
stockholders for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Waste Connections
for basic and diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
36,539 |
|
|
$ |
27,574 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic shares outstanding |
|
|
113,519,266 |
|
|
|
116,560,332 |
|
Dilutive effect of stock options and warrants |
|
|
476,624 |
|
|
|
1,135,932 |
|
Dilutive effect of restricted stock |
|
|
405,414 |
|
|
|
317,838 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted shares outstanding |
|
|
114,401,304 |
|
|
|
118,014,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended March 31, 2011, all outstanding stock options and warrants were
dilutive and included in the computation of diluted earnings per share. For the three months ended
March 31, 2010, stock options and warrants to purchase 5,472 shares of common stock were excluded
from the computation of diluted earnings per share as they were anti-dilutive. The 2026 Notes were
not dilutive during the three months ended March 31, 2010. On April 1, 2010, the Company redeemed
the aggregate principal amount of its 2026 Notes.
11. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
The Company uses a three-tier fair value hierarchy to classify and disclose all assets and
liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, as well as assets and liabilities measured
at fair value on a non-recurring basis, in periods subsequent to their initial measurement. These
tiers include: Level 1, defined as quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities; Level 2, defined as inputs other than Level 1 that are observable, either directly or
indirectly, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in markets that
are not active, model-based valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are
observable in the market, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable
market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities; and Level 3, defined as
unobservable inputs that are not corroborated by market data.
The Companys financial assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on a recurring basis
include derivative instruments and restricted assets. The Companys derivative instruments are
pay-fixed, receive-variable interest rate swaps and pay-fixed, receive-variable diesel fuel hedges.
The Companys interest rate swaps are recorded at their estimated fair values based on quotes
received from financial institutions that trade these contracts. The Company verifies the
reasonableness of these quotes using similar quotes from another financial institution as of each
date for which financial statements are prepared. The Company uses a discounted cash flow (DCF)
model to determine the estimated fair values of the diesel fuel hedges. The assumptions used in
preparing the DCF model include: (i) estimates for the forward DOE index curve; and (ii) the
discount rate based on risk-free interest rates over the term of the agreements. The DOE index
curve used in the DCF model was obtained from financial institutions that trade these contracts.
For the Companys interest rate swaps and fuel hedges, the Company also considers the Companys
creditworthiness in its determination of the fair value measurement of these instruments in a net
liability position and the banks creditworthiness in its determination of the fair value
measurement of these instruments in a net asset position. The Companys restricted assets are
valued at quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets, which the Company receives
from the financial institutions that hold such investments on its behalf. The Companys restricted
assets measured at fair value are invested primarily in U.S. government and agency securities.
Page 17
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The Companys assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis at March 31,
2011 and December 31, 2010, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurement at March 31, 2011 Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
Interest rate swap
derivative
instruments net
liability position |
|
$ |
(7,790 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(7,790 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Fuel hedge
derivative
instruments net
asset position |
|
$ |
8,568 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,568 |
|
Restricted assets |
|
$ |
27,958 |
|
|
$ |
27,958 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurement at December 31, 2010 Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
Interest rate swap
derivative
instruments net
liability position |
|
$ |
(9,722 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(9,722 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Fuel hedge
derivative
instruments net
asset position |
|
$ |
4,730 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,730 |
|
Restricted assets |
|
$ |
30,791 |
|
|
$ |
30,791 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
During the three months ended March 31, 2011, there were no fair value measurements of assets
or liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis subsequent to their initial
recognition.
Page 18
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The following table summarizes the change in the fair value for Level 3 derivatives for the
three months ended March 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
Balance as of December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
4,730 |
|
Realized gains included in earnings |
|
|
(811 |
) |
Unrealized losses included in AOCIL |
|
|
4,649 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
8,568 |
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the change in the fair value for Level 3 derivatives for the
three months ended March 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
Balance as of December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
(104 |
) |
Realized losses included in earnings |
|
|
1,470 |
|
Unrealized gains included in AOCIL |
|
|
(610 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance as of March 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
756 |
|
|
|
|
|
Page 19
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
12. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
Comprehensive income includes changes in the fair value of interest rate swaps and fuel hedges
that qualify for hedge accounting. The components of other comprehensive income (loss) and related
tax effects for the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Tax effect |
|
|
Net of tax |
|
Interest rate swap amounts
reclassified into interest expense |
|
$ |
1,866 |
|
|
$ |
(709 |
) |
|
$ |
1,157 |
|
Fuel hedge amounts reclassified
into cost of operations |
|
|
(811 |
) |
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
(503 |
) |
Changes in fair value of interest
rate swaps |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
41 |
|
Changes in fair value of fuel hedges |
|
|
4,649 |
|
|
|
(1,767 |
) |
|
|
2,882 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
5,770 |
|
|
$ |
(2,193 |
) |
|
$ |
3,577 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Tax effect |
|
|
Net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap amounts
reclassified into interest expense |
|
$ |
2,319 |
|
|
$ |
(881 |
) |
|
$ |
1,438 |
|
Fuel hedge amounts reclassified
into cost of operations |
|
|
1,470 |
|
|
|
(559 |
) |
|
|
911 |
|
Changes in fair value of interest
rate swaps |
|
|
(3,822 |
) |
|
|
1,468 |
|
|
|
(2,354 |
) |
Changes in fair value of fuel hedges |
|
|
(610 |
) |
|
|
232 |
|
|
|
(378 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(643 |
) |
|
$ |
260 |
|
|
$ |
(383 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010 was $40,370 and
$27,431, respectively.
A rollforward of the amounts included in AOCIL, net of taxes, is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
|
Fuel Hedges |
|
|
Rate Swaps |
|
|
Income (Loss) |
|
Balance at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
2,931 |
|
|
$ |
(6,026 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,095 |
) |
Amounts reclassified into earnings |
|
|
(503 |
) |
|
|
1,157 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
Change in fair value |
|
|
2,882 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
2,923 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
5,310 |
|
|
$ |
(4,828 |
) |
|
$ |
482 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Note 9 for further discussion on the Companys derivative instruments.
Page 20
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
13. STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
Stock-Based Compensation
A summary of activity related to restricted stock units under the Third Amended and Restated
2004 Equity Incentive Plan, as of December 31, 2010, and changes during the three month period
ended March 31, 2011, is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
1,514,459 |
|
Granted |
|
|
488,310 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(10,400 |
) |
Vested |
|
|
(541,852 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
1,450,517 |
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted average grant date fair value per share for the shares of common stock underlying
the restricted stock units granted during the three month period ended March 31, 2011 was $29.24.
During the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, the Companys stock-based compensation
expense from restricted stock units was $2,978 and $2,830, respectively.
Share Repurchase Program
The Companys Board of Directors has authorized a common stock repurchase program for the
repurchase of up to $800,000 of common stock through December 31, 2012. Under the program, stock
repurchases may be made in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions from time to
time at managements discretion. The timing and amounts of any repurchases will depend on many
factors, including the Companys capital structure, the market price of the common stock and
overall market conditions. During the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company
repurchased 751,005 and 2,266,551 shares, respectively, of its common stock under this program at a
cost of $20,613 and $49,796, respectively. As of March 31, 2011, the remaining maximum dollar
value of shares available for repurchase under the program was approximately $130,761. The
Companys policy related to repurchases of its common stock is to charge any excess of cost over
par value entirely to additional paid-in capital.
Stock Split
On October 19, 2010, the Companys Board of Directors declared a three-for-two split of its
common stock, in the form of a 50% stock dividend, payable to stockholders of record as of October
29, 2010. Shares resulting from the split were issued on November 12, 2010. In connection
therewith, the Company transferred $394 from retained earnings to common stock, representing the
par value of additional shares issued. As a result of the stock split, fractional shares equal to
2,479 whole shares were repurchased for $101. All share and per share amounts for all periods
presented have been retroactively adjusted to reflect the stock split.
Cash Dividend
On October 19, 2010, the Companys Board of Directors declared the initiation of a
quarterly cash dividend of $0.075 per share, as adjusted for the three-for-two stock split
described above. The initial quarterly cash dividend totaling $8,561 was paid on November 12, 2010
to the stockholders of record as of the close of business on October 29, 2010. On January 28,
2011, the Company announced that its Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.075 per share on the Companys common stock. The
dividend totaling $8,515 was paid on March 1, 2011, to stockholders of record on the close of
business on February 22, 2011.
Page 21
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
14. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
In the normal course of its business and as a result of the extensive governmental regulation
of the solid waste industry, the Company is subject to various judicial and administrative
proceedings involving federal, state or local agencies. In these proceedings, an agency may seek
to impose fines on the Company or to revoke or deny renewal of an operating permit held by the
Company. From time to time, the Company may also be subject to actions brought by special interest
or other groups, adjacent landowners or residents in connection with the permitting and licensing
of landfills and transfer stations, or alleging environmental damage or violations of the permits
and licenses pursuant to which the Company operates.
