Earnings Labs

Eversource Energy (ES)

Q3 2012 Earnings Call· Thu, Nov 8, 2012

$68.55

-0.06%

Key Takeaways · AI generated
AI summary not yet generated for this transcript. Generation in progress for older transcripts; check back soon, or browse the full transcript below.

Same-Day

-0.21%

1 Week

-0.94%

1 Month

+3.43%

vs S&P

-0.48%

Transcript

Operator

Operator

Good day, everyone, and welcome to the EnergySolutions Third Quarter 2012 Earnings Conference Call. This call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] At this time, I would just like to turn the call over to Richard Putnam, EnergySolutions' Vice President of Investors Relations. Mr. Putnam, please go ahead.

Richard Putnam

Analyst

Thank you, Marcella. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to our third quarter earnings conference call. With me today are Chief Executive Officer, David Lockwood; and our Chief Financial Officer, Greg Wood. Before I turn the call over to Mr. Lockwood, I'd like to remind listeners that during today's call, management's remarks will contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of federal securities laws. These remarks may include statements concerning plans, estimates, objectives, goals, strategies, projections of future events or performance, many of which are based upon certain assumptions. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, and although EnergySolutions believe that its plans, intention and expectations are based upon reasonable assumptions, we may not achieve those plans, intentions or expectations. There are important risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements made in this conference call. Such risks and uncertainties are discussed in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, and on our just announced earnings release included in our current report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Any projections as to the company's future financial performance represent management's estimates as of today, November 8, 2012. EnergySolutions assumes no obligation to update these projections in the future due to changing conditions, developments or otherwise. We've also prepared a number of tables which are referenced in -- that will be referenced this morning. Those tables are part of the earnings release that was put out earlier this morning, and they can be accessed on our Investor Relations tab at energysolutions.com. We would like to answer as many of your questions as we can. We will be happy to follow up with you individually after the conference call if you have additional questions. With that, I'll now turn the time over to David Lockwood, CEO of EnergySolutions.

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Good morning. Thank you for taking the time to join us to discuss our third quarter results. As we detailed on our last earnings call, the new management team, in our first months on the job, reached a number of conclusions about our business: that we required more focus; that we would benefit from a lower cost structure; that we would also benefit from a stronger balance sheet; and that we need to invest to grow. Based on these conclusions, we launched 4 strategic alternatives: asset sales, cost restructuring, debt pay-down and investing for growth. Let's talk about our progress on these 4 strategic initiatives during the quarter. Asset sales. We've said we will refocus the company and pay down debt through asset sales. We continue to be actively engaged in that process with our financial adviser and have made significant progress. As we've said in previous calls, we will not discuss potential strategic alternatives unless we have reached the conclusion on a particular process. In the case of our European business, that process has concluded. As we embarked on asset sales, we were approached unsolicited by a third party to purchase our European business. As a public company, our board is focused on shareholder value, and our board decided it would be in the best interest of shareholders to run a competitive process to consider offers for that business, which includes the Magnox contract. We received a number of offers to purchase our European business, but the board decided, based on a recommendation by management, not to sell but to retain and grow our business. Decommissioning is at the core of our company, and Magnox is one of the largest decommissioning contracts in the world. We believe that contract not only has significant economic value, but also significant strategic…

Gregory S. Wood

Analyst

Thank you, David, and good morning, everyone. Today I'll be discussing our financial results for the third quarter, as set forth in the 5 tables attached to our press release. These numbers include both GAAP and non-GAAP financial results, and you'll find a reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP results in Table 4 of our earnings release. Looking first at our income statement on Table 1, you can see that revenue in the third quarter was $444 million, up $23 million from $421 million in the third quarter of 2011. Our Government revenue was down $8 million quarter-on-quarter, while Global Commercial revenue was up $31 million. Most of the increase in Global Commercial was attributable to our International operations. I'll provide more details on segment results in a few minutes. The higher revenues and lower cost of revenue increased gross profits by more than $9 million in Q3 compared to the prior year. Despite lower revenue, Government gross profits increased by $1.5 million and Global Commercial gross profits were up $7.5 million. Selling, general and administrative expenses were $32 million in the third quarter, slightly lower than the third quarter of 2011. Our Q3 results include $3.3 million of restructuring costs associated with the organizational restructuring we announced on October 9. We expect to incur additional charges in Q4 for restructuring. Our other income for the quarter was $12 million. We had a good quarter of performance in the NDT fund associated with our Zion project, as earnings were nearly $20 million. This was offset by nonrecurring charges of approximately $5 million related to the tentative legal settlements that David mentioned and approximately $2.5 million related to write-off of an engineering research building that we donated to Washington State University in the quarter. The resulting net income attributable to EnergySolutions for…

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Thank you, Greg. We're extremely pleased with the performance of our management team and our dedicated employees. We come to work everyday excited about the prospects for our company. We're fortunate to work with the best people in the business, the engineers, scientists and professionals of EnergySolutions who make a difference in the communities in which they work and live. The opportunities for environmental cleanup have never been greater, and we look forward to what we can achieve in the years ahead. With that, let's open it up for questions. Operator?

