UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Form 10-Q
| |
|
|
| þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008
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 000-50132
Sterling
Chemicals, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
| |
|
|
Delaware (State or other
jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
|
76-0502785 (IRS Employer
Identification No.) |
| |
|
|
333 Clay Street,
Suite 3600 Houston, Texas 77002-4109 (Address of
principal executive offices) |
|
(713) 650-3700 (Registrant’s
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 is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated
filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
| Large accelerated filer o |
Accelerated filer o |
Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting
company) |
Smaller reporting company þ |
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.
As of July 31, 2008, Sterling
Chemicals, Inc. had 2,828,460 shares of common stock outstanding.
IMPORTANT
INFORMATION REGARDING THIS FORM 10-Q
Unless otherwise indicated, references
to “we,” “us,” “our” and “ours” in this Form 10-Q refer collectively to Sterling
Chemicals, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries.
Readers should consider
the following information as they review this Form 10-Q:
Forward-Looking
Statements
This report contains “forward-looking
statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the United
States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act.
Forward-looking statements give our current expectations or forecasts of future
events. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be
deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include,
without limitation, any statement that may project, indicate or imply future
results, events, performance or achievements, and may contain or be identified
by the words “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “predict,” “anticipate,” “estimate,”
“believe,” “should,” “could,” “may,” “might,” “will,” “will be,” “will
continue,” “will likely result,” “project,” “forecast,” “budget” and similar
expressions. Statements in this report that contain forward-looking statements
include, but are not limited to, information concerning our possible or assumed
future results of operations and statements about the following subjects:
| |
• |
|
current and future industry conditions and their effect on our results
of operations or financial position; |
| |
| |
• |
|
the extent, timing and impact of expansions of production capacity of
our products, by us or by our competitors; |
| |
| |
• |
|
the potential effects of market and industry conditions and
cyclicality on our competitiveness, business strategy, results of
operations or financial position; |
| |
| |
• |
|
our ability to consummate development projects at our Texas City,
Texas site; |
| |
| |
• |
|
the adequacy of our liquidity; |
| |
| |
• |
|
our environmental management programs and safety initiatives; |
| |
| |
• |
|
our market sensitive financial instruments; |
| |
| |
• |
|
future uses of, and requirements for, financial resources; |
| |
| |
• |
|
future contractual obligations; |
| |
| |
• |
|
future amendments, renewals or terminations of existing contractual
relationships; |
| |
| |
• |
|
business strategies; |
| |
| |
• |
|
growth opportunities; |
| |
| |
• |
|
competitive position; |
| |
| |
• |
|
expected financial position; |
| |
| |
• |
|
future cash flows or dividends; |
| |
| |
• |
|
budgets for capital and other expenditures; |
| |
| |
• |
|
plans and objectives of management; |
| |
| |
• |
|
outcomes of legal proceedings; |
| |
| |
• |
|
compliance with applicable laws; |
| |
| |
• |
|
our reliance on marketing partners; |
| |
| |
• |
|
adequacy of insurance coverage or indemnification rights; |
| |
| |
• |
|
the timing and extent of changes in commodity prices for our products
or raw materials; |
| |
| |
• |
|
petrochemicals industry production capacity or operating rates; |
| |
| |
• |
|
costs associated with the shut down and decommissioning of our styrene
facility; |
| |
| |
• |
|
increases in the cost of, or our ability to obtain, raw materials or
energy; |
| |
| |
• |
|
regulatory initiatives and compliance with governmental laws or
regulations, including environmental laws or regulations; |
| |
| |
• |
|
customer preferences; |
| |
| |
• |
|
our ability to attract or retain high quality employees; |
| |
| |
• |
|
operating hazards attendant to the petrochemicals industry; |
| |
| |
• |
|
casualty losses, including those resulting from weather related
events; |
| |
| |
• |
|
changes in foreign, political, social or economic conditions; |
| |
| |
• |
|
risks of war, military operations, other armed hostilities, terrorist
acts or embargoes; |
| |
| |
• |
|
changes in technology, which could require significant capital
expenditures in order to maintain competitiveness or could cause existing
manufacturing processes to become obsolete; |
| |
| |
• |
|
effects of litigation; |
| |
| |
• |
|
cost, availability or adequacy of insurance;
and |
i
| |
• |
|
various other matters, many of which are beyond our
control. |
The risks included here are not
exhaustive. Other sections of this report and our other filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, including, without limitation,
our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007,
or our Annual Report, include additional factors that could adversely affect our
business, results of operations or financial performance. See “Risk Factors”
contained in Item 1A of Part I of our Annual Report. Given these risks
and uncertainties, investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking
statements. Forward-looking statements included in this Form 10-Q are made only
as of the date of this Form 10-Q and are not guarantees of future performance.
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking
statements are reasonable, such expectations may prove to have been incorrect.
All written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to us, or persons
acting on our behalf, are expressly qualified in their entirety by these
cautionary statements.
Document
Summaries
Descriptions of documents and
agreements contained in this Form 10-Q are provided in summary form only, and
such summaries are qualified in their entirety by reference to the actual
documents and agreements filed as exhibits to our Annual Report, other periodic
reports we file with the SEC or this Form 10-Q.
Access to
Filings
Access to our annual reports on Form
10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K, and
amendments to those reports, filed with or furnished to the SEC pursuant to
Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act, as well as reports filed electronically
pursuant to Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, may be obtained through our
website (http://www.sterlingchemicals.com). Our website provides a hyperlink to
a third-party website, where these reports may be viewed and printed at no cost
as soon as reasonably practicable after we have electronically filed such
material with the SEC. The contents of our website (or the third-party websites
accessible through the various hyperlinks) are not, and shall not be deemed to
be, incorporated into this report.
ii
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
INDEX
1
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of
Directors and Stockholders of Sterling Chemicals, Inc.:
We have reviewed the accompanying
condensed consolidated balance sheet of Sterling Chemicals, Inc. and its
subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of June 30, 2008, and the related condensed
consolidated statements of operations for the three and six month periods ended
June 30, 2008, and cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2008.
These interim financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s
management.
We conducted our review in accordance
with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United
States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of
applying analytical procedures to financial data and making inquiries of persons
responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in
scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is
the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a
whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.
Based on our review, we are not aware
of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying condensed
consolidated financial statements for them to be in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Houston,
Texas
August 14, 2008
2
PART
I.
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1.