In addition, the Company is a party to various claims and suits pending for alleged damages to
persons and property, alleged violations of certain laws and alleged liabilities arising out of
matters occurring during the normal operation of the waste management business. Except as noted in
the legal cases described below, as of March 31, 2011, there is no current proceeding or litigation
involving the Company or its property that the Company believes could have a material adverse
impact on its business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Chaparral, New Mexico Landfill Permit Litigation
The Companys subsidiary, High Desert Solid Waste Facility, Inc. (formerly known as Rhino
Solid Waste, Inc.) (HDSWF), owns undeveloped property in Chaparral, New Mexico, for which it
sought a permit to operate a municipal solid waste landfill. After a public hearing, the New
Mexico Environment Department (the Department) approved the permit for the facility on January
30, 2002. Colonias Development Council (CDC), a nonprofit organization, opposed the permit at
the public hearing and appealed the Departments decision to the courts of New Mexico, primarily on
the grounds that the Department failed to consider the social impact of the landfill on the
community of Chaparral, and failed to consider regional planning issues. On July 18, 2005, in
Colonias Dev. Council v. Rhino Envtl. Servs., Inc. (In re Rhino Envtl. Servs.), 2005 NMSC 24, 117
P.3d 939, the New Mexico Supreme Court remanded the matter back to the Department to conduct a
limited public hearing on certain evidence that CDC claimed was wrongfully excluded from
consideration by the hearing officer, and to allow the Department to reconsider the evidence
already proffered concerning the impact of the landfill on the surrounding communitys quality of
life. In July 2007, the Department, CDC, the Company and Otero County signed a stipulation
requesting a postponement of the limited public hearing to allow the Company time to explore a
possible relocation of the landfill to a new site. Since 2007, the Department has issued several
postponements orders for the limited public hearing, currently scheduled for November 2011, as
HDSWF has continued to evaluate the suitability of a new site. In July 2009, HDSWF purchased
approximately 325 acres of undeveloped land comprising a proposed new site from the State of New
Mexico. HDSWF filed a formal landfill permit application for the new site with the Department on
September 17, 2010, and the Department is evaluating that application. If the Department denies
the landfill permit application for the new site, HDSWF intends to actively resume its efforts to
enforce the previously issued landfill permit for the original site in Chaparral. At March 31,
2011, the Company had $11,761 of capitalized expenditures related to this landfill development
project. If the Company is ultimately issued a permit to operate the landfill at the new site
purchased in July 2009, the Company will be required to expense in a future period $10,318 of
capitalized expenditures related to the original Chaparral property, less the recoverable value of
that undeveloped property and other amounts recovered, which would likely have a material adverse
effect on the Companys results of operations for that period. If the Company instead is
ultimately issued a permit to operate the landfill at the original Chaparral property, the Company
will be required to expense in a future period $1,443 of capitalized expenditures related to the
new site purchased in July 2009, less the recoverable value of that undeveloped property and other amounts recovered. If the Company is not
ultimately issued a permit to operate the landfill at either one of the two sites, the Company will
be required to expense in a future period the $11,761 of capitalized expenditures, less the
recoverable value of the undeveloped properties and other amounts recovered, which would likely
have a material adverse effect on the Companys results of operations for that period.
Page 22
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
Harper County, Kansas Landfill Permit Litigation
The Company opened a municipal solid waste landfill in Harper County, Kansas in January 2006,
following the issuance by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) of a final
permit to operate the landfill. The landfill has operated continuously since that time. On
October 3, 2005, landfill opponents filed a suit (Board of Commrs of Sumner County, Kansas,
Tri-County Concerned Citizens and Dalton Holland v. Roderick Bremby, Secy of the Kansas Dept of
Health and Envt, et al.) in the District Court of Shawnee County, Kansas, seeking a judicial
review of KDHEs decision to issue the permit, alleging that a site analysis prepared for the
Company and submitted to KDHE as part of the process leading to the issuance of the permit was
deficient in several respects. The action sought to stay the effectiveness of the permit and to
nullify it. The Company intervened in this lawsuit shortly after it was filed. On April 7, 2006,
the District Court issued an order denying the plaintiffs request for judicial review on the
grounds that they lacked standing to bring the action. The plaintiffs appealed that decision to
the Kansas Court of Appeals, and on October 12, 2007, the Court of Appeals issued an opinion
reversing and remanding the District Courts decision. The Company appealed the decision to the
Kansas Supreme Court, and on July 25, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of
Appeals and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings on the merits.
Plaintiffs filed a second amended petition on October 22, 2008, and the Company filed a motion to
strike various allegations contained within the second amended petition. On July 2, 2009, the
District Court granted in part and denied in part the Companys motion to strike. The District
Court also set a new briefing schedule, and the parties completed the briefing during the first
half of 2010. Oral argument in the case occurred on September 27, 2010. There is no scheduled
time limit within which the District Court has to decide this administrative appeal. While the
Company believes that it will prevail in this case, the District Court could remand the matter back
to KDHE for additional review of its decision or could revoke the permit. An order of remand to
KDHE would not necessarily affect the Companys continued operation of the landfill. Only in the
event that a final, materially adverse determination with respect to the permit is received would
there likely be a material adverse effect on the Companys reported results of operations in the
future. If as a result of this litigation, after exhausting all appeals, the Company was unable to
continue to operate the landfill, the Company estimates that it would be required to record a
pre-tax impairment charge of approximately $15,000 to reduce the carrying value of the landfill to
its estimated fair value. In addition, the Company estimates the current annual impact to its
pre-tax earnings that would result if it was unable to continue to operate the landfill would be
approximately $4,000 per year.
El Paso, Texas Labor Union Disputes
One of the Companys subsidiaries, El Paso Disposal, LP (EPD), is a party to administrative
proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In these proceedings, the union
has alleged various unfair labor practices relating to the parties failure to reach agreement on
initial labor contracts and the resultant strike by, and the replacement of and a failure to
recall, union-represented employees. On April 29, 2009, following a hearing, an administrative law
judge issued a recommended Decision and Order finding violations of the National Labor Relations
Act by EPD and recommended to the NLRB that EPD take remedial actions, including reinstating
certain employees and their previous terms and conditions of employment, refraining from certain
conduct, continuing to bargain collectively and providing a make whole remedy. EPD filed
exceptions to the administrative law judges recommendations on June 30, 2009. The matter is
currently before the NLRB on review. On July 27, 2009, the NLRBs regional office in Phoenix,
Arizona filed a petition in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas seeking an injunction to
reinstate the replaced employees, order EPD to continue collective bargaining while the NLRBs
review is pending, and to refrain from further alleged unfair labor practices. A hearing on the
injunction was held on August 19, 2009; and on October 30, 2009, the District Court granted the
NLRBs requested relief. EPD appealed the District Courts order to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and a hearing on the appeal occurred on August 2, 2010. On November
4, 2010, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the District Courts injunction order.
Page 23
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
Several related unfair labor practice charges alleging failure to bargain and failure to
appropriately recall union-represented employees subsequently were filed against EPD. The charges
were heard by an administrative law judge during the week of August 24, 2009. On December 2, 2009,
the administrative law judge issued a recommended Decision and Order granting part of the NLRBs
requested relief, while denying part, but the issues were effectively subsumed by the District
Courts injunction. Both EPD and the NLRBs General Counsel filed exceptions to the administrative
law judges recommendations with the NLRB. These exceptions also are currently under review by the
NLRB.
On January 22, 2010 and March 5, 2010, the union filed new unfair labor practice charges
against EPD concerning events relating to the ongoing contract negotiation process. On May 28,
2010, the NLRB issued a complaint against EPD alleging unfair labor practices, including alleged
unlawful threats and coercive statements, refusal to provide striking employees with full and
unconditional reinstatement, reduction of earning opportunities for striking employees,
implementation of new routes for drivers, implementation of a new longevity bonus plan, use of
video footage captured by surveillance camera to discipline employees, change to the driver
training program, change to the uniform practice and bargaining proposals that were predictably
unacceptable to the union. EPD filed an answer denying any wrongdoing. Further, EPD believes it
has resolved many of these allegations through negotiations with the union. A hearing on this
complaint was scheduled for November 2, 2010, but subsequently was postponed indefinitely by the
NLRB as a result of a pending comprehensive settlement of outstanding matters between EPD and the
union that is more fully described below.
Most recently, on June 11, 2010, June, 24, 2010, and June 30, 2010, the union filed new unfair
labor practice charges alleging that EPD has unlawfully failed to provide relevant information
requested by the union, and unilaterally changed terms and working conditions of employment (by
unspecified acts) resulting in a reduced size of the bargaining unit, implementing new work
schedules, suspending an employee with pay due to an accident, reassigning and/or changing work
assignments among bargaining unit employees and intimidating and coercing employees by suspending
strikers involved in accidents and by following drivers excessively while performing their duties.
The NLRB included these new allegations in its complaint to be heard on November 2, 2010, which was
postponed indefinitely by the NLRB because of the pending comprehensive settlement between EPD and
the union.
On August 10, 2010, the NLRB filed a petition for contempt and other civil relief before the
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, alleging that EPD violated the
District Courts October 30, 2009 injunction order by failing or refusing to implement the interim
relief directed by the court (e.g., to restore changed employment terms, reinstate former strikers
to their prior positions, and not commit future purported unfair labor practices). EPD filed an
answer denying any wrongdoing. A hearing on the NLRBs petition was scheduled for November 10,
2010, but was postponed indefinitely by the NLRB because of the pending comprehensive settlement
between EPD and the union.
Page 24
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
In December 2010, the union ratified a comprehensive settlement reached with EPD as to all
outstanding unfair labor practice charges and related liability issues. The settlement has
resulted in the indefinite postponement of the NLRB and District Court proceedings described above,
pending final administration of the settlement terms. The settlement includes: agreement on
collective bargaining agreements for the two EPD bargaining units; withdrawal by the union of all of its unfair labor practice charges; and the
payment by EPD of 60% of net back pay, without interest, for all alleged discriminatees for the
back pay period in question, which ended in 2009. Any disputes regarding the amount of back pay
owed will be determined through arbitration. Notwithstanding the settlement, EPD continues to deny
that any wrongdoing occurred. The parties have begun to implement the settlement terms, pursuant
to which, in December 2010, the union filed a request with the NLRB to withdraw all of its unfair
labor practice charges. This request currently is pending before the NLRB regional office in
Phoenix, but has not yet been approved. Thus, the pending comprehensive settlement is not yet
final.
Solano County, California Measure E/Landfill Expansion Litigation
The Company and one of its subsidiaries, Potrero Hills Landfill, Inc. (PHLF), were named as
real parties in interest in an amended complaint captioned Sustainability, Parks, Recycling and
Wildlife Legal Defense Fund v. County of Solano, which was filed in the Superior Court of
California, County of Solano, on July 9, 2009 (the original complaint was filed on June 12, 2009).
This lawsuit seeks to compel Solano County to comply with Measure E, a ballot initiative and County
ordinance passed in 1984 that the County has not enforced against PHLF since at least 1992.
Measure E directs in part that Solano County shall not allow the importation into the County of any
solid waste which originated or was collected outside the County in excess of 95,000 tons per year.
PHLF disposes of approximately 670,800 tons of solid waste annually, approximately 562,300 tons of
which originate from sources outside of Solano County. The Sustainability, Parks, Recycling and
Wildlife Legal Defense Fund (SPRAWLDEF) lawsuit also seeks to overturn Solano Countys approval
of the use permit for the expansion of the Potrero Hills Landfill and the related Environmental
Impact Report (EIR), arguing that both violate Measure E and that the EIR violates the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Two similar actions seeking to enforce Measure E, captioned
Northern California Recycling Association v. County of Solano and Sierra Club v. County of Solano,
were filed in the same court on June 10, 2009, and August 10, 2009, respectively. The Northern
California Recycling Association (NCRA) case does not name the Company or any of its subsidiaries
as parties and does not contain any CEQA claims. The Sierra Club case names PHLF as a real party
in interest, and seeks to overturn the conditional use permit for the expansion of the landfill on
Measure E grounds (but does not raise CEQA claims). These lawsuits follow a previous lawsuit
concerning Measure E that NCRA filed against PHLF in the same court on July 22, 2008, prior to the
Companys acquisition of PHLF in April 2009, but which NCRA later dismissed.