Operator

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Alex Rygiel, FBR.

Alexander J. Rygiel

Analyst

If you could update us on a few items. First, I know you don't want to get into too much detail on the asset sales, but I believe in the past, you were hopeful to have many of those completed by year-end. If you could just maybe update that kind of view on your timeline for asset sales, that would be helpful.

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Yes, asset sales, we plan to have done -- if we're going to do asset sales, we plan to have them done by the end of the year.

Alexander J. Rygiel

Analyst

And are there any other assets that you possibly moved down the path pretty far on selling that you also made the determination not to move forward with?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

No.

Alexander J. Rygiel

Analyst

Okay. As it relates to Magnox, how should we think about the incremental costs for rebid and the potential for you to partner with another entity?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

So 2 things. We have not given guidance on the costs of rebidding Magnox, but that is included in our numbers when we forecast. And we believe that the best chance for winning Magnox is with a partner, for us not to bid it alone.

Alexander J. Rygiel

Analyst

And what's the timeline for when we may hear who your partner is?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

I don't know the answer to that. It's not -- it would not be immediately, but we don't know the answer to that.

Alexander J. Rygiel

Analyst

And one last question, and then I'll get back in the queue. As it relates to Zion, what's the timeline for disposal shipments to Clive?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

We expect the first unit will leave Zion and head to Clive next month.

Operator

Operator

Our next question comes from Al Kaschalk, Wedbush.

Albert Leo Kaschalk

Analyst

[technical issue]

Operator

Operator

Our next question comes from Jon Evans, Edmunds White Partners.

Jonathan Evans

Analyst

Could you talk a little bit about the bonds? And I guess what I was hoping to understand is, can you help us understand the basket and the availability that you have to go out and try to repurchase the high-yield bonds? Because obviously, that would be very accretive to the shareholders if you did that with some of the cash flow in your quest to reduce debt.

Gregory S. Wood

Analyst

Sure. As you know, our credit facilities senior to the bonds, so there are restrictions on what we can repurchase. But under that Credit Agreement, we are allowed a basket. From memory, it's in the range of -- I think it depends on our -- the cash flow that we're generating, but the basket is in the range of $25 million to $30 million a year.

Jonathan Evans

Analyst

So do you think you guys will start to purchase those in the market to reduce debt? Or help us understand how you achieve reducing debt.

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

We have not made those decisions yet. That's a discussion that we're having with the board. Once we have gone through the asset sale process, we'll have a better idea both for what our cash position will be, our balance sheet, our needs going forward. So once we've done that -- and what our EBITDA will be going forward because if we conduct asset sales, that will obviously change the EBITDA of the company. So once we've done that, then we will look at how best to reduce debt, whether it's through using the basket on the bonds or whether it's through paying down term loan or other means.

Jonathan Evans

Analyst

One last question relative to that is if you could talk a little bit about if you make asset sales, do you have a claw -- any kind of clawback either with the term loan or with the high-yield bonds? In other words, do they have to get a portion of the asset sales?

Gregory S. Wood

Analyst

Yes. Under our -- under the senior Credit Agreement, there is a requirement that 100% of asset proceeds be used to pay down that debt.

Operator

Operator

Our next question comes from Scott Levine, JPMorgan.

Rodney C. Clayton

Analyst

It's Rodney here for Scott. So first, can you remind -- and I understand the point that you want to see how the asset sale process plays out before making any additional debt payments. But can you remind us how much cash you need to carry on the balance sheet before you would consider making additional payment once the asset sales are out of the way?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Well, again, it depends upon which assets we sale and what the resulting EBITDA is and also what the require -- the funding requirements would be given however the company is going to look once we do the asset sales. So I don't think there is a number that we could give you. It's really going to depend on what the company looks like going forward.

Rodney C. Clayton

Analyst

Okay, I understand that. Secondly, can you provide a quick update on the San Onofre steam generator shipments, when do you kind of expect that to -- when you might get those shipments to Clive?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

We don't talk specifically about when those generators would or wouldn't go to Clive. So we include that in our forecasts, both the forecast we give and our internal forecast as we think about next year. But we're not going to comment on any particular steam generator and whether it's going or not going or whether it's in the guidance or not in the guidance. But I understand your question, but we're just not going to talk about that.