Financial Statements
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(Dollars in Thousands,
Except Share Data)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(As Restated, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(As Restated, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
See Note 11 ) |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
See Note 11) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
47,795 |
|
|
$ |
34,132 |
|
|
$ |
85,995 |
|
|
$ |
66,847 |
|
|
Cost of goods
sold |
|
|
37,969 |
|
|
|
31,329 |
|
|
|
71,767 |
|
|
|
58,417 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
9,826 |
|
|
|
2,803 |
|
|
|
14,228 |
|
|
|
8,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative expenses |
|
|
3,787 |
|
|
|
2,525 |
|
|
|
6,205 |
|
|
|
4,823 |
|
|
Impairment of
long-lived assets |
|
|
6,649 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
6,649 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Interest and debt
related expenses |
|
|
4,719 |
|
|
|
4,932 |
|
|
|
8,931 |
|
|
|
8,392 |
|
|
Interest
income |
|
|
(1,107 |
) |
|
|
(572 |
) |
|
|
(2,432 |
) |
|
|
(647 |
) |
|
Other expense |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing
operations before income tax |
|
|
(4,222 |
) |
|
|
(4,921 |
) |
|
|
(5,125 |
) |
|
|
(4,977 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income
taxes |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(973 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(973 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing
operations |
|
$ |
(4,222 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,948 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,125 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,004 |
) |
|
Income (loss) from
discontinued operations, net of tax of zero for all periods |
|
|
(1,588 |
) |
|
|
4,474 |
|
|
|
(7,813 |
) |
|
|
7,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
(loss) |
|
$ |
(5,810 |
) |
|
$ |
526 |
|
|
$ |
(12,938 |
) |
|
$ |
3,196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock
dividends |
|
|
4,422 |
|
|
|
4,976 |
|
|
|
8,693 |
|
|
|
8,026 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable
to common stockholders |
|
$ |
(10,232 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,450 |
) |
|
$ |
(21,631 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,830 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) per
share of common stock attributable to common stockholders, basic and
diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing
operations |
|
$ |
(3.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(3.15 |
) |
|
$ |
(4.89 |
) |
|
$ |
(4.26 |
) |
|
Income (loss) from
discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
(0.56 |
) |
|
|
1.58 |
|
|
|
(2.76 |
) |
|
|
2.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss
per share |
|
$ |
(3.62 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.57 |
) |
|
$ |
(7.65 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and
diluted |
|
|
2,828,460 |
|
|
|
2,828,460 |
|
|
|
2,828,460 |
|
|
|
2,828,460 |
|
The accompanying
notes are an integral part of the condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
(Dollars in Thousands, Except
Share Data)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash
equivalents |
|
$ |
160,491 |
|
|
$ |
100,183 |
|
|
Accounts receivable,
net of allowance of $33 and $39, respectively |
|
|
24,098 |
|
|
|
29,157 |
|
|
Inventories,
net |
|
|
5,562 |
|
|
|
5,044 |
|
|
Prepaid
expenses |
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
3,129 |
|
|
Deferred tax
asset |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
5,029 |
|
|
Assets of discontinued
operations |
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
71,754 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current
assets |
|
|
191,693 |
|
|
|
214,296 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and
equipment, net |
|
|
68,329 |
|
|
|
77,677 |
|
|
Other assets,
net |
|
|
13,646 |
|
|
|
14,471 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
273,668 |
|
|
$ |
306,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIENCY IN ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable |
|
$ |
14,996 |
|
|
$ |
13,715 |
|
|
Accrued
liabilities |
|
|
15,385 |
|
|
|
22,789 |
|
|
Liabilities of
discontinued operations |
|
|
12,401 |
|
|
|
11,528 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current
liabilities |
|
|
42,782 |
|
|
|
48,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
Deferred tax
liability |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
5,029 |
|
|
Deferred credits and
other liabilities |
|
|
26,415 |
|
|
|
26,168 |
|
|
Long-term liabilities
of discontinued operations |
|
|
41,584 |
|
|
|
51,436 |
|
|
Commitments and
contingencies (Note 6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable preferred
stock |
|
|
108,559 |
|
|
|
99,866 |
|
|
Stockholders’
equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $.01 par
value (shares authorized 20,000,000; shares issued and outstanding
2,828,460) |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
Additional paid-in
capital |
|
|
132,527 |
|
|
|
141,174 |
|
|
Accumulated
deficit |
|
|
(245,480 |
) |
|
|
(232,542 |
) |
|
Accumulated other
comprehensive income |
|
|
17,253 |
|
|
|
17,253 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders’
deficiency in assets |
|
|
(95,672 |
) |
|
|
(74,087 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
stockholders’ deficiency in assets |
|
$ |
273,668 |
|
|
$ |
306,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying
notes are an integral part of the condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(Dollars in
Thousands)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from
operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
(loss) |
|
$ |
(12,938 |
) |
|
$ |
3,196 |
|
|
Adjustments to
reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bad debt
expense |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Stock compensation
expense |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Depreciation and
amortization |
|
|
5,082 |
|
|
|
5,490 |
|
|
Impairment of
long-lived assets |
|
|
6,649 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Interest
amortization |
|
|
810 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
Unearned income
amortization |
|
|
(5,744 |
) |
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
Lower-of-cost-or-market
adjustment |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
Loss on
investment |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
839 |
|
|
Gain on disposal of
property, plant and equipment |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(182 |
) |
|
Deferred tax
benefit |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(973 |
) |
|
Other |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
Change in
assets/liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable |
|
|
60,193 |
|
|
|
(29,358 |
) |
|
Inventories |
|
|
15,010 |
|
|
|
19,359 |
|
|
Prepaid
expenses |
|
|
2,620 |
|
|
|
2,029 |
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
1,976 |
|
|
Accounts
payable |
|
|
1,846 |
|
|
|
5,243 |
|
|
Accrued
liabilities |
|
|
(6,533 |
) |
|
|
(1,041 |
) |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
|
(3,862 |
) |
|
|
(8,760 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by
(used in) operating activities |
|
|
63,065 |
|
|
|
(969 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows used in
investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
for property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(2,757 |
) |
|
|
(4,350 |
) |
|
Net proceeds from the
sale of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in
investing activities |
|
|
(2,757 |
) |
|
|
(4,168 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from
financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of tendered
Old Secured Notes |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(100,579 |
) |
|
Proceeds from the
issuance of Secured Notes |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
Debt issuance
costs |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(7,832 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by
financing activities |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
41,589 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in
cash |
|
|
60,308 |
|
|
|
36,452 |
|
|
Cash and cash
equivalents — beginning of year |
|
|
100,183 |
|
|
|
20,690 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash
equivalents — end of period |
|
$ |
160,491 |
|
|
$ |
57,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosures of cash flow information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid, net of
interest income received |
|
$ |
5,607 |
|
|
$ |
4,001 |
|
|
Cash paid for income
taxes |
|
|
404 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
The accompanying
notes are an integral part of the condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
1. Basis of
Presentation
The accompanying unaudited interim
condensed consolidated financial statements were prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
(“GAAP”) and reflect all adjustments (including normal recurring accruals)
which, in our opinion, are considered necessary for the fair presentation of the
results for the periods presented. The results of operations and cash flows for
the periods presented are not necessarily indicative of the results to be
expected for the full year. These statements should be read in conjunction with
the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in our
Annual Report.
Reclassifications
Certain amounts reported in the
condensed consolidated financial statements for the prior periods have been
reclassified to conform to the current consolidated financial statement
presentation with no effect on net loss or stockholders’ equity (deficiency in
assets). For the six months ended June 30, 2007, we have reclassified
certain amounts between depreciation and amortization and other liabilities on
the condensed consolidated statement of cash flows. For the three and six months
ended June 30, 2007, we have reclassified certain amounts on the condensed
consolidated statements of operations and the condensed consolidated balance
sheet as of December 31, 2007, to reflect the discontinued operations of
styrene.
2. Stock-Based
Compensation
On December 19, 2002, we adopted
our 2002 Stock Plan and reserved 379,747 shares of our common stock for issuance
under the plan (subject to adjustment). Under our 2002 Stock Plan, officers and
key employees, as designated by our Board of Directors, may be issued stock
options, stock awards, stock appreciation rights or stock units. There are
currently options to purchase a total of 347,500 shares of our common stock
outstanding under our 2002 Stock Plan, all at an exercise price of $31.60, and
an additional 16,414 shares of common stock available for issuance under our
2002 Stock Plan.
During the second quarter of 2008, we
granted 125,000 stock options at a weighted-average exercise price of $31.60.
The fair value of each grant was estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted-average
assumptions:
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
2008 |
| |
|
Expected life
(years) |
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
Expected
volatility |
|
|
54.3 |
% |
|
Expected dividend
yield |
|
|
— |
|
|
Risk-free interest
rate |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
Weighted-average fair
value of options granted during the period |
|
$ |
7.25 |
|
Stock based compensation expense was
less than $0.1 million for the three and six months ended June 30,
2008 and 2007.
3. Discontinued
Operations
On September 16, 2005, we
announced that we were exiting the acrylonitrile business and related derivative
operations, which included sodium cyanide and disodium iminodiacetic acid
production. These production units had been shut down since February 2005,
and after our announcement, we dismantled these facilities. Our decision was
based on a history of operating losses incurred by our acrylonitrile and
derivatives businesses, and was made after a full review and analysis of our
strategic alternatives.
6
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
On September 17, 2007, we entered
into a long-term exclusive styrene supply agreement and a related railcar
purchase and sale agreement with NOVA Chemicals Inc., or NOVA. Under this supply
agreement, NOVA had the exclusive right to purchase 100% of our styrene
production (subject to existing contractual commitments), the amount of styrene
supplied in any particular period being at NOVA’s option. In November 2007,
this supply agreement, which was subsequently assigned by NOVA to INEOS NOVA,
LLC, or INEOS NOVA, obtained clearance under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. This
clearance caused the supply agreement and the railcar agreement to become
effective and triggered a $60 million payment to us in November 2007. In
accordance with the terms of the supply agreement, INEOS NOVA assumed
substantially all of our contractual obligations for future styrene deliveries.