In December 2009, the Company and PHLF filed briefs vigorously opposing enforcement of Measure
E on Constitutional and other grounds. The Companys position is supported by Solano County, a
co-defendant in the Measure E litigation. It is also supported by the Attorney General of the
State of California, the National Solid Wastes Management Association and the California Refuse
Recycling Council, each of which filed supporting friend of court briefs or letters. In addition,
numerous waste hauling companies in California, Oregon and Nevada have intervened on the Companys
side in the state cases, subsequent to their participation in the federal action challenging
Measure E discussed below. A hearing on the merits for all three Measure E state cases was held on
February 18, 2010.
On May 12, 2010, the Solano County Superior Court issued a written opinion addressing all
three cases. The Court upheld Measure E in part by judicially rewriting the law, and then issued a
writ of mandamus directing Solano County to enforce Measure E as rewritten. The Court decided that
it could cure the laws discrimination against out-of-county waste by revising Measure E to only
limit the importation of waste into Solano County from other counties in California, but not from
other states. In the same opinion, the Court rejected the requests from petitioners in the cases
for a writ of administrative mandamus to overturn the permit approved by Solano County in June 2009
for the expansion of PHLFs landfill, thereby leaving the expansion permit in place. Petitioners
Sierra Club and SPRAWLDEF filed motions to reconsider in which they asked the Court to issue a writ
of administrative mandamus and void PHLFs expansion permit. The County, the Company and PHLF opposed the motions to reconsider and a hearing was held on June 25, 2010.
On August 30, 2010, the Court denied the motions to reconsider and reaffirmed its ruling denying
the petitions for writs to overturn PHLFs expansion permit.
Page 25
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
In December 2010, the Court entered final judgments and writs of mandamus in the three cases,
and Solano County, the Company, PHLF and the waste hauling company intervenors filed notices of
appeal, which stayed the judgments and writs pending the outcome of the appeal. Petitioners Sierra
Club and SPRAWLDEF cross-appealed the Courts ruling denying their petitions for writs to overturn
PHLFs expansion permit. The appeals and cross-appeals were consolidated and the parties entered
into a briefing schedule by stipulation in February, 2011. PHLF filed its opening brief on March
4, 2011. Sierra Club and SPRAWLDEF must file their combined response and opening brief for
cross-appeal by May 2, 2011, and all briefing is scheduled to be complete by June 27, 2011.
As part of the final judgments, the Solano County Superior Court retained jurisdiction over
any motions for attorneys fees under Californias Private Attorney General statute. Petitioners
NCRA, SPRAWLDEF and Sierra Club each filed a bill of costs and a motion for attorney fees totaling
$771, none of which the Company has recorded as a liability at December 31, 2010. The Company
vigorously opposes the award of attorney fees. The motions were heard in March 2011, prior to
which the court issued a tentative order awarding Petitioners $482 in attorneys fees. The matter
was submitted after argument and the parties are awaiting final judgment on the attorneys fees
issue. If the Company prevails on the appeals of the three underlying cases, then none of the
Petitioners would be entitled to attorneys fees and costs. If the Company is unsuccessful on
these appeals and any future appeal of the pending attorneys fees judgment, the Company, PHLF and
the County ultimately would be jointly and severally liable for any such attorneys fees award in
the SPRAWLDEF and Sierra Club cases. Because the Company and PHLF are not parties to the NCRA
case, they are not subject to a court order for NCRAs attorney fees. However, in all three cases,
the Company may reimburse the County for any such attorneys fees under the indemnification
provision in PHLFs land use permit.
At this point the Company is not able to determine the likelihood of any outcome in this
matter. However, in the event that after all appeals are exhausted the Superior Courts writ of
mandamus enforcing Measure E as rewritten is upheld, the Company estimates that the current annual
impact to its pre-tax earnings resulting from the restriction on imports into Solano County would
be approximately $6,000 per year. The Companys estimate could be impacted by various factors,
including the Countys allocation of the 95,000 tons per year import restriction among PHLF and the
other disposal and composting facilities in Solano County. In addition, if the final rulings on
Measure E do not limit the importation of waste into Solano County from other states, the Company
could potentially offset a portion of the estimated reduction to its pre-tax earnings by
internalizing waste for disposal at PHLF from other states in which the Company operates, or by
accepting waste volumes from third party haulers operating outside of California.
In response to the pending three state court actions to enforce Measure E described above, the
Company, PHLF and other waste hauling companies in California, Oregon and Nevada that are damaged
by Measure E and would be further damaged if Measure E was enforced, filed a federal lawsuit to
enjoin Measure E and have it declared unconstitutional. On September 8, 2009, the coalition
brought suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California in
Sacramento challenging Measure E under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution,
captioned Potrero Hills Landfill, Inc. et al. v. County of Solano. In response, SPRAWLDEF, Sierra
Club and NCRA intervened in the federal case to defend Measure E and filed motions to dismiss the
federal suit, or in the alternative, for the court to abstain from hearing the case in light of the
pending state court Measure E actions. On December 23, 2009, the federal court abstained and
declined to accept jurisdiction over the Companys case, holding that Measure E raised unique state
issues that should be resolved by the pending state court litigation, and granted the motions to
dismiss. The Company filed a notice of appeal to the courts ruling on January 22, 2010, and
briefing in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was completed on November 17, 2010. Oral argument on the appeal took place on
April 14, 2011.
Page 26
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
Individual members of SPRAWLDEF were also plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed in the Solano County
Superior Court on October 13, 2005, captioned Protect the Marsh, et al. v. County of Solano, et
al., challenging the EIR that Solano County certified in connection with its approval of the
expansion of the Potrero Hills Landfill on September 13, 2005. A motion to discharge the Superior
Courts writ of mandate directing the County to vacate and set aside its certification of the EIR
was heard in August 2009. On November 3, 2009, the Superior Court upheld the Countys
certification of the EIR and the related permit approval actions. In response, the plaintiffs in
Protect the Marsh filed a notice of appeal to the courts order on December 31, 2009. On October
8, 2010, the California Court of Appeal dismissed Plaintiffs appeal for lack of standing.
SPRAWLDEF subsequently filed a petition for review of this decision with the California Supreme
Court. On December 21, 2010, the Supreme Court denied the petition, concluding this litigation in
favor of the County and the Company.
On December 17, 2010, SPRAWLDEF and one its members filed a petition for writ of mandate in
San Francisco Superior Court seeking to overturn the October 2010 approval of the marsh development
permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) for PHLFs
landfill expansion, alleging that the approval is contrary to the Marsh Act and Measure E. The
petition, captioned SPRAWLDEF v. San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, names
BCDC as a respondent and the Company as the real party in interest. Petitioners seek a declaration
that the law does not allow BCDC to approve a marsh development permit beyond the footprint and
operational levels originally approved for PHLF in 1984, and that the approval violates Measure E.
BCDC is preparing the administrative record of its permit decision to be filed with the court and
answers to the petition will be due 30 days thereafter. A hearing has not yet been set on the
petition. At this point the Company is not able to determine the likelihood of any outcome in this
matter.
If as a result of any of the matters described above, after exhausting all appeals, PHLF is
unable to secure an expansion permit, and the Superior Courts writ of mandamus enforcing Measure E
as rewritten is ultimately upheld, the Company estimates that it would be required to recognize a
pre-tax impairment charge of approximately $39,000 to reduce the carrying value of PHLF to its
estimated fair value. If PHLF is unable to secure an expansion permit but Measure E is ultimately
ruled to be unenforceable, the Company estimates that it would be required to recognize a pre-tax
impairment charge of approximately $24,000 to reduce the carrying value of PHLF to its estimated
fair value.
El Paso, Texas Breach of Contract/Flow Control Litigation
On November 15, 2010, the Company filed a petition in the County Court at Law No. 3, El Paso
County, Texas, captioned Waste Connections, Inc., Camino Real Environmental Center, Inc. and El
Paso Disposal, LP v. The City of El Paso, Texas, John F. Cook, in his capacity as El Paso Mayor,
and Joyce Wilson, in her capacity as El Paso City Manager (No. 2010-4476). The action relates to
that certain Solid Waste Disposal and Operating Agreement, dated April 27, 2004, by and among the
City of El Paso, Texas (the City) and the Company (the 2004 Agreement), and Ordinance 017380,
as adopted by the City Council on August 24, 2010 (the Ordinance).
The 2004 Agreement grants the Company and its subsidiaries (Camino Real and El Paso Disposal)
the non-exclusive right to do business in the City, and to provide commercial and industrial solid
waste collection and disposal services to customers within the territorial and extra-territorial
jurisdiction of the City, for a period of ten years from April 27, 2004. In addition, the 2004
Agreement provides that during the ten-year period the City shall not modify solid waste hauler
fees for the Company or any of its subsidiaries. The City also agreed in the 2004 Agreement that, until April 27, 2014, it would not provide private roll-off services
or otherwise become a competitor to private solid waste companies in providing these services.
Page 27
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The Company believes that the Ordinance violates the law and is contrary to the 2004 Agreement
in numerous respects, including because it requires that waste collected within the Citys
jurisdiction be hauled only by permitted haulers who enter into franchise agreements with the City,
and that such haulers may only dispose of such waste at facilities designated or authorized by the
City. The petition seeks to require the City to specifically perform the 2004 Agreement, and to
enjoin temporarily and permanently the Citys enforcement of the Ordinance to the extent such
enforcement would breach the 2004 Agreement. The lawsuit also seeks a declaratory judgment that:
(1) the Ordinance violates the Contracts Clauses of the Texas and United States Constitutions, and
constitutes an improper taking and an inverse condemnation under the Texas Constitution; (2) the
City and its Mayor and City Manager must prospectively comply with the 2004 Agreement; and (3) the
Agreement is valid, enforceable and complies with Texas law. The Company also seeks costs of suit
and such other relief at law or in equity to which it may be entitled. The Company is not
presently seeking money damages.