Rodney C. Clayton

Analyst

Okay, fair enough. Finally, can you help us with the contribution that you're getting from Fukushima on your International revenues and margins? I mean, whatever level of detail you can provide with respect to, I guess, percentage of revenues or how the margins compare to what you get from Magnox would be helpful.

Gregory S. Wood

Analyst

Sure. So this is Greg. We -- as we mentioned, most of the increase in revenue compared to Q3 of last year was attributed to our International operations, and particularly the cleanup operations in Japan and Korea. And as you can imagine, most of that's Fukushima. So it's the better part of $30 million increase year-on-year. And in terms of -- we don't provide the specifics on gross margins, but for providing the liners and the media and the containers, that's the bulk of the revenue as they ramp up to treat the water. And generally, that's -- let's say that's better margins than we get overall on the Magnox contracts.

Operator

Operator

Our next question comes from Al.

Albert Leo Kaschalk

Analyst

David, I was wondering if you could help us understand the why the partnering with another company obviously in the E&C nuclear service firm, is best for, a, the company and, b, shareholders. And this, of course, relates to Magnox?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Yes, no, I think given the nature of the rebid, I think it significantly improves the chances of winning. I do not think you will see any firm, any sole vendor bid that contract. I think it will be consortiums of either 2 firms or up to as many as 3 or 4 firms in one particular bid. And I think we believe the best chance of winning is to partner with another firm.

Albert Leo Kaschalk

Analyst

Is that mandated from the NDA, or is that something that even your competitors would candidly admit?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Look, I can't speak for our -- first of all, as far as I know, it is not mandated by the NDA. I do not believe that's a requirement of making a bid. However, I believe if you talk to any of the number of firms who are bidding that contract, they would all tell you that if you want to have a shot at winning that, you've got to partner with at least one other firm. The ability to partner with another firm brings a much broader array of resources and capabilities to the bid that we believe anyway will be important to the NDA.

Albert Leo Kaschalk

Analyst

Okay. And then sort of related to that and in line with the restructuring efforts and cost, I think Greg said $3.3 million was what you recorded in Q3. What's that number expected to be in Q4?

Gregory S. Wood

Analyst

The total restructuring guidance we gave when we announced this on October 9 was a range of $12 million to $16 million, of which a chunk of that was attributable to facilities, and the rest was for personnel costs. We said $9 million to $11 million for severance termination benefits, employee relocation, et cetera, and between $3 million and $5 million for facility costs.

Albert Leo Kaschalk

Analyst

And then what was that to lead to savings or cost savings in '13, was that $25 million?

Gregory S. Wood

Analyst

Well, our target, what we've quantified is about $35 million of annual savings, and our goal is to get to that for the run rate on January 1.

Albert Leo Kaschalk

Analyst

Okay. So if I can pose this question to you, if the Magnox contract is to be won by a bid by joint effort and you take your sort of historical levels of performance on that contract from an EBITDA basis, is it fair to say that your cost savings could exceed any value -- or any EBITDA levels that you would have to share with a partner on that contract? Or you're not in a spot today to be able to conclude that?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Yes, I would say it's too early to speculate on that.

Operator

Operator

Our next question comes from Robert Perry, Kingsland Capital.

Robert Perry

Analyst

So I had a question with regard to your strategy on asset sales. Now that you've decided, in conjunction with the board, not to sell the European business. Given your other portfolio of businesses, I mean, what characteristics of kind of your remaining businesses make -- would make one business more or less attractive to consider for sale than another? Can you just give us some idea how you're evaluating the rest of the portfolio outside the International business?

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

Yes, so as we've talked about on previous calls -- let's take out the International business for the moment. If you look at our U.S. business, what are our key competitive strengths? Well, one is we have the largest Class A commercial disposal facility in the United States, that's Clive; two is we have the largest processing facility, which is Bear Creek; we have the largest logistics firm in -- for nuclear commissioning in Hittman and other assets such as containers; and we have the leading water treatment business in the United States. Those are really our core competency here in the States beyond the -- as we've talked about, the overarching opportunity here, which is nuclear decommissioning that we see at Zion, that we see at Magnox, at Sellafield in the U.K., the next large contract, and in other places throughout Europe. So that's how we think about our core competitive strengths, and we consider asset sales in the context of that.

Operator

Operator

At this time, I'm showing no further questions. I would like to turn the call over to Mr. David Lockwood for closing remarks.

David J. Lockwood

Analyst

All right. Thank you, everyone, for participating in our call today.

Operator

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation in today's conference. This concludes the program. You may now disconnect. Have a great day.