After the supply agreement became effective, INEOS NOVA nominated zero pounds of
styrene under the supply agreement for the balance of 2007 and, in response, we
exercised our right to terminate the supply agreement and permanently shut down
our styrene facility. Under the supply agreement, we are responsible for the
closure costs of our styrene facility and are also restricted from reentering
the styrene business until November 2012. The restricted period of time was
initially 8 years. However effective April 1, 2008, INEOS NOVA unilaterally
reduced the restricted period to 5 years. We operated our styrene facility
through early December 2007, as we completed our production of inventory
and exhausted our raw materials and purchase requirements, and sold
substantially all of our remaining inventory during the first quarter of 2008.
During 2007 and the first six months of 2008, we incurred closure costs to
decommission our styrene facility of $0.7 million and $14.6 million,
respectively. We expect to incur up to approximately $4 million in
additional decommissioning costs related to the closure of our styrene facility.
In mid-July, with the decontamination process for the styrene facility nearing
completion, we announced a reduction in work force in order to reduce our
staffing to a level appropriate for our existing operations and site development
projects. As a result, we reduced our salaried work force by seven people. In
addition, we made offers for early retirement to several members of our hourly
work force and our salaried administrative and process supervisors. Upon
completion of the down-sizing of our hourly work force and our administrative
and process supervisor positions, total staff reductions are expected to be
approximately 40 employees, and we expect to recognize approximately
$2.2 million in severance costs in the third and fourth quarters of 2008,
in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or SFAS
No. 146, “Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal
Activities.”
In accordance with SFAS No. 144,
“Accounting for the Impairment and Disposal of Long Lived Assets,” we have
reported the operating results of these businesses as discontinued operations in
our condensed consolidated financial statements. The carrying amounts of assets
and liabilities related to discontinued operations as of June 30, 2008 and
December 31, 2007 were as follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, 2008 |
|
|
December 31, 2007 |
|
| |
|
(Dollars in Thousands) |
|
|
Assets of
discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable,
net |
|
$ |
851 |
|
|
$ |
55,995 |
|
|
Inventories |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
15,709 |
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,032 |
|
|
$ |
71,754 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities of
discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
3,363 |
|
|
Accrued liabilities
(1) |
|
|
12,401 |
|
|
|
8,165 |
|
|
Deferred credits and
other liabilities (1) |
|
|
41,584 |
|
|
|
51,436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
53,985 |
|
|
$ |
62,964 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (1) |
|
Includes $54 million of deferred income for the NOVA supply
agreement that will be amortized over the contractual non-compete period
of five years using the straight-line method. Accrued liabilities include
the current portion of $12.4 million and deferred credits and other
liabilities include the long-term portion of
$41.6 million. |
Revenue and pre-tax losses from
discontinued operations for the three and six-month periods ended June 30,
2008 and 2007 are presented below:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
Six months ended June 30, |
| |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
611 |
|
|
$ |
218,339 |
|
|
$ |
15,208 |
|
|
$ |
382,011 |
|
|
Income (loss) before
income taxes |
|
|
(1,588 |
) |
|
|
4,474 |
|
|
|
(7,813 |
) |
|
|
7,200 |
|
7
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Current severance obligations related
to the exit from our acrylonitrile operations are detailed below (in thousands):
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Accrued as of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued as of |
| |
|
December 31, 2007 |
|
Additional accruals |
|
Cash payments |
|
June 30, 2008 |
| |
|
Severance
accrual |
|
$ |
325 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
325 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
4. Shutdown and
Impairment of Phthalic Anhydride Manufacturing Unit
On May 27, 2008, we entered into a
Third Amended and Restated Plasticizers Production Agreement, or our Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement, with BASF Corporation, or BASF, with an
effective date of April 1, 2008. The Amended Plasticizers Production
Agreement amended certain provisions of the Second Amended and Restated
Plasticizers Production Agreement between us and BASF dated as of
January 1, 2006, or the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement. The Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement was entered into in connection with BASF’s
nomination of zero pounds of phthalic anhydride, or PA, under the Old
Plasticizers Production Agreement in response to deteriorating market conditions
which were not expected to improve over the next few years, causing the shutdown
of our PA unit.
The Amended Plasticizers Production
Agreement relieves BASF of most of its obligations under the Old Plasticizers
Production Agreement related to our PA manufacturing unit. BASF’s obligations
under the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement related to our esters
manufacturing unit were not affected by the Amended Plasticizers Production
Agreement and are continuing in accordance with the same terms as existed under
the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement. In exchange for being relieved of its
obligations related to our PA manufacturing unit, BASF is required to pay us an
aggregate amount of approximately $3.2 million, $3.0 million of which
was paid in May 2008, and the balance of which is due and payable on or
before August 15, 2008. However, we are obligated to refund 75% of this
amount if we restart our PA manufacturing unit before January 1, 2009, 50%
of this amount if we restart our PA manufacturing unit during 2009 and 25% of
this amount if we restart our PA manufacturing unit during 2010. The
$3.2 million represents the termination of BASF’s obligations under the Old
Plasticizers Production Agreement with respect to the operation of our PA
manufacturing unit, and will be recognized using the straight-line method over
the restricted period of April 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010 under
the Amended Plasticizers Production Agreement. During the first half of 2008,
BASF is also required to pay us approximately $3.7 million for
reimbursement of certain direct fixed and variable costs associated with the
shutdown and decontamination of our PA manufacturing unit, which amounts are not
subject to refund. All direct fixed and variable costs associated with the
shutdown and decontamination of our PA unit have been incurred and expensed, and
the $3.7 million in cost reimbursements, has been recognized as revenue in
the first six months of 2008. The quarterly fixed periodic payments under the
Old Plasticizers Production Agreement with respect to the operation of our PA
and esters manufacturing units were not changed under the Amended Plasticizers
Agreement. However, these quarterly fixed periodic payments are now solely
related to the operation of our esters manufacturing unit under the Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement.
In addition, under the Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement, (i) the methods for calculating payments
required to be made by BASF for achieving reductions in direct fixed and
variable costs and (ii) BASF’s right to terminate the Agreement in the
event that direct fixed and variable costs exceed a specified threshold (unless
we elect to cap BASF’s reimbursement obligations) have both been modified to
exclude costs savings and direct fixed and variable costs pertaining to our PA
manufacturing unit.
After April 1, 2008, the Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement also removed all restrictions or rights BASF
formerly had during the term of the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement with
respect to our use or disposition of the PA manufacturing unit, including a
limited purchase right, the right to request capacity increases and consultation
rights regarding future capital expenditures with respect to our PA
manufacturing unit.
As a result of the Amended Plasticizers
Production Agreement and subsequent permanent shutdown of our PA unit, our
management determined that a triggering event, as defined in SFAS No. 144,
“Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” had occurred
and during the second quarter of 2008, we performed an asset impairment analysis
on our PA manufacturing unit. We analyzed the undiscounted cash flow stream from
our PA business over the remaining life of the PA manufacturing unit and
compared it to the $6.6 million net book carrying value of our PA
manufacturing unit. This analysis showed that the undiscounted projected cash
flow stream from our PA business was less than the net book carrying value of
our PA manufacturing unit. As a result, we performed a discounted cash flow
analysis and subsequently concluded that our PA manufacturing unit was impaired
and should be written down to zero. This write-down caused us to record an
impairment of $6.6 million in June 2008.
8
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Other than the impairment discussed
above, we do not believe the shutdown of our PA manufacturing unit will have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows as the required quarterly fixed periodic payments previously related to
the PA manufacturing unit will continue throughout the original term of the
contract, however have been allocated to the operations of the esters
manufacturing unit, and all decontamination and shutdown costs were reimbursed
by BASF.
5. Long-Term
Debt
On March 1, 2007, we commenced an
offer, or our tender offer, to repurchase all $100.6 million of our
outstanding 10% Senior Secured Notes due 2007, or our Old Secured Notes.