The Company and the City have been negotiating, and continue to negotiate, an agreed
resolution to their differences. As a result of these efforts, on December 21, 2010, the El Paso
City Council approved a series of amendments to the Ordinance to address certain concerns of the
Company and other haulers that operate within the Citys jurisdiction. The negotiations continue
and on March 29, 2011, an amendment to the ordinance postponed the effective date of the
requirement that haulers enter into franchise agreements with the City until September 1, 2011. At
this point, however, the Company is not able to determine the likelihood of any outcome in this
litigation, nor is it able to estimate the amount or range of loss or the impact on the Company or
its financial condition in the event of an unfavorable outcome.
15. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
On April 1, 2011, the Company entered into a Second Supplement to Master Note Purchase
Agreement with certain accredited institutional investors, pursuant to which the Company issued and
sold to the investors on that date $250,000 of senior uncollateralized notes at fixed interest
rates with interest payable in arrears semi-annually on October 1 and April 1 beginning on October
1, 2011 in a private placement. Of these notes, $100,000 will mature on April 1, 2016 with an
annual interest rate of 3.30% (the 2016 Notes), $50,000 will mature on April 1, 2018 with an
annual interest rate of 4.00% (the 2018 Notes), and $100,000 will mature on April 1, 2021 with an
annual interest rate of 4.64% (the 2021 Notes). The 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes are
uncollateralized obligations and rank equally in right of payment with the 2015 Notes, the 2019
Notes and obligations under the Companys credit facility. The 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021
Notes are subject to representations, warranties, covenants and events of default. Upon the
occurrence of an event of default, payment of the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes may be
accelerated by the holders of the respective notes. The 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes may
also be prepaid by the Company at any time at par plus a make-whole amount determined in respect of
the remaining scheduled interest payments on the respective notes, using a discount rate of the
then current market standard for United States treasury bills plus 0.50%. In addition, the Company
will be required to offer to prepay the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes upon certain changes
in control.
The Company may issue additional series of senior uncollateralized notes pursuant to the terms
and conditions of the Master Note Purchase Agreement, provided that the purchasers of the
outstanding notes, including the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes, shall not have any
obligation to purchase any additional notes issued pursuant to the Master Note Purchase Agreement
and the aggregate principal amount of the outstanding notes and any additional notes issued
pursuant to the Master Note Purchase Agreement shall not exceed $750,000. The Company currently
has $600,000 of Notes outstanding under the Master Note Purchase Agreement.
Page 28
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except share, per share, per gallon, tonnage and per ton amounts)
The Company used the proceeds from the sale of the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes, and 2021 Notes for
general corporate purposes, including to fund a portion of the purchase price for the acquisition
of Hudson Valley Waste Holding, Inc., which is described below.
On April 1, 2011, the Company completed the acquisition of Hudson Valley Waste Holding, Inc.,
and its wholly-owned subsidiary, County Waste and Recycling Service, Inc. (County Waste). The
operations include six collection operations, three transfer stations and one recycling facility
across six markets: Orange County, New York; Greater Albany, New York; Springfield, Massachusetts;
Fulton County, New York; Warrant and Washington Counties, New York; and Greene, Columbia and Ulster
Counties, New York. The Company paid $299,000 in existing cash and cash from the issuance of
$250,000 of senior uncollaterized notes described above for the purchased operations plus amounts
paid for the purchase of accounts receivable and other prepaid assets and estimated working
capital, which amounts are subject to post-closing adjustments. No other consideration, including
contingent consideration, was transferred by the Company to acquire these operations. The Company
has not yet completed its initial purchase price allocation.
As a result of the County Waste acquisition described above, in the second quarter of 2011,
the Company will be realigning its segment reporting structure by changing its three geographic
operating segments from Western, Central and Southern to Western, Central and Eastern. As part of
the realignment, the states of Arizona, Louisiana, New Mexico and Texas, which were previously part
of the Southern region, will now be included in the Central region. Also as part of this
realignment, the state of Michigan, which was previously part of the Central region, will now be
included in the Eastern region. Additionally, the states of New York and Massachusetts, in which
the Company now operates as a result of the County Waste acquisition, will be included in the
Eastern region. The segment information presented in Note 8 does not reflect this realignment.
On April 20, 2011, the Companys Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend
of $0.075 per share on the Companys common stock. The dividend will be paid on May 20, 2011, to
stockholders of record on the close of business on May 6, 2011.
Page 29
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Certain statements contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are forward-looking in
nature, including statements related to our ability to provide adequate cash to fund our operating
activities, our ability to draw on our credit facility or raise additional capital, the impact of
global economic conditions on our volume, business and results of operations, the effects of
landfill special waste projects on volume results, the effects of seasonality on our business and
results of operations, demand for recyclable commodities and recyclable commodity pricing, our
expectations with respect to capital expenditures, our expectations with respect to our ability to
obtain expansions of permitted landfill capacity, our expectations with respect to the outcomes of
our legal proceedings and our expectations with respect to the purchase of fuel and fuel prices.
These statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as believes,
expects, may, will, should, or anticipates, or the negative thereof or comparable
terminology, or by discussions of strategy.
Our business and operations are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and,
consequently, actual results may differ materially from those projected by any forward-looking
statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ from those projected include, but
are not limited to, the following:
|
|
|
Our acquisitions may not be successful, resulting in changes in strategy, operating
losses or a loss on sale of the business acquired; |
|
|
|
A portion of our growth and future financial performance depends on our ability to
integrate acquired businesses into our organization and operations; |
|
|
|
Downturns in the worldwide economy adversely affect operating results; |
|
|
|
Our results are vulnerable to economic conditions and seasonal factors affecting the
regions in which we operate; |
|
|
|
We may be subject in the normal course of business to judicial, administrative or other
third party proceedings that could interrupt or limit our operations, require expensive
remediation, result in adverse judgments, settlements or fines and create negative
publicity; |
|
|
|
We may be unable to compete effectively with larger and better capitalized companies
and governmental service providers; |
|
|
|
We may lose contracts through competitive bidding, early termination or governmental
action; |
|
|
|
Price increases may not be adequate to offset the impact of increased costs or may
cause us to lose volume; |
|
|
|
Increases in the price of fuel may adversely affect our business and reduce our
operating margins; |
|
|
|
Increases in labor and disposal and related transportation costs could impact our
financial results; |
|
|
|
Efforts by labor unions could divert management attention and adversely affect
operating results; |
|
|
|
We could face significant withdrawal liability if we withdraw from participation in one
or more underfunded multiemployer pension plans in which we participate; |
|
|
|
Increases in insurance costs and the amount that we self-insure for various risks could
reduce our operating margins and reported earnings; |
Page 30
|
|
|
Competition for acquisition candidates, consolidation within the waste industry and
economic and market conditions may limit our ability to grow through acquisitions; |
|
|
|
Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial condition; we may incur
substantially more debt in the future; |
|
|
|
Each business that we acquire or have acquired may have liabilities or risks that we
fail or are unable to discover, including environmental liabilities; |
|
|
|
Liabilities for environmental damage may adversely affect our financial condition,
business and earnings; |
|
|
|
Our accruals for our landfill site closure and post-closure costs may be inadequate; |
|
|
|
The financial soundness of our customers could affect our business and operating
results; |
|
|
|
We depend significantly on the services of the members of our senior, regional and
district management team, and the departure of any of those persons could cause our
operating results to suffer; |
|
|
|
Our decentralized decision-making structure could allow local managers to make
decisions that adversely affect our operating results; |
|
|
|
We may incur charges related to capitalized expenditures of landfill development
projects, which would decrease our earnings; |
|
|
|
Because we depend on railroads for our intermodal operations, our operating results and
financial condition are likely to be adversely affected by any reduction or deterioration
in rail service; |
|
|
|
Our financial results are based upon estimates and assumptions that may differ from
actual results; |
|
|
|
The adoption of new accounting standards or interpretations could adversely affect our
financial results; |
|
|
|
Our financial and operating performance may be affected by the inability to renew
landfill operating permits, obtain new landfills and expand existing ones; |
|
|
|
Future changes in laws or renewed enforcement of laws regulating the flow of solid
waste in interstate commerce could adversely affect our operating results; |
|
|
|
Fluctuations in prices for recycled commodities that we sell and rebates we offer to
customers may cause our revenues and operating results to decline; |
|
|
|
Extensive and evolving environmental, health, safety and employment laws and
regulations may restrict our operations and growth and increase our
costs; |
|
|
|
Climate change regulations may adversely affect operating results; |
|
|
|
Extensive regulations that govern the design, operation and closure of landfills may
restrict our landfill operations or increase our costs of operating landfills; |
|
|
|
Alternatives to landfill disposal may cause our revenues and operating results to
decline; and |
|
|
|
Unusually adverse weather conditions may interfere with our operations, harming our
operating results. |
Page 31
These risks and uncertainties, as well as others, are discussed in greater detail in this
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or
SEC, including our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K. There may be additional risks of which
we are not presently aware or that we currently believe are immaterial which could have an adverse
impact on our business. We make no commitment to revise or update any forward-looking statements
in order to reflect events or circumstances that may change.
OVERVIEW
The solid waste industry is a local and highly competitive business, requiring substantial
labor and capital resources. The participants compete for collection accounts primarily on the
basis of price and, to a lesser extent, the quality of service, and compete for landfill business
on the basis of tipping fees, geographic location and quality of operations. The solid waste
industry has been consolidating and continues to consolidate as a result of a number of factors,
including the increasing costs and complexity associated with waste management operations and
regulatory compliance. Many small independent operators and municipalities lack the capital
resources, management, operating skills and technical expertise necessary to operate effectively in
such an environment. The consolidation trend has caused solid waste companies to operate larger
landfills that have complementary collection routes that can use company-owned disposal capacity.
Controlling the point of transfer from haulers to landfills has become increasingly important as
landfills continue to close and disposal capacity moves farther from collection markets.
Generally, the most profitable industry operators are those companies that are vertically
integrated or enter into long-term collection contracts. A vertically integrated operator will
benefit from: (1) the internalization of waste, which is bringing waste to a company-owned
landfill; (2) the ability to charge third-party haulers tipping fees either at landfills or at
transfer stations; and (3) the efficiencies gained by being able to aggregate and process waste at
a transfer station prior to landfilling.
We are an integrated solid waste services company that provides solid waste collection,
transfer, disposal and recycling services in mostly exclusive and secondary markets. We also
provide intermodal services for the rail haul movement of cargo and solid waste containers in the
Pacific Northwest through a network of intermodal facilities. We also treat and dispose of
non-hazardous waste that is generated in the exploration and production of oil and natural gas
primarily at a facility in Southwest Louisiana. We seek to avoid highly competitive, large urban
markets and instead target markets where we can provide either solid waste services under exclusive
arrangements, or markets where we can be integrated and attain high market share. In markets where
waste collection services are provided under exclusive arrangements, or where waste disposal is
municipally funded or available at multiple municipal sources, we believe that controlling the
waste stream by providing collection services under exclusive arrangements is often more important
to our growth and profitability than owning or operating landfills. As of March 31, 2011, we
served approximately two million residential, commercial and industrial customers from a network of
operations in 27 states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North
Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and
Wyoming. As of that date, we owned or operated a network of 135 solid waste collection operations,
54 transfer stations, seven intermodal facilities, 38 recycling operations, 42 municipal solid
waste landfills, two construction and demolition landfills and one exploration and production waste
treatment and disposal facility. On April 1, 2011, we completed the acquisition of Hudson Valley
Waste Holding, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, County Waste and Recycling, Inc. (County
Waste). The operations include six collection operations, three transfer stations and one
recycling facility. The operations are in New York and Massachusetts and will be included within
our newly realigned Eastern region.
Page 32
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles requires estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities in
the consolidated financial statements. As described by the SEC, critical accounting estimates and
assumptions are those that may be material due to the levels of subjectivity and judgment necessary
to account for highly uncertain matters or the susceptibility of such matters to change, and that
have a material impact on the financial condition or operating performance of a company. Such
critical accounting estimates and assumptions are applicable to our reportable segments. Refer to
our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete description of our critical accounting
estimates and assumptions.
GENERAL
Our revenues are derived from one industry segment, which includes the collection, transfer,
recycling and disposal of non-hazardous solid waste. No single contract or customer accounted for
more than 10% of our total revenues at the consolidated or reportable segment level during the
periods presented. The table below shows for the periods indicated our total reported revenues
attributable to services provided (dollars in thousands).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Collection |
|
$ |
239,437 |
|
|
|
63.2 |
% |
|
$ |
229,070 |
|
|
|
65.1 |
% |
Disposal and transfer |
|
|
109,560 |
|
|
|
28.9 |
|
|
|
100,699 |
|
|
|
28.6 |
|
Intermodal, recycling and other |
|
|
30,144 |
|
|
|
7.9 |
|
|
|
22,300 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
379,141 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
352,069 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: intercompany elimination |
|
|
(47,673 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44,529 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
331,468 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
307,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our Chief Operating Decision Maker evaluates performance and determines resource allocations
based on several factors, of which the primary financial measure is operating income before
depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets. Operating income before
depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets is not a measure of operating
income, operating performance or liquidity under GAAP and may not be comparable to similarly titled
measures reported by other companies. Our management uses operating income before depreciation,
amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets in the evaluation of segment operating
performance as it is a profit measure that is generally within the control of the operating
segments.
We manage our operations through three geographic operating segments, which are also our
reportable segments. Each operating segment is responsible for managing several vertically
integrated operations, which are comprised of districts. The segment information presented herein
reflects the realignment of certain of our districts between operating segments in the first
quarter of 2010. For the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, our Western Region was
comprised of operating locations in California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and
western Wyoming; our Central Region was comprised of operating locations in Colorado, Kansas,
Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah and eastern Wyoming; and our Southern
Region was comprised of operating locations in Alabama, Arizona, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
Page 33
Revenues, net of intercompany eliminations, for our reportable segments are shown in the
following table for the periods indicated (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Western |
|
$ |
174,565 |
|
|
$ |
167,002 |
|
Central |
|
|
72,038 |
|
|
|
65,582 |
|
Southern |
|
|
84,865 |
|
|
|
74,956 |
|
Corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
331,468 |
|
|
$ |
307,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets for
our reportable segments is shown in the following table for the periods indicated (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Western |
|
$ |
54,453 |
|
|
$ |
50,446 |
|
Central |
|
|
23,917 |
|
|
|
20,553 |
|
Southern |
|
|
28,471 |
|
|
|
23,974 |
|
Corporate(a) |
|
|
(1,277 |
) |
|
|
(81 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
105,564 |
|
|
$ |
94,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Corporate functions include accounting, legal, tax, treasury, information technology,
risk management, human resources, training and other administrative functions. |
A reconciliation of Operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on
disposal of assets to Income before income tax provision is included in Note 8 to the Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q.
Significant changes in revenue and operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain
(loss) on disposal of assets for our reportable segments for the three month period ended March 31,
2011, compared to the three month period ended March 31, 2010, are discussed below:
Segment Revenue
Revenue in our Western segment increased $7.6 million, or 4.5%, to $174.6 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, from $167.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010.
For the three months ended March 31, 2011, the components of the increase consisted of net price
increases of $3.8 million, recyclable commodity sales increases of $3.8 million, intermodal revenue
increases of $2.1 million and other revenue increases of $0.2 million, partially offset by volume
decreases of $2.3 million.
Revenue in our Central segment increased $6.4 million, or 9.8%, to $72.0 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, from $65.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. For the
three months ended March 31, 2011, the components of the increase consisted of revenue acquired
from acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the three months ended March 31, 2010, of $3.6
million, net price increases of $3.5 million and recyclable commodity sales increases of $0.2
million, partially offset by volume decreases of $0.9 million.
Page 34
Revenue in our Southern segment increased $9.9 million, or 13.2%, to $84.9 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, from $75.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010.
For the three months ended March 31, 2011, the components of the increase consisted of volume
increases of $1.1 million, revenue acquired from acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the
three months ended March 31, 2010, of $5.5 million, net price increases of $3.2 million and
recyclable commodity sales increases of $0.2 million, partially offset by other revenue decreases
of $0.1 million.
Segment Operating Income before Depreciation, Amortization and Gain (Loss) on Disposal of
Assets
Operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets in
our Western segment increased $4.1 million, or 7.9%, to $54.5 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, from $50.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The increase was
primarily due to increased revenues and decreased disposal expenses, partially offset by increased
rail transportation expenses at our intermodal operations, increased franchise fees and taxes on
revenues, increased expenses associated with the cost of purchasing recyclable commodities,
increased labor expenses and increased diesel fuel expense.
Operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets in
our Central segment increased $3.3 million, or 16.4%, to $23.9 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, from $20.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The increase was
primarily due to income generated from acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the three
months ended March 31, 2010 and the following changes at operations owned in comparable periods in
2010 and 2011: increased revenues and decreased auto and workers compensation insurance expenses,
partially offset by increased third party trucking and transportation expenses, increased labor
expenses and increased diesel fuel expense.
Operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets in
our Southern segment increased $4.5 million, or 18.8%, to $28.5 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, from $24.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The increase was
primarily due to income generated from acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the three
months ended March 31, 2010 and the following changes at operations owned in comparable periods in
2010 and 2011: increased revenues, partially offset by increased third party trucking and
transportation expenses, increased taxes on revenues, increased labor expenses and increased diesel
fuel expense.
Operating income before depreciation, amortization and gain (loss) on disposal of assets at
Corporate decreased $1.2 million, to a loss total of $1.3 million for the three months ended March
31, 2011, from a loss total of $0.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. Our
estimated recurring corporate expenses, which can vary from the actual amount of incurred corporate
expenses, are allocated to our three geographic operating segments. The decrease was primarily
attributable to increased cash incentive compensation expense and increased direct acquisition
expenses.
Page 35
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2011 AND 2010
The following table sets forth items in our condensed consolidated statements of income as a
percentage of revenues for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Revenues |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost of operations |
|
|
56.4 |
|
|
|
57.5 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
11.7 |
|
|
|
11.6 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
Loss (gain) on disposal of assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
20.7 |
|
|
|
19.4 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
|
|
(4.0 |
) |
Interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income, net |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
(7.1 |
) |
|
|
(6.4 |
) |
Net income attributable to noncontrolling
interests |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Waste Connections |
|
|
11.0 |
% |
|
|
9.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues. Total revenues increased $24.0 million, or 7.8%, to $331.5 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, from $307.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010.
Acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the three months ended March 31, 2010, increased
revenues by approximately $9.0 million.
During the three months ended March 31, 2011, the net increase in prices charged to our
customers was $10.5 million, consisting of $8.8 million of core price increases and $1.7 million of
fuel, materials and environmental surcharges.
Volume decreases in our existing business during the three months ended March 31, 2011,
decreased revenues by approximately $2.0 million. The net decrease in volume was primarily
attributable to decreases in commercial collection volumes, partially offset by increased disposal
volumes.
Increased recyclable commodity volumes collected and increased recyclable commodity prices
during the three months ended March 31, 2011, increased revenues by $4.2 million. The increase in
recyclable commodity prices was primarily due to increased overseas demand for recyclable
commodities.
Other revenues increased by $2.3 million during the three months ended March 31, 2011,
primarily due to an increase in cargo volume at our intermodal operations.
Page 36
Cost of Operations. Total cost of operations increased $10.1 million, or 5.7%, to
$187.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2011, from $177.0 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2010. The increase was primarily attributable to operating costs associated with
acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the three months ended March 31, 2010, increased rail
transportation expenses at our intermodal operations, increased third party trucking and
transportation expenses due to increased waste disposal internalization, increased franchise fees
and taxes on revenues due to increased tax rates and increased landfill volumes, increased expenses associated with the cost of purchasing recyclable commodities due to
recyclable commodity pricing increases, increased labor expenses, increased diesel fuel expense
resulting from higher market prices for fuel and increased employee medical benefit expenses
resulting from increased claims cost and severity, partially offset by a decrease in auto and
workers compensation expense under our high deductible insurance program due to a reduction in
projected losses on open claims and a decrease in third party disposal expenses due to decreased
collection volumes and an increase in waste disposal internalization.
Cost of operations as a percentage of revenues decreased 1.1 percentage points to 56.4% for
the three months ended March 31, 2011, from 57.5% for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The
decrease as a percentage of revenues was primarily attributable to decreased disposal expenses,
decreased auto and workers compensation expense, price increases charged to our customers being
higher, on a percentage basis, than certain expense increases recognized during the three months
ended March 31, 2011, and acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the three months ended
March 31, 2010 having lower cost of operations as a percentage of revenue than our existing base
operations, partially offset by increased rail expenses at our intermodal operations, increased
fuel expense and increased employee medical benefit expenses.