Concurrently with our tender offer, we solicited consents from the holders of
our Old Secured Notes to, among other things, eliminate certain covenants
contained in the indenture governing our Old Secured Notes and related security
documents. On March 30, 2007, we repurchased $58 million in aggregate
principal amount of our Old Secured Notes, which were validly tendered prior to
the expiration of our tender offer, and paid the accrued interest thereon and
$0.1 million in consent fees. On April 27, 2007, we redeemed all of
our Old Secured Notes that were not tendered pursuant to our tender offer for
$44 million, which included $1.5 million in accrued interest.
On March 29, 2007, we completed a
private offering of $150 million aggregate principal amount of unregistered
101/4% Senior Secured Notes due 2015, or our Secured
Notes, pursuant to a Purchase Agreement among us, Sterling Chemicals Energy,
Inc., or Sterling Energy, one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, and Jefferies
& Company, Inc. and CIBC World Markets Corp., as initial purchasers. In
connection with the offering of our Secured Notes, we entered into an indenture,
dated March 29, 2007, among us, Sterling Energy, as guarantor, and U. S.
Bank National Association, as trustee and collateral agent. On May 6, 2008,
Sterling Energy was merged with and into Sterling Chemicals, Inc. Upon
consummation of the merger, Sterling Energy no longer had independent existence
and, consequently, our Secured Notes are no longer guaranteed by Sterling
Energy. Pursuant to a registration rights agreement among us, Sterling Energy
and the initial purchasers, we agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to
file an exchange offer registration statement to exchange our unregistered
Secured Notes for a new issue of substantially identical debt securities
registered under the Securities Act, to cause the registration statement to
become effective by December 24, 2007 and to complete the exchange offer
within 50 days of the effective date of the registration statement. On
August 30, 2007, we made an initial filing of this required exchange offer
registration statement. However, the registration statement was not declared
effective by December 24, 2007 and, as a result, the interest rate on our
Secured Notes increased by 0.25% per annum on each of December 25, 2007,
March 24, 2008 and June 22, 2008. The registration statement was
declared effective on August 13, 2008 and we expect the interest rate on
our Secured Notes to revert back to the face amount of 101/4% per annum, effective September 12, 2008,
when the exchange offer is expected to close. The additional interest incurred
from December 25, 2007 through the expected closing of the exchange offer is
estimated to be approximately $.5 million.
Our indenture contains affirmative and
negative covenants and customary events of default, including payment defaults,
breaches of covenants and certain events of bankruptcy, insolvency and
reorganization. If an event of default occurs and is continuing, other than an
event of default triggered upon certain bankruptcy events, the trustee under our
indenture or the holders of at least 25% in principal amount of our outstanding
Secured Notes may declare our Secured Notes to be due and payable immediately.
Upon an event of default, the trustee may also take actions to foreclose on the
collateral securing our outstanding Secured Notes, subject to the terms of an
intercreditor agreement dated March 29, 2007, among us, Sterling Energy,
the trustee and The CIT Group/Business Credit, Inc. Our indenture does not
require us to maintain any financial ratios or satisfy any financial maintenance
tests. We are currently in compliance with all of the covenants contained in our
indenture.
Interest is due on our outstanding
Secured Notes on April 1 and October 1 of each year. Our outstanding Secured
Notes, which mature on April 1, 2015, are senior secured obligations and
rank equally in right of payment with all of our existing and future senior
indebtedness. Subject to specified permitted liens, our outstanding Secured
Notes are secured (i) on a first priority basis, by all of our fixed assets
and certain related assets, including, without limitation, all property, plant
and equipment and (ii) on a second priority basis, by all of our other
assets, including, without limitation, accounts receivable, inventory, capital
stock of our domestic restricted subsidiaries, intellectual property, deposit
accounts and investment property.
On December 19, 2002, we entered
into a Revolving Credit Agreement, or our revolving credit facility, with The
CIT Group/Business Credit, Inc., as administrative agent and a lender, and
certain other lenders. Under our revolving credit facility, we and Sterling
Energy were co-borrowers and were jointly and severally liable for any
indebtedness thereunder. After the merger of Sterling Energy with and into
Sterling Chemicals, Inc., Sterling Energy ceased to be a co-borrower under our
revolving credit facility. Our revolving credit facility is secured by first
priority liens on all of our accounts receivable, inventory and other
9
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
specified assets. On
March 29, 2007, we amended and restated our revolving credit facility to,
among other things, extend the term of our revolving credit facility until
March 29, 2012, reduce the maximum commitment thereunder to
$50 million, make certain changes to the calculation of the borrowing base
and lower the interest rates and fees charged thereunder. Borrowings under our
revolving credit facility now bear interest, at our option, at an annual rate of
a base rate plus 0.0% to 0.50% or the LIBOR rate plus 1.50% to 2.25%, depending
on our borrowing availability at the time. We are also required to pay an
aggregate commitment fee of 0.375% per year (payable monthly) on any unused
portion of our revolving credit facility. Available credit under our revolving
credit facility is subject to a monthly borrowing base of 70% of eligible
accounts receivable plus 65% of eligible inventory. As of December 31,
2007, our borrowing base exceeded the maximum commitment under our revolving
credit facility, making the total credit available under our revolving credit
facility $50 million. However, since that time, the monetization of
accounts receivable and inventory associated with our exit from the styrene
business has significantly decreased the borrowing base under our revolving
credit facility. In response to the expected continued lower levels of accounts
receivable and inventory, as well as our lesser need for a working capital
facility, on June 30, 2008, we reduced our commitment under our revolving
credit facility to $25 million. As of June 30, 2008, total credit
available under our revolving credit facility was limited to $17.3 million,
we had no loans outstanding and we had $4.1 million in letters of credit
outstanding, resulting in effective borrowing availability of
$13.2 million. Pursuant to Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 95-22,
“Balance Sheet Classification of Borrowings under Revolving Credit Agreements
That Include both a Subjective Acceleration Clause and a Lock-Box Arrangement,”
any balances outstanding under our revolving credit facility would be classified
as a current portion of long-term debt.
Our revolving credit facility contains
numerous covenants and conditions, including, but not limited to, restrictions
on our ability to incur indebtedness, create liens, sell assets, make
investments, make capital expenditures, engage in mergers and acquisitions and
pay dividends. Our revolving credit facility also includes various circumstances
and conditions that would, upon their occurrence and subject in certain cases to
notice and grace periods, create an event of default thereunder. Our revolving
credit facility does not require us to maintain any financial ratios or satisfy
any financial maintenance tests. We are currently in compliance with all of the
covenants contained in our revolving credit facility.
6. Commitments and
Contingencies
Product
Contracts:
We have long-term agreements which
provide for the dedication of 100% of our production of acetic acid and
plasticizers, each to one customer.
Environmental
Regulations:
Our operations involve the handling,
production, transportation, treatment and disposal of materials that are
classified as hazardous or toxic and that are extensively regulated by
environmental and health and safety laws, regulations and permit requirements.
Environmental permits required for our operations are subject to periodic
renewal and may be revoked or modified for cause or when new or revised
environmental requirements are implemented. Changing and increasingly strict
environmental requirements can affect the manufacture, handling, processing,
distribution and use of our chemical products and, if so affected, our business
and operations may be materially and adversely affected. In addition, changes in
environmental requirements may cause us to incur substantial costs in upgrading
or redesigning our facilities and processes, including our waste treatment,
storage, disposal and other waste handling practices and equipment.
A business risk inherent in chemical
operations is the potential for personal injury and property damage claims from
employees, contractors and their employees and nearby landowners and occupants.
While we believe our business operations and facilities generally are operated
in compliance with all applicable environmental and health and safety
requirements in all material respects, we cannot be sure that past practices or
future operations will not result in material claims or regulatory action,
require material environmental expenditures or result in exposure or injury
claims by employees, contractors or their employees or the public. Some risk of
environmental costs and liabilities is inherent in our operations and products,
as it is with other companies engaged in similar businesses.
We have incurred, and may continue to
incur, liability for investigation and cleanup of waste or contamination at our
own facilities or at facilities operated by third parties where we have disposed
of waste. We continually review all estimates of potential environmental
liabilities, but we may not have identified or fully assessed all potential
liabilities arising out of our past or present operations or the amount
necessary to investigate and remediate any conditions that may be significant to
us. Based on information available at this time and reviews undertaken to
identify potential exposure, we believe any amount reserved for
10
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
environmental matters
is adequate to cover our potential exposure for clean-up costs.