SG&A. SG&A expenses increased $3.1 million, or 8.9%, to $38.8 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, from $35.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The
increase was primarily the result of additional personnel from acquisitions closed during, or
subsequent to, the three months ended March 31, 2010, increased payroll and payroll-related
expenses, increased cash incentive compensation expense and increased direct acquisition expenses.
SG&A expenses as a percentage of revenues increased 0.1 percentage points to 11.7% for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, from 11.6% for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The
increase as a percentage of revenues was primarily attributable to increased direct acquisition
expenses.
Depreciation. Depreciation expense increased $1.6 million, or 5.1%, to $33.0 million
for the three months ended March 31, 2011, from $31.4 million for the three months ended March 31,
2010. The increase was primarily attributable to depreciation and depletion associated with
acquisitions closed during, or subsequent to, the three months ended March 31, 2010, and increased
depreciation expense associated with additions to our fleet and equipment purchased to support our
existing operations.
Depreciation expense as a percentage of revenues decreased 0.2 percentage points to 10.0% for
the three months ended March 31, 2011, from 10.2% for the three months ended March 31, 2010, due
primarily to leveraging existing equipment to service increases in recyclable commodity and
intermodal revenue.
Amortization of Intangibles. Amortization of intangibles expense increased $0.4
million, or 10.9%, to $4.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2011, from $3.6 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2010. The increase was primarily attributable to the amortization
of contracts and customer lists acquired during, or subsequent to, the three months ended March 31,
2010.
Amortization of intangibles expense as a percentage of revenues was unchanged at 1.2% for the
three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010.
Operating Income. Operating income increased $9.0 million, or 15.0%, to $68.6 million
for the three months ended March 31, 2011, from $59.6 million for the three months ended March 31,
2010. The increase was primarily attributable to increased revenues, partially offset by increased
operating costs, increased SG&A expense, and increased depreciation expense and amortization of
intangibles expense.
Operating income as a percentage of revenues increased 1.3 percentage points to 20.7% for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, from 19.4% for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The
increase as a percentage of revenues was due to the previously described 1.1 percentage point
decrease in cost of operations, 0.2 percentage point decrease in depreciation expense, partially
offset by the 0.1 percentage point increase in SG&A expense.
Page 37
Interest Expense. Interest expense decreased $3.5 million, or 28.0%, to $8.8 million
for the three months ended March 31, 2011, from $12.3 million for the three months ended March 31,
2010. The decrease was primarily attributable to funding the redemption of our 2026 Notes with
borrowings under our credit facility at lower interest rates and a reduction in the amortization of
our debt discount and debt issuance costs on the redeemed 2026 Notes.
Income Tax Provision. Income taxes increased $3.6 million, or 18.2%, to $23.5 million
for the three months ended March 31, 2011, from $19.9 million for the three months ended March 31,
2010.
Our effective tax rates for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, were 39.0% and
41.7%, respectively.
Our higher effective tax rate during the three months ended March 31, 2010, was due primarily
to a $1.5 million increase in the income tax provision associated with an adjustment in deferred
tax liabilities resulting from a voter-approved increase in Oregon state income tax rates and
changes to the geographic apportionment of our state income taxes.
Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests. Net income attributable to
noncontrolling interests increased $0.1 million to $0.3 million for the three months ended March
31, 2011, from $0.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010, due to increased earnings at
our majority-owned subsidiaries.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
The following table sets forth certain cash flow information for the three month periods ended
March 31, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
88,378 |
|
|
$ |
83,680 |
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(16,771 |
) |
|
|
(28,499 |
) |
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(70,387 |
) |
|
|
(50,474 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and equivalents |
|
|
1,220 |
|
|
|
4,707 |
|
Cash and equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
9,873 |
|
|
|
9,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
11,093 |
|
|
$ |
14,346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities Cash Flows
For the three months ended March 31, 2011, net cash provided by operating activities was $88.4
million. For the three months ended March 31, 2010, net cash provided by operating activities was
$83.7 million. The $4.7 million net increase in cash provided by operating activities was due
primarily to the following:
|
1) |
|
An increase in net income of $9.0 million; |
|
2) |
|
An increase in deferred taxes of $14.1 million due primarily to the recognition
during the three months ended March 31, 2011, of tax benefits associated with a change in
our tax method for deducting depreciation expense for certain landfills; |
|
3) |
|
An increase in depreciation and amortization expense of $2.0 million; less |
Page 38
|
4) |
|
A decrease in cash flows from operating assets and liabilities, net of effects from
acquisitions, of $19.0 million to cash used in operating assets and liabilities of $7.2
million for the three months ended March 31, 2011, from cash provided by operating assets
and liabilities of $11.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The
significant components of the $7.2 million in net cash outflows from
changes in operating assets and liabilities for the three months ended March 31, 2011,
include the following: |
|
a) |
|
a decrease in cash of $14.0 million to fund the decrease in accounts payable
due primarily to the timing of payments for capital expenditures; less |
|
b) |
|
an increase in cash resulting from a $2.9 million decrease in accounts
receivable due to the timing of collection of receivables; less |
|
c) |
|
an increase in cash resulting from a $2.4 million decrease in prepaid
expenses and other current assets due primarily to decreases in prepaid income taxes
and prepaid insurance expenses; less |
|
d) |
|
an increase in cash resulting from an increase in accrued other long-term
liabilities of $2.1 million due primarily to increased deferred compensation plan
liabilities resulting from employee contributions. |
As of March 31, 2011, we had a working capital deficit of $26.2 million, including cash and
equivalents of $11.1 million. Our working capital deficit decreased $11.8 million from $38.0
million at December 31, 2010. To date, we have experienced no loss or lack of access to our cash
or cash equivalents; however, we can provide no assurances that access to our cash and cash
equivalents will not be impacted by adverse conditions in the financial markets. Our strategy in
managing our working capital is generally to apply the cash generated from our operations that
remains after satisfying our working capital and capital expenditure requirements, along with stock
repurchase and dividend programs, to reduce our indebtedness under our credit facility and to
minimize our cash balances.
Investing Activities Cash Flows
Net cash used in investing activities decreased $11.7 million to $16.8 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, from $28.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010. The
significant components of the decrease include the following:
|
1) |
|
A decrease in capital expenditures for property and equipment of $7.2 million due to
decreases in expenditures for trucks as well as site costs for various landfills and
equipment, partially offset by an increase in expenditures for buildings and computers; |
|
2) |
|
A decrease in restricted assets of $3.2 million due to the liquidation of restricted
asset accounts that were replaced with financial surety bonds; and |
|
3) |
|
A decrease in payments for acquisitions of $0.9 million. |
Financing Activities Cash Flows
Net cash flows used in financing activities increased $19.9 million to $70.4 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, from $50.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010.
The significant components of the increase include the following:
|
1) |
|
A decrease in net long-term borrowings of $34.1 million; |
|
2) |
|
An increase in cash
dividends paid of $8.5 million with the initiation of a quarterly
cash dividend in November 2010; |
|
3) |
|
A decrease in proceeds from option and warrant exercises of $4.5 million due to a
decrease in the number of options and warrants exercised in the three month period ended
March 31, 2011; |
|
4) |
|
An increase in tax withholdings related to net share settlements of restricted stock
units of $1.7 million due to an increase in the value of restricted stock units vesting in
the three months ended March 31, 2011; less |
|
5) |
|
A decrease in payments to repurchase our common stock of $29.2 million. |
Page 39
Our business is capital intensive. Our capital requirements include acquisitions and fixed
asset purchases. We will also make capital expenditures for landfill cell construction, landfill
development, landfill closure activities and intermodal facility construction in the future.
Our Board of Directors has authorized a common stock repurchase program for the repurchase of
up to $800.0 million of our common stock through December 31, 2012. Under the program, stock
repurchases may be made in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions from time to
time at managements discretion. The timing and amounts of any repurchases will depend on many
factors, including our capital structure, the market price of the common stock and overall market
conditions. As of March 31, 2011 and 2010, we had repurchased in aggregate 36.2 million and 30.8
million shares, respectively, of our common stock at an aggregate cost of $669.2 million and $532.2
million, respectively. As of March 31, 2011, the remaining maximum dollar value of shares
available for purchase under the program was approximately $130.8 million.
On October 19, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a three-for-two split of our common
stock, in the form of a 50% stock dividend, payable to stockholders of record as of October 29,
2010. Shares resulting from the split were issued on November 12, 2010. All share and per share
amounts for all periods presented have been retroactively adjusted to reflect the stock split.
In addition, on October 19, 2010, our Board of Directors declared the initiation of a
quarterly cash dividend of $0.075 per share, as adjusted for the three-for-two stock split
described above. The initial quarterly cash dividend totaling $8.6 million was paid on November
12, 2010 to the stockholders of record as of the close of business on October 29, 2010. On January
28, 2011, we announced that our Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of
$0.075 per share on our common stock. The dividend totaling $8.5 million was paid on March 1,
2011, to stockholders of record on the close of business on
February 22, 2011. On April 20, 2011, our Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.075
per share on our common stock. The dividend will be paid on May 20, 2011, to stockholders of
record on the close of business on May 6, 2011. The Board will
review the cash dividend periodically, with a long-term objective of increasing the amount of the
dividend. We cannot assure you as to the amounts or timing of future dividends.
We made $19.5 million in capital expenditures during the three months ended March 31, 2011.
We expect to make capital expenditures of approximately $135 million in 2011 in connection with our
existing business. We intend to fund our planned 2011 capital expenditures principally through
internally generated funds and borrowings under our credit facility. In addition, we may make
substantial additional capital expenditures in acquiring solid waste collection and disposal
businesses. If we acquire additional landfill disposal facilities, we may also have to make
significant expenditures to bring them into compliance with applicable regulatory requirements,
obtain permits or expand our available disposal capacity. We cannot currently determine the amount
of these expenditures because they will depend on the number, nature, condition and permitted
status of any acquired landfill disposal facilities. We believe that our cash and equivalents,
credit facility and the funds we expect to generate from operations will provide adequate cash to
fund our working capital and other cash needs for the foreseeable future. However, disruptions in
the capital and credit markets could adversely affect our ability to draw on our credit facility or
raise other capital. Our access to funds under the credit facility is dependent on the ability of
the banks that are parties to the facility to meet their funding commitments. Those banks may not
be able to meet their funding commitments if they experience shortages of capital and liquidity or
if they experience excessive volumes of borrowing requests within a short period of time.
As of March 31, 2011, we had $473.6 million outstanding under our credit facility, exclusive
of outstanding stand-by letters of credit of $84.4 million. As of March 31, 2011, we were in
compliance with all applicable covenants in our credit facility.
Page 40
On April 1, 2011, we entered into a Second Supplement to Master Note Purchase Agreement with
certain accredited institutional investors, pursuant to which we issued and sold to the investors
on that date $250.0 million of senior uncollateralized notes at fixed interest rates with interest payable in
arrears semi-annually on October 1 and April 1, beginning on October 1, 2011, in a private
placement. Of these notes, $100.0 million will mature on April 1, 2016 with an annual interest
rate of 3.30% (the 2016 Notes), $50.0 million will mature on April 1, 2018 with an annual
interest rate of 4.00% (the 2018 Notes), and $100.0 million will mature on April 1, 2021 with an
annual interest rate of 4.64% (the 2021 Notes). The 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes are
uncollateralized obligations and rank equally in right of payment with the 2015 Notes, the 2019
Notes and obligations under our credit facility. The 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes are
subject to representations, warranties, covenants and events of default. Upon the occurrence of an
event of default, payment of the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes may be accelerated by the
holders of the respective notes. The 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes may also be prepaid by
us at any time at par plus a make-whole amount determined in respect of the remaining scheduled
interest payments on the respective notes, using a discount rate of the then current market
standard for United States treasury bills plus 0.50%. In addition, we will be required to offer to
prepay the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes upon certain changes in control.
We may issue additional series of senior uncollateralized notes pursuant to the terms and
conditions of the Master Note Purchase Agreement, provided that the purchasers of the outstanding
notes, including the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes and 2021 Notes, shall not have any obligation to
purchase any additional notes issued pursuant to the Master Note Purchase Agreement and the
aggregate principal amount of the outstanding notes and any additional notes issued pursuant to the
Master Note Purchase Agreement shall not exceed $750.0 million. We currently have $600.0 million
of Notes outstanding under the Master Note Purchase Agreement.
We used the proceeds from the sale of the 2016 Notes, 2018 Notes, and 2021 Notes for general
corporate purposes, including to fund a portion of the purchase price for the acquisition of Hudson
Valley Waste Holding, Inc., which is described below.
On April 1, 2011, we completed the acquisition of Hudson Valley Waste Holding, Inc., and its
wholly-owned subsidiary, County Waste and Recycling Service, Inc. (County Waste). The operations
include six collection operations, three transfer stations and one recycling facility across six
markets: Orange County, New York; Greater Albany, New York; Springfield, Massachusetts; Fulton
County, New York; Warrant and Washington Counties, New York; and Greene, Columbia and Ulster
Counties, New York. We paid $299.0 million in existing cash and cash from the issuance of $250.0
million of senior uncollaterized notes described above for the purchased operations plus amounts
paid for the purchase of accounts receivable and other prepaid assets and estimated working
capital, which amounts are subject to post-closing adjustments. No other consideration, including
contingent consideration, was transferred by us to acquire these operations.
As of March 31, 2011, we had the following contractual obligations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than |
|
|
1 to 3 |
|
|
3 to 5 |
|
|
Over 5 |
|
Recorded Obligations |
|
Total |
|
|
1 Year |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
Long-term debt |
|
$ |
874,960 |
|
|
$ |
2,678 |
|
|
$ |
479,262 |
|
|
$ |
178,886 |
|
|
$ |
214,134 |
|
Cash interest payments |
|
$ |
160,418 |
|
|
$ |
31,946 |
|
|
$ |
46,775 |
|
|
$ |
41,235 |
|
|
$ |
40,462 |
|
Long-term debt payments include:
|
1) |
|
$473.6 million in principal payments due September 2012 related to our credit
facility. Our credit facility bears interest, at our option, at either the base rate plus
the applicable base rate margin (approximately 3.25% at March 31, 2011) on base rate
loans, or the Eurodollar rate plus the applicable Eurodollar margin (approximately 0.87%
at March 31, 2011) on Eurodollar loans. As of March 31, 2011, our credit facility allowed
us to borrow up to $845 million. |
Page 41
|
2) |
|
$175.0 million in principal payments due 2015 related to our 2015 Notes. Holders of
the 2015 Notes may require us to purchase their notes in cash at a purchase price of 100%
of the principal amount of the 2015 Notes plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, upon a
change in control, as defined in the Master Note Purchase Agreement. The 2015 Notes bear
interest at a rate of 6.22%. |
|
3) |
|
$175.0 million in principal payments due 2019 related to our 2019 Notes. Holders of
the 2019 Notes may require us to purchase their notes in cash at a purchase price of 100%
of the principal amount of the 2019 Notes plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, upon a
change in control, as defined in the Master Note Purchase Agreement. The 2019 Notes bear
interest at a rate of 5.25%. |
|
4) |
|
$39.4 million in principal payments related to our tax-exempt bonds, which bear
interest at variable rates (between 0.26% and 0.32%) at March 31, 2011. The tax-exempt
bonds have maturity dates ranging from 2012 to 2033. |
|
5) |
|
$8.9 million in principal payments related to our notes payable to sellers. Our
notes payable to sellers bear interest at rates between 2.50% and 10.35% at March 31,
2011, and have maturity dates ranging from 2012 to 2036. |
|
6) |
|
$3.0 million in principal payments related to our notes payable to third parties.
Our notes payable to third parties bear interest at rates between 6.7% and 10.9% at March
31, 2011, and have maturity dates ranging from 2012 to 2019. |
The following assumptions were made in calculating cash interest payments:
|
1) |
|
We calculated cash interest payments on the credit facility using the Eurodollar rate
plus the applicable Eurodollar margin at March 31, 2011. We assumed the credit facility
is paid off when the credit facility matures in September 2012. |
|
2) |
|
We calculated cash interest payments on our interest rate swaps using the stated
interest rate in the swap agreement less the Eurodollar rate through the term of the
swaps. |
The total liability for uncertain tax positions at March 31, 2011, was approximately $0.4
million. We are not able to reasonably estimate the amount by which the liability will increase or
decrease over time; however, at this time, we do not expect a significant payment related to this
liability within the next year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Commitment Expiration Per Period |
|
|
|
(amounts in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than |
|
|
1 to 3 |
|
|
3 to 5 |
|
|
Over 5 |
|
Unrecorded Obligations(1) |
|
Total |
|
|
1 Year |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
Operating leases |
|
$ |
72,123 |
|
|
$ |
10,090 |
|
|
$ |
18,137 |
|
|
$ |
12,703 |
|
|
$ |
31,193 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We are party to operating lease agreements. These lease agreements are
established in the ordinary course of our business and are designed to provide us with
access to facilities at competitive, market-driven prices. These arrangements have
not materially affected our financial position, results of operations or liquidity
during the three months ended March 31, 2011, nor are they expected to have a material
impact on our future financial position, results of operations or liquidity. |
We have obtained financial surety bonds, primarily to support our financial assurance needs
and landfill operations. We provided customers and various regulatory authorities with surety
bonds in the aggregate amounts of approximately $287.9 million and $285.7 million at March 31, 2011
and December 31, 2010, respectively. These arrangements have not materially affected our financial
position, results of operations or liquidity during the three months ended March 31, 2011, nor are
they expected to have a material impact on our future financial position, results of operations or
liquidity.
From time to time, we evaluate our existing operations and their strategic importance to us.
If we determine that a given operating unit does not have future strategic importance, we may sell
or otherwise dispose of those operations. Although we believe our reporting units would not be
impaired by such dispositions, we could incur losses on them.
Page 42
The disposal tonnage that we received in the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and
2010, at all of our landfills during the respective period, is shown below (tons in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Sites |
|
|
Tons |
|
|
Sites |
|
|
Tons |
|
Owned landfills and
landfills operated
under life-of-site
agreements |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
3,059 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
2,829 |
|
Operated landfills |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
3,179 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
2,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEAURES
Free Cash Flow
We present free cash flow, a non-GAAP financial measure, supplementally because it is widely
used by investors as a valuation and liquidity measure in the solid waste industry. We define free
cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities, plus proceeds from disposal of assets, plus
or minus change in book overdraft, plus excess tax benefit associated with equity-based
compensation, less capital expenditures for property and equipment and distributions to
noncontrolling interests. This measure is not a substitute for, and should be used in conjunction
with, GAAP liquidity or financial measures. Management uses free cash flow as one of the principal
measures to evaluate and monitor the ongoing financial performance of our operations. Other
companies may calculate free cash flow differently. Our free cash flow for the three month periods
ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, is calculated as follows (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
88,378 |
|
|
$ |
83,680 |
|
Less: Change in book overdraft |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(981 |
) |
Plus: Proceeds from disposal of assets |
|
|
789 |
|
|
|
802 |
|
Plus: Excess tax benefit associated with
equity-based compensation |
|
|
1,838 |
|
|
|
2,478 |
|
Less: Capital expenditures for property and equipment |
|
|
(19,528 |
) |
|
|
(26,754 |
) |
Less: Distributions to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(675 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free cash flow |
|
$ |
70,786 |
|
|
$ |
59,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 43
Adjusted Operating Income Before Depreciation and Amortization
We present adjusted operating income before depreciation and amortization, a non-GAAP
financial measure, supplementally because it is widely used by investors as a performance and
valuation measure in the solid waste industry. We define adjusted operating income before
depreciation and amortization as operating income, plus depreciation and amortization expense, plus
closure and post-closure accretion expense, plus or minus any gain or loss on disposal of assets.