Air emissions from our manufacturing
facility in Texas City, Texas, or our Texas City facility, are subject to
certain permit requirements and self-implementing emission limitations and
standards under state and federal laws. Our Texas City facility is subject to
the federal government’s June 1997 National Ambient Air Quality Standards,
or NAAQS, which lowered the ozone and particulate matter concentration
thresholds for attainment. Our Texas City facility is located in an area that
the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, has classified as not having
achieved attainment under the NAAQS for ozone, either on a 1-hour or an 8-hour
basis. Ozone is typically controlled by reduction of emissions of volatile
organic compounds, or VOCs, and nitrogen oxide, or NOx. The Texas Commission for
Environmental Quality, or TCEQ, has imposed strict requirements on regulated
facilities, including our Texas City facility, to ensure that the air quality
control region will achieve attainment under the NAAQS for ozone. Local
authorities may also impose new ozone and particulate matter standards.
Compliance with these stricter standards may substantially increase our future
control costs for emissions of NOx, VOCs and particulate matter, the amount and
full impact of which cannot be determined at this time.
In 2002, the TCEQ adopted a revised
State Implementation Plan, or SIP, in order to achieve compliance with the
“1-hour” ozone standard under the Clean Air Act by 2007. The EPA approved this
“1-hour” SIP, which required an 80% reduction of NOx emissions, and extensive
monitoring of emissions of highly reactive VOCs, or HRVOCs, such as ethylene, in
the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria area, or the HGB area. We are in full compliance
with these regulations. However, the HGB area failed to attain compliance with
the 1-hour ozone standard, and Section 185 of the Clean Air Act requires
implementation of a program of emissions-based fees until the standard is
attained. These “Section 185 fees” will be assessed on all NOx and VOC
emissions in 2008 and beyond in the HGB area which are in excess of 80% of the
baseline year. The method for calculating baseline emissions, as well as other
details of the program, has not yet been developed. At the present time, we do
not expect to be assessed any fees for our emissions for 2008, primarily due to
the reduction in emissions from our Texas City facility following the closure of
our styrene facility.
In April 2004, the HGB area was
designated a “moderate” non-attainment area with respect to the “8-hour” ozone
standard of the Clean Air Act, which resulted in mandated compliance with the
8-hour ozone standard no later than June 15, 2010. However, on
June 15, 2007, the Governor of the State of Texas requested that the EPA
reclassify the HGB area as a “severe” non-attainment area, which will likely
change the mandated compliance date for the 8-hour ozone standard from
June 15, 2010 to June 15, 2019, as the EPA has begun the process of
reclassification. On May 23, 2007, the TCEQ formally adopted revisions to
the SIP designed to achieve compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard in the HGB
area as a “moderate” non-attainment area. This “8-hour” SIP calls for relatively
modest additional controls at our Texas City facility which will require very
little expense on our part. However, the 8-hour SIP will need to be revised if
and when the HGB area is reclassified from “moderate” to “severe.” The timing
and content of any revised 8-hour SIP have not yet been determined. Based on
these developments, it is difficult to predict our final cost of compliance
under these regulations. However, given the permanent shutdown of our phthalic
anhydride, styrene and ethylbenzene facilities, we estimate the additional cost
of compliance will range from zero to $4 million for capital expenditures
and the purchase of NOx emissions allowances, depending on the terms of the
final 8-hour SIP.
Legal
Proceedings:
On July 5, 2005, Patrick B.
McCarthy, an employee of Kinder-Morgan, Inc., or Kinder-Morgan, was seriously
injured at Kinder-Morgan’s facilities near Cincinnati, Ohio, while attempting to
offload a railcar containing one of our plasticizers products. On
October 28, 2005, Mr. McCarthy and his family filed a suit in the
Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County, Ohio (Case No. A0509 144) against
us and six other defendants. Since that time, the plaintiffs have added two
additional defendants to this lawsuit. In addition, we and some of the other
defendants have brought Kinder-Morgan into this lawsuit as a third-party
defendant. The plaintiffs are seeking in excess of $32 million in alleged
compensatory and punitive damages. Discovery is ongoing in this case as to the
underlying cause of the accident and the parties’ respective liabilities, if
any. At this time, it is impossible to determine what, if any, liability we will
have for this incident and we will vigorously defend the suit. We believe that
all, or substantially all, of any liability imposed upon us as a result of this
suit and our related out-of-pocket costs and expenses will be covered by our
insurance policies, subject to a $1 million deductible which was met in
January 2008. As of June 30, 2008, we have received $0.2 million
from our insurance carrier for the reimbursement of amounts exceeding the
deductible, and we have accrued for an additional $0.2 million for the
reimbursement of amounts exceeding the deductible which were incurred during the
second quarter of 2008. We do not believe that this incident will have a
material adverse affect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows; although we cannot guarantee that a material adverse
effect will not occur.
On August 17, 2006, we initiated
an arbitration proceeding against BP Chemicals to resolve a dispute involving
the interpretation of provisions of our acetic acid Production Agreement with BP
Chemicals, or our Acetic Acid Production Agreement. Under our Acetic Acid
Production Agreement, BP Chemicals reimburses our manufacturing expenses and
pays us a
11
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
percentage of the
profits derived from the sales of the acetic acid we produce. Historically, the
costs of manufacturing charged to our acetic acid business, and reimbursed by BP
Chemicals, included the amounts we paid Praxair for carbon monoxide, hydrogen
and a blend of carbon monoxide and hydrogen commonly referred to as “blend gas.”
Our acetic acid business has always used all of the carbon monoxide produced by
Praxair, other than the small amount of carbon monoxide included in the blend
gas. Until July 1, 2006, all of the blend gas produced by Praxair was used
by the oxo-alcohols plant included in our plasticizers business. During the
period when the oxo-alcohols plant was operating, BP Chemicals was compensated
for the use of this blend gas by our oxo-alcohols plant through a credit to the
amount of our manufacturing expenses reimbursed by BP Chemicals. Effective
July 1, 2006, we permanently closed our oxo-alcohols plant. BP Chemicals
has taken the position that it is entitled to continue to deduct a portion of
the blend gas credit from the reimbursement of our manufacturing expenses, even
though our oxo-alcohols plant has been closed and is no longer taking any blend
gas and the Praxair facilities have been modified so that the carbon monoxide
previously used in blend gas can be used in our acetic acid operations.
Effective August 1, 2006, BP Chemicals began short paying our invoices for
manufacturing expenses by the portion of the credit that BP Chemicals claims
should continue through July 31, 2016. The disputed portion of the credit
averaged approximately $0.3 million per month during 2006 and 2007, before
adjusting for the portion of the profits we receive from BP Chemicals’ sale of
the acetic acid we produce. We are also seeking additional damages from BP
Chemicals in the arbitration based on what we believe are breaches of duty by BP
Chemicals. The parties have abated the arbitration proceedings while they
attempt to reach a negotiated settlement. As part of the agreement to abate the
arbitration proceedings, BP Chemicals reimbursed us $0.8 million on
February 5, 2007, which was 50% of the disputed credit through that date,
and has continued and will continue to pay 50% of the disputed amount each month
during the period of negotiation. As of June 30, 2008, the disputed amount
is $8.1 million and we have received payments totaling $3.8 million.
We are not recording any revenue related to any portion of the disputed amount
until the matter is resolved. The parties have stipulated that the payments are
made without prejudice, in that BP Chemicals is not admitting liability and
continues to insist that we remain liable for the disputed portion of the blend
gas credit. According to the agreement, either party may reinstate the
arbitration process at any time after August 1, 2007. If the arbitration is
reinstated and an award is made, the amounts paid by BP Chemicals will be
credited against any sums awarded to us or refunded by us to BP Chemicals,
depending on the ruling of the arbitration panel. We believe that our Acetic
Acid Production Agreement does not contemplate the continuation of any portion
of the blend gas credit under these circumstances and will vigorously pursue our
position. Although we are in a dispute with BP Chemicals over the interpretation
of this contractual provision, we believe that we continue to have a
constructive working relationship with BP Chemicals, as has been the case since
1986. As part of the on-going settlement negotiations over the blend gas issue,
we are discussing an extension of the term of the Acetic Acid Production
Agreement.
On February 21, 2007, we received
a summons naming us, several benefit plans and the plan administrators for those
plans as defendants in a class action suit, Case No. H-07-0625 filed in the
United States District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. The
plaintiffs seek to represent a proposed class of retired employees of Sterling
Fibers, Inc., one of our former subsidiaries that we sold in connection with our
emergence from bankruptcy in 2002. The plaintiffs are alleging that we were not
permitted to increase their premiums for retiree medical insurance based on a
provision contained in the asset purchase agreement between us and Cytec
Industries Inc. and certain of its affiliates governing our purchase of our
former acrylic fibers business in 1997. During our bankruptcy case, we
specifically rejected this asset purchase agreement and the bankruptcy court
approved that rejection. The plaintiffs are claiming that we violated the terms
of the benefit plans and breached fiduciary duties governed by the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act and are seeking damages, declaratory relief,
punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. The parties have taken minimal discovery
to date. The plaintiffs have moved for partial summary judgment and for class
certification related to their claims for denial of benefits under our retiree
medical plans. The parties have fully briefed the issues and the motions are
pending before the court. However, the court has stayed all proceedings while
the plaintiffs pursue administrative remedies under the terms of our retiree
medical plans. On April 23, 2008, the plan administrator denied the
plaintiffs’ claims under the terms of our retiree medical plans. The plaintiffs
appealed that denial as permitted in the applicable benefit plan and an appeal
with the plan administrator was heard on July 29, 2008. The plan
administrator denied the plaintiffs claim after the appeal. We are vigorously
defending this action and are unable to state at this time if a loss is probable
or remote and are unable to determine the possible range of loss related to this
matter, if any.
On March 4, 2008, Gulf Hydrogen
and Energy, L.L.C., or Gulf Hydrogen, filed suit against us in the 212th District Court of
Galveston County, Texas (Cause No. 08CV0220) to enforce the provisions of a
Memorandum of Understanding, or MOU, entered into between us and Gulf Hydrogen
involving the possible sale of our outstanding equity interests to Gulf Hydrogen
for approximately $390 million. This lawsuit also names certain of our
officers, a director and our primary stockholder as defendants. Gulf Hydrogen
does not allege a specific amount of money damages in the lawsuit but has asked
the court to enforce certain MOU provisions which expired on March 1, 2008,
including restrictions on our ability to engage in negotiations related to
transactions that would result in a change of control or to enter into mergers,
stock sales or other transactions relating to a material part of our business or
operations and other insignificant restrictions customary for transactions of a
similar nature. Gulf Hydrogen alleges that the defendants breached the terms of
the MOU and made certain misrepresentations in connection therewith. We are
vigorously defending this lawsuit, which we believe is completely without merit.
We do not believe that this incident will have a
12
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
material adverse affect
on our business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows,
although we cannot guarantee that a material adverse effect will not occur.
We are subject to various other claims
and legal actions that arise in the ordinary course of our business. We do not
believe that any of these claims and actions, separately or in the aggregate,
will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results
of operation or cash flows, although we cannot guarantee that a material adverse
effect will not occur.
7. Income Taxes
During the three months and six months
ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, we recorded net tax expense of zero and a net
tax benefit of $1.0 million, respectively, for income taxes from continuing
operations. Based on our net operating loss position and projections for the
year, we expect that any tax expense or benefit during 2008 will be fully offset
by a related change in the valuation allowance, resulting in an effective tax
rate of zero. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2008, this
resulted in less than $0.1 million and $2.1 million, respectively, of
tax benefit being offset by a total increase of $2.1 million to our
valuation allowance. This increase in our valuation allowance brings our total
valuation allowance to $38.3 million.
8. Pension Plans
and Other Postretirement Benefits
Net periodic pension costs consisted of
the following components:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
(Dollars in Thousands) |
|
|
Service cost |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
153 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
305 |
|
|
Interest cost |
|
|
1,788 |
|
|
|
1,782 |
|
|
|
3,576 |
|
|
|
3,565 |
|
|
Expected return on plan
assets |
|
|
(2,148 |
) |
|
|
(2,025 |
) |
|
|
(4,296 |
) |
|
|
(4,050 |
) |
|
Curtailment loss
(gain) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net pension
benefit |
|
$ |
(358 |
) |
|
$ |
(190 |
) |
|
$ |
(716 |
) |
|
$ |
(280 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other postretirement benefits costs
consisted of the following components:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
(Dollars in Thousands) |
|
|
Service cost |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
$ |
65 |
|
|
Interest cost |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
693 |
|
|
Amortization of
unrecognized costs |
|
|
(541 |
) |
|
|
(375 |
) |
|
|
(1,082 |
) |
|
|
(717 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net plan costs
(benefit) |
|
$ |
(385 |
) |
|
$ |
(27 |
) |
|
$ |
(770 |
) |
|
$ |
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. Operating
Segment and Sales Information
As of June 30,
2008, we have reported our operations through two segments: acetic acid and
plasticizers. The critical accounting policies for these operating segments are
the same as those disclosed in our Annual Report. We use gross profit for
reporting the results of our operating segments and this measure includes all
operating items related to the businesses. There are no sales between segments.
The revenues and gross profit for each of our reportable operating segments are
as follows:
13
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
(Dollars in Thousands) |
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acetic acid |
|
$ |
39,139 |
|
|
$ |
27,012 |
|
|
$ |
68,074 |
|
|
$ |
51,830 |
|
|
Plasticizers |
|
|
8,487 |
|
|
|
6,971 |
|
|
|
17,481 |
|
|
|
14,486 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
47,795 |
|
|
$ |
34,132 |
|
|
$ |
85,995 |
|
|
$ |
66,847 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment gross
profit: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acetic acid |
|
$ |
9,585 |
|
|
$ |
6,649 |
|
|
$ |
13,572 |
|
|
$ |
12,481 |
|
|
Plasticizers |
|
|
1,155 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
3,047 |
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
Other(1) |
|
|
(914 |
) |
|
|
(4,117 |
) |
|
|
(2,391 |
) |
|
|
(4,507 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
9,826 |
|
|
|
2,803 |
|
|
|
14,228 |
|
|
|
8,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative expenses |
|
|
3,787 |
|
|
|
2,525 |
|
|
|
6,205 |
|
|
|
4,823 |
|
|
Impairment of
long-lived assets(2) |
|
|
6,649 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
6,649 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Interest and debt
related expenses |
|
|
4,719 |
|
|
|
4,932 |
|
|
|
8,931 |
|
|
|
8,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income |
|
|
(1,107 |
) |
|
|
(572 |
) |
|
|
(2,432 |
) |
|
|
(647 |
) |
|
Other expense |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing
operations before income tax |
|
$ |
(4,222 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,921 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,125 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,977 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and
amortization expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acetic acid |
|
$ |
1,525 |
|
|
$ |
1,315 |
|
|
$ |
3,037 |
|
|
$ |
2,632 |
|
|
Plasticizers |
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
979 |
|
|
Other(3) |
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
953 |
|
|
|
981 |
|
|
|
1,879 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,447 |
|
|
$ |
2,761 |
|
|
$ |
5,082 |
|
|
$ |
5,490 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acetic acid |
|
$ |
348 |
|
|
$ |
704 |
|
|
$ |
1,142 |
|
|
$ |
908 |
|
|
Plasticizers |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Other—plant
infrastructure |
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
1,398 |
|
|
|
1,615 |
|
|
|
3,442 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
720 |
|
|
$ |
2,102 |
|
|
$ |
2,757 |
|
|
$ |
4,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (1) |
|
Gross profit (loss) for Other includes various unallocated
corporate charges and credits. |
| |
| (2) |
|
As a result of the shutdown of our PA unit and the subsequent entry
into the Amended Plasticizers Production Agreement in May 2008, with
an effective date of April 1, 2008, our PA unit was determined to be
impaired in the second quarter of 2008 and was written down to zero. See
Note 4 for more information. |
| |
| (3) |
|
Includes depreciation and amortization expense of $0.1 million
and $0.7 million for discontinued operations for the three months
ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, respectively, and $0.4 million and
$1.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
(Dollars in Thousands) |
|
|
Total assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acetic acid |
|
$ |
45,009 |
|
|
$ |
53,769 |
|
|
Plasticizers |
|
|
6,466 |
|
|
|
13,216 |
|
|
Other(4) |
|
|
222,193 |
|
|
|
239,459 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
273,668 |
|
|
$ |
306,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (4) |
|
Components of Other are presented in the table
below: |
14
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June
30, |
|
December 31, |
| |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
| |
|
(Dollars in Thousands) |
|
Total assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
$ |
160,491 |
|
|
$ |
100,183 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
20,620 |
|
|
|
27,998 |
|
|
Plant
infrastructure: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and
equipment, net |
|
|
40,050 |
|
|
|
39,524 |
|
|
Assets of discontinued
operations |
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
71,754 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
222,193 |
|
|
$ |
239,459 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales to major
customers constituting 10% or more of total revenues from continuing operations
were as follows (there were no export sales):
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
(Dollars in Thousands) |
|
|
Major
customers: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BP Chemicals |
|
$ |
39,139 |
|
|
$ |
27,012 |
|
|
$ |
68,074 |
|
|
$ |
51,830 |
|
|
BASF
Corporation |
|
|
8,487 |
|
|
|
6,971 |
|
|
|
17,481 |
|
|
|
14,486 |
|
10. New Accounting
Standards
In September 2006, the Financial
Accounting Standards Board, or the FASB, issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value
Measurements,” or SFAS No. 157. This statement establishes a framework for
measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements for financial assets and liabilities,
as well as for any other assets and liabilities that are carried at fair value
on a recurring basis in financial statements. SFAS No. 157 is effective for
financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. We adopted SFAS
No. 157 in the first quarter of 2008 and determined it had no impact on our
condensed consolidated financial statements.
In February 2008, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157”, which
defers the effective date of SFAS No. 157 to fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years, for all
non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for items that are
recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring
basis (at least annually). An entity that has issued interim or annual financial
statements reflecting the application of the measurement and disclosure
provisions of SFAS No. 157 prior to February 12, 2008 must continue to
apply all provisions of SFAS No. 157. We are currently evaluating the
impact of our adoption of the deferred portion of SFAS No. 157, effective
January 1, 2009, on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities,” or SFAS No. 159. SFAS No. 159, which amends SFAS
No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities,” allows certain financial assets and liabilities to be recognized,
at our election, at fair market value, with any gains or losses for the period
recorded in the statement of operations. SFAS No. 159 is effective for
fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and did not have a material
impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations,” or SFAS
No. 141R. SFAS No. 141R broadens the guidance of SFAS No. 141,
extending its applicability to all transactions and other events in which one
entity obtains control over one or more other businesses. It broadens the fair
value measurement and recognition of assets acquired, liabilities assumed and
interests transferred as a result of business combinations. SFAS No. 141R
expands on required disclosures to improve the statement users’ abilities to
evaluate the nature and financial effects of business combinations. SFAS
No. 141R is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2008. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 141R to have a material
impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements; an amendment of ARB No. 51,” or SFAS No. 160. This
statement establishes the accounting and reporting standards for a
noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a
subsidiary. This statement clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a
subsidiary is an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be
reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. SFAS No. 160
requires retroactive adoption of the presentation and disclosure requirements
for existing minority interests and applies prospectively to business
combinations for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. We do
15
STERLING
CHEMICALS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
not expect the adoption
of SFAS No. 160 to have a material impact on our condensed consolidated
financial statements.
In March 2008, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures About Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities,” or SFAS No. 161. This statement requires enhanced disclosures
about an entity’s derivative and hedging activities, with the intent to provide
users of financial statements with an enhanced understanding of (a) how and
why an entity uses derivative instruments, (b) how derivative instruments
and related hedged items are accounted for under SFAS No. 133, “Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” and its related
interpretations and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items
affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows.
SFAS No. 161 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2008. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 161 to
have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In May 2008, the FASB issued
Statement No. 162, “The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles”, or SFAS No. 162. SFAS No. 162 identifies the sources of
accounting principles and the framework for selecting the principles to be used
in the preparation of financial statements that are presented in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. SFAS No. 162
is effective 60 days following the SEC’s approval of The Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board’s amendments to, Statements on Auditing Standards
Section 411, “The Meaning of ‘Present fairly in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles’. “ SFAS No. 162 is not expected to have a
material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In June 2008, the FASB issued FASB
Staff Position Emerging Issues Task Force “Determining Whether Instruments
Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities,” or
FSP EITF 03-6-1, which addresses whether instruments granted in share-based
payment transactions are participating securities prior to vesting and,
therefore, need to be included in earnings allocation in computing earnings per
share under the two-class method as described in SFAS No. 128, “Earnings
Per Share.” Under the guidance in FSP EITF 03-6-1, unvested share-based payment
awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents
(whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and need to be included in
the computation of earnings per share pursuant to the two class method. FSP EITF
03-6-1 is effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2008
and all prior-period earnings per share data presented is required to be
adjusted retrospectively. Early application is not permitted. We are currently
evaluating the potential impact of the adoption of FSP EITF 03-6-1 to our
condensed consolidated financial statements.
11. Restatement of
Financial Information
As discussed in Note 16 to the
consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2007 contained
in Item 8 of our Annual Report, subsequent to the issuance of our condensed
consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2007,
we determined that accounting errors, as described below, were included in our
previously issued condensed consolidated financial statements. As a result, we
have restated our condensed consolidated financial statements for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2007, due to the following errors:
| |
• |
|
Paid-in-kind dividends on our Series A Convertible Preferred
Stock were incorrectly recorded as 4% of the Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock’s liquidation value versus the fair value of the
dividends. As a result of this error, redeemable preferred stock was
understated and additional paid-in capital was overstated by
$29.2 million as of June 30, 2007. Preferred stock dividends and
net loss attributable to common shareholders were understated by
$2.6 million and $3.4 million for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2007, respectively. |
| |
| |
• |
|
Disputed revenues were inappropriately recognized resulting in a gross
up of the consolidated statements of operations for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2007. Revenues and selling, general and
administrative expenses were overstated by $1.0 million and
$2.0 million for the three and six months ended June 30,
2007. |
| |
| |
• |
|
Deferred taxes were not recognized on benefit adjustments to other
comprehensive income, or OCI, for the quarterly period ended June 30,
2007. OCI was overstated and benefit for income taxes was understated by
$1.0 million for the three and six months ended June 30,
2007. |
16
Item 2.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations
The following discussion should be read
in conjunction with our condensed consolidated financial statements (including
the Notes thereto) included in Item 1, Part I of this report.
Business
Overview
We are a North American producer of
selected petrochemicals used to manufacture a wide array of consumer goods and
industrial products. We currently operate in two segments: acetic acid and
plasticizers.
Our acetic acid is used primarily to
manufacture vinyl acetate monomer, which is used in a variety of products,
including adhesives and surface coatings. Pursuant to our acetic acid Production
Agreement, or our Acetic Acid Production Agreement, that began in 1986 and
extends to 2016, all of our acetic acid production is sold to BP Amoco Chemical
Company, or BP Chemicals, and we are BP Chemicals’ sole source of acetic acid
production in the Americas. BP Chemicals markets all of the acetic acid that we
produce and pays us, among other amounts, a portion of the profits derived from
its sales of the acetic acid we produce. In addition, BP Chemicals reimburses us
for 100% of our fixed and variable costs of production. Prior to
August 2006, BP Chemicals also paid us a set monthly amount. However, under
the terms of our Acetic Acid Production Agreement, beginning in
August 2006, the portion of the profits we receive from the sales of acetic
acid produced at our plant increased and BP Chemicals was no longer required to
pay us this set monthly amount. This change in payment structure did not affect
BP Chemicals’ obligation to reimburse us for all of our fixed and variable costs
of production. We believe that we have one of the lowest cost acetic acid
facilities in the world. Our acetic acid facility utilizes BP Chemicals’
proprietary “Cativa” carbonylation technology, which we believe offers several
advantages over competing production methods, including lower energy
requirements and lower fixed and variable costs. We also jointly invest with BP
Chemicals in capital expenditures related to our acetic acid facility in the
same percentage as the profits from the business are divided. We initially pay
for 100% of the capital expenditures related to our acetic acid business and
then invoice BP Chemicals for its portion. The net amount that is not reimbursed
by BP Chemicals represents our basis in the property, plant and equipment
related to our acetic acid business, which is capitalized and depreciated over
its useful life. Acetic acid production has two major raw material requirements,
methanol and carbon monoxide. BP Chemicals, a producer of methanol, supplies
100% of our methanol requirements related to our production of acetic acid. All
of the required carbon monoxide is supplied by Praxair Hydrogen Supply, Inc., or
Praxair, from a partial oxidation unit constructed by Praxair on land leased
from us at our site in Texas City, Texas, or our Texas City facility.
All of our plasticizers, which are used
to make flexible plastics, such as shower curtains, floor coverings, automotive
parts and construction materials, are sold to BASF Corporation, or BASF,
pursuant to a long-term production agreement that extends until 2013, or our
Amended Plasticizers Production Agreement, subject to some early termination
rights held by BASF that begin in 2010. Under our Amended Plasticizers
Production Agreement, BASF provides us with most of the required raw materials,
markets the plasticizers we produce and is obligated to make certain fixed
quarterly payments to us and reimburse us monthly for our actual production
costs and capital expenditures related to our plasticizers facility. In
May 2008, we entered into our Amended Plasticizers Production Agreement,
effective as of April 1, 2008. Our Amended Plasticizers Production
Agreement was entered into in connection with BASF’s nomination of zero pounds
of phthalic anhydride, or PA, under the prior version of this agreement, or our
Old Plasticizers Production Agreement, due to deteriorating market conditions
which were not expected to improve over the next few years, which resulted in
the shutdown of our PA unit.
Prior to December 3, 2007, we
manufactured styrene. However, on September 17, 2007, we entered into a
long-term exclusive styrene supply agreement and a related railcar purchase and
sale agreement with NOVA Chemicals Inc., or NOVA. Under this supply agreement,
NOVA had the exclusive right to purchase 100% of our styrene production (subject
to existing contractual commitments), the amount of styrene supplied in any
particular period being at NOVA’s option. In November 2007, this supply
agreement, which was subsequently assigned by NOVA to INEOS NOVA, LLC, or INEOS
NOVA, obtained clearance under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. This clearance caused
the supply agreement and the railcar agreement to become effective and triggered
a $60 million payment to us in November 2007. In addition, in accordance
with the terms of the supply agreement, INEOS NOVA assumed substantially all of
our contractual obligations for future styrene deliveries. After the supply
agreement became effective, INEOS NOVA nominated zero pounds of styrene under
the supply agreement for the balance of 2007 and, in response, we exercised our
right to terminate the supply agreement and permanently shut down our styrene
facility. Under the supply agreement, we are responsible for the closure costs
of our styrene facility and are also restricted from reentering the styrene
business until November 2012. The restricted period was initially eight years.
However, on April 1, 2008, INEOS NOVA unilaterally reduced the restricted
period to five years. We operated our styrene facility through early
December 2007, as we completed our production of inventory and exhausted
our raw materials and purchase requirements, and sold substantially all of our
remaining inventory during the first quarter of 2008. During 2007 and the first
six months of 2008, we incurred closure costs to decommission our styrene
facility of $0.7 million and $14.6 million, respectively. We expect to
incur up to approximately $4 million in additional decommissioning costs
related to the closure of our styrene facility. In mid-July, with the
decontamination process for the styrene facility nearing completion, we
announced a reduction in work force in order to reduce our staffing to a level
appropriate for our existing operations and site development projects. As a
result, we reduced our salaried work force by seven
17
people. In addition, we
made offers for early retirement to several members of our hourly work force and
our salaried administrative and process supervisors. Upon completion of the
down-sizing of our hourly work force and our administrative and process
supervisor, total staff reductions will be approximately 40 employees and we
expect to recognize approximately $2.2 million of severance costs in the
third and fourth quarters of 2008, in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards, or SFAS No. 146, “Accounting for Costs Associated
with Exit or Disposal Activities.”
We manufacture all of our
petrochemicals products at our Texas City facility. In terms of production
capacity, our Texas City facility has the sixth largest acetic acid facility in
the world. Our Texas City facility covers an area of 290 acres, is strategically
located on Galveston Bay and benefits from a deep-water dock capable of handling
ships with up to a 40-foot draft, as well as four barge docks and direct access
to Union Pacific and Burlington Northern Santa Fe railways with in-motion rail
scales on site. Our Texas City facility also has truck loading racks, weigh
scales, stainless and mild steel storage tanks, three waste deepwells, 160 acres
of available land zoned for heavy industrial use and additional land zoned for
light industrial use and a supportive political environment for growth. In
addition, we are in the heart of one of the largest petrochemical complexes on
the Gulf Coast and, as a result, have on-site access to a number of raw material
pipelines, as well as close proximity to a number of large refinery complexes.
Given our under-utilized
infrastructure, our management and engineering expertise, as well as ample
unoccupied land, we believe that there are significant opportunities for further
development of our Texas City facility. We are currently pursuing numerous
initiatives to attract new manufacturing and/or storage related businesses to
our Texas City facility, including opportunities involving renewable fuels
projects, gasification, energy projects and chemicals terminalling.
Specifically, we are seeking long-term contractual business arrangements or
partnerships that will provide us with an ability to realize the value of our
under-utilized assets through profit sharing or other revenue generating
arrangements. For development projects that may have significant capital
expenditure requirements, we are considering joint ventures or other
arrangements where we would contribute certain of our assets and management
expertise to minimize our share of the capital costs. In any case, we expect any
new facility constructed at our Texas City facility to lower the amount of
overall fixed costs allocated to each of our operating units and provide us with
additional profit.
We plan to evaluate strategic
acquisitions, focusing on chemical businesses and assets which would allow us to
increase our market share of products we currently produce or those that would
provide upstream or downstream integration within our existing businesses.
Results of
Operations
Three Months
Ended June 30, 2008 Compared to Three Months Ended June 30,
2007
Revenues and income from continuing
operations
Our revenues were $47.8 million
for the second quarter of 2008, a 40% increase from the $34.1 million in
revenues we recorded for the second quarter of 2007. We had a net loss from
continuing operations of $4.2 million for the second quarter of 2008,
compared to a net loss of $3.9 million in the second quarter of 2007.
Revenues from our acetic acid
operations were approximately $39.1 million in the second quarter of 2008,
a 45% increase from the $27.0 million in revenues we received from these
operations in the second quarter of 2007. This increase in acetic acid revenues
in the second quarter of 2008 was primarily due to increased sales volumes,
improved profit sharing amounts and increased cost reimbursements received from
BP Chemicals due to increased cost allocations to our acetic acid operating
segment as a result of our exit from the styrene business. Gross profit from our
acetic acid operations increased $2.9 million during the second quarter of
2008 compared to the second quarter of 2007. This increase in gross profit from
our acetic acid operations was due to higher profit sharing amounts.
Revenues from our plasticizers
operations were approximately $8.5 million in the second quarter of 2008, a
21% increase from the $7.0 million in revenues we received from these
operations in the second quarter of 2007. Gross profit from our plasticizers
operations increased $0.9 million during the second quarter of 2008 compared to
the second quarter of 2007. These increases in revenues and gross profit were
primarily due to a $0.3 million gain on the PA closure costs and
$0.3 million from amortization of the early termination payment received
from BASF in the second quarter of 2008.
Selling, general and administrative
expenses
Our selling, general and administrative
expenses were $3.8 million for the second quarter of 2008 compared to
$2.5 million
18
for the second quarter
of 2007. This increase in 2008 was due in large part to increased legal fees
related to the Gulf Hydrogen lawsuit and increased audit fees related to filing
the amended registration statement for the exchange offer for our 101/4% Senior Secured Notes due 2015, or our Secured
Notes.
Impairment of long-lived assets
As a result of the Amended Plasticizers
Production Agreement and the shutdown of