We further adjust this calculation to exclude the effects of items management believes impact the
ability to assess the operating performance of our business. This measure is not a substitute for,
and should be used in conjunction with, GAAP financial measures. Management uses adjusted
operating income before depreciation and amortization as one of the principal measures to evaluate
and monitor the ongoing financial performance of our operations. Other companies may calculate
adjusted operating income before depreciation and amortization differently. Our adjusted operating
income before depreciation and amortization for the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, is
calculated as follows (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
68,575 |
|
|
$ |
59,606 |
|
Plus: Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
37,014 |
|
|
|
35,029 |
|
Plus: Closure and post-closure accretion |
|
|
484 |
|
|
|
441 |
|
Plus/less: Loss (gain) on disposal of assets |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
257 |
|
Adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plus: Acquisition-related transaction costs (a) |
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted operating income before depreciation and
amortization |
|
$ |
106,719 |
|
|
$ |
95,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Reflects the addback of acquisition-related costs expensed due to the implementation
of new accounting guidance for business combinations effective January 1, 2009. |
INFLATION
Other than volatility in fuel prices, inflation has not materially affected our operations in
recent years. Consistent with industry practice, many of our contracts allow us to pass through
certain costs to our customers, including increases in landfill tipping fees and, in some cases,
fuel costs. Therefore, we believe that we should be able to increase prices to offset many cost
increases that result from inflation in the ordinary course of business. However, competitive
pressures or delays in the timing of rate increases under our contracts may require us to absorb at
least part of these cost increases, especially if cost increases exceed the average rate of
inflation. Managements estimates associated with inflation have an impact on our accounting for
landfill liabilities.
SEASONALITY
We expect our operating results to vary seasonally, with revenues typically lowest in the
first quarter, higher in the second and third quarters and lower in the fourth quarter than in the
second and third quarters. This seasonality reflects the lower volume of solid waste generated
during the late fall, winter and early spring because of decreased construction and demolition
activities during winter months in the U.S. We expect the fluctuation in our revenues between our
highest and lowest quarters to be approximately 7% to 10%. In addition, some of our operating
costs may be higher in the winter months. Adverse winter weather conditions slow waste collection
activities, resulting in higher labor and operational costs. Greater precipitation in the winter
increases the weight of collected waste, resulting in higher disposal costs, which are calculated
on a per ton basis.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
In the normal course of business, we are exposed to market risk, including changes in interest
rates and prices of certain commodities. We use hedge agreements to manage a portion of our risks
related to interest rates and fuel prices. While we are exposed to credit risk in the event of
non-performance by counterparties to our hedge agreements, in all cases such counterparties are
highly rated financial institutions and we do not anticipate non-performance. We do not hold or
issue derivative financial instruments for trading purposes. We monitor our hedge positions by
regularly evaluating the positions at market and by performing sensitivity analyses over the
unhedged fuel and variable rate debt positions.
Page 44
At March 31, 2011, our derivative instruments included two interest rate swap agreements that
effectively fix the interest rate on the applicable notional amounts of our variable rate debt as
follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed |
|
|
Variable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expiration |
|
Date Entered |
|
Amount |
|
|
Rate Paid* |
|
|
Received |
|
|
Effective Date |
|
|
Date |
|
November 2007 |
|
$ |
50,000 |
|
|
|
4.29 |
% |
|
1-month LIBOR |
|
|
June 2009 |
|
|
June 2011 |
|
March 2009 |
|
$ |
175,000 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
% |
|
1-month LIBOR |
|
|
February 2011 |
|
|
February 2014 |
|
|
|
|
* |
|
plus applicable margin. |
Under derivatives and hedging guidance, all the interest rate swap agreements are considered
cash flow hedges for a portion of our variable rate debt, and we apply hedge accounting to account
for these instruments. The notional amounts and all other significant terms of the swap agreements
are matched to the provisions and terms of the variable rate debt being hedged.
We have performed sensitivity analyses to determine how market rate changes will affect the
fair value of our unhedged floating rate debt. Such an analysis is inherently limited in that it
reflects a singular, hypothetical set of assumptions. Actual market movements may vary
significantly from our assumptions. Fair value sensitivity is not necessarily indicative of the
ultimate cash flow or earnings effect we would recognize from the assumed market rate movements.
We are exposed to cash flow risk due to changes in interest rates with respect to the unhedged
floating rate balances owed at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, of $288.0 million and $325.4
million, respectively, including floating rate debt under our credit facility and floating rate
municipal bond obligations. A one percentage point increase in interest rates on our variable-rate
debt as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, would decrease our annual pre-tax income by
approximately $2.9 million and $3.3 million, respectively. All of our remaining debt instruments
are at fixed rates, or effectively fixed under the interest rate swap agreements described above;
therefore, changes in market interest rates under these instruments would not significantly impact
our cash flows or results of operations, subject to counterparty default risk.
The market price of diesel fuel is unpredictable and can fluctuate significantly. We purchase
approximately 27 million gallons of diesel fuel per year; therefore, a significant increase in the
price of fuel could adversely affect our business and reduce our operating margins. To manage a
portion of this risk, in 2008, we entered into multiple fuel hedge agreements related to forecasted
diesel fuel purchases.
At March 31, 2011, our derivative instruments included two fuel hedge agreements as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Diesel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in gallons |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per |
|
|
Paid |
|
|
Diesel Rate Received |
|
|
Effective |
|
|
Expiration |
|
Date Entered |
|
month) |
|
|
Fixed |
|
|
Variable |
|
|
Date |
|
|
Date |
|
December 2008 |
|
|
400,000 |
|
|
$ |
2.950 |
|
|
DOE Diesel Fuel Index* |
|
January 2011 |
|
December 2011 |
December 2008 |
|
|
400,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.030 |
|
|
DOE Diesel Fuel Index* |
|
January 2012 |
|
December 2012 |
|
|
|
* |
|
If the national U.S. on-highway average price for a gallon of diesel fuel
(average price), as published by the Department of Energy, exceeds the contract
price per gallon, we receive the difference between the average price and the contract
price (multiplied by the notional number of gallons) from the counterparty. If the
average price is less than the contract price per gallon, we pay the difference to the
counterparty. |
Under derivatives and hedging guidance, all the fuel hedges are considered cash flow hedges
for a portion of our forecasted diesel fuel purchases, and we apply hedge accounting to account for
these instruments.
Page 45
We have performed sensitivity analyses to determine how market rate changes will affect the
fair value of our unhedged diesel fuel purchases. Such an analysis is inherently limited in that
it reflects a singular, hypothetical set of assumptions. Actual market movements may vary
significantly from our assumptions. Fair value sensitivity is not necessarily indicative of the
ultimate cash flow or earnings effect we would recognize from the assumed market rate movements.
For the year ending December 31, 2011, we expect to purchase approximately 26.8 million gallons of
diesel fuel, of which 22.0 million gallons will be purchased at market prices and 4.8 million
gallons will be purchased at prices that are fixed under our fuel hedges. During the nine month
period of April 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011, we expect to purchase approximately 16.5 million
gallons of unhedged diesel fuel at market prices; therefore, a $0.10 per gallon increase in the
price of fuel over the remaining nine months in 2011 would decrease our pre-tax income during this
period by approximately $1.7 million.
We market a variety of recyclable materials, including cardboard, office paper, plastic
containers, glass bottles and ferrous and aluminum metals. We own and operate 38 recycling
processing operations and sell other collected recyclable materials to third parties for processing
before resale. Certain of our municipal recycling contracts in the state of Washington specify
benchmark resale prices for recycled commodities. If the prices we actually receive for the
processed recycled commodities collected under the contract exceed the prices specified in the
contract, we share the excess with the municipality, after recovering any previous shortfalls
resulting from actual market prices falling below the prices specified in the contract. To reduce
our exposure to commodity price risk with respect to recycled materials, we have adopted a pricing
strategy of charging collection and processing fees for recycling volume collected from third
parties. In the event of a decline in recycled commodity prices, a 10% decrease in average
recycled commodity prices from the average prices that were in effect during the three months ended
March 31, 2011 and 2010, would have had a $1.4 million and $1.1 million impact on revenues for the
three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Page 46
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
As required by Rule 13a-15(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as such term
is defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of the end of the fiscal quarter covered by
this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and
procedures, our management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed
and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives,
and our management is required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of
possible controls and procedures.
Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded as
of March 31, 2011, that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable
assurance level such that information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports: (1) is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules
and forms; and (2) is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
During the quarter ended March 31, 2011, there was no change in our internal control over
financial reporting that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our
internal control over financial reporting.
Page 47
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Information regarding our legal proceedings can be found in Note 14 of our condensed
consolidated financial statements included in Part I, Item 1 of this report and is incorporated
herein by reference.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Our Board of Directors has authorized a common stock repurchase program for the repurchase of
up to $800 million of our common stock through December 31, 2012. Under the program, stock
repurchases may be made in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions from time to
time at managements discretion. The timing and amounts of any repurchases will depend on many
factors, including our capital structure, the market price of our common stock and overall market
conditions. As of March 31, 2011, we have repurchased approximately 36.2 million shares of our
common stock at a cost of $669.2 million. The table below reflects repurchases we have made for
the three months ended March 31, 2011 (in thousands, except share and per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
Approximate Dollar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased |
|
|
Value of Shares that |
|
|
|
Total Number |
|
|
Average |
|
|
as Part of Publicly |
|
|
May Yet Be |
|
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
Price Paid |
|
|
Announced |
|
|
Purchased Under |
|
Period |
|
Purchased |
|
|
Per Share(1) |
|
|
Program |
|
|
the Program |
|
1/1/11 1/31/11 |
|
|
751,005 |
|
|
$ |
27.45 |
|
|
|
751,005 |
|
|
$ |
130,761 |
|
2/1/11 2/28/11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130,761 |
|
3/1/11 3/31/11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130,761 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
751,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
751,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This amount represents the weighted average price paid per common share. This price
includes a per share commission paid for all repurchases. |
Item 6. Exhibits
See Exhibit Index immediately following the signature page of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Page 48
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
|
|
Date: April 26, 2011 |
BY: |
/s/ Ronald J. Mittelstaedt
|
|
|
|
Ronald J. Mittelstaedt, |
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
Date: April 26, 2011 |
BY: |
/s/ Worthing F. Jackman
|
|
|
|
Worthing F. Jackman, |
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer |
|
Page 49
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit Number |
|
Description of Exhibits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant (incorporated
by reference to the exhibit filed with the Registrants Form 10-Q filed on July
24, 2007) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
Third Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant, effective May 15, 2009
(incorporated by reference to the exhibit filed with the Registrants Form 8-K
filed on April 23, 2009) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
Summary of Management Incentive Compensation Program for Eric M. Merrill |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Exchange Act Rules
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Exchange Act Rules
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. §1350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
The following materials from Waste Connections, Inc.s Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business
Reporting Language): (i) the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets; (ii) the
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income; (iii) the Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Equity and Comprehensive Income; (iv) the Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows; and (v) the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements, tagged as blocks of text. In accordance with Regulation S-T, the
XBRL-formatted interactive data files that comprise this Exhibit 101 shall be
deemed furnished and not filed. |
Page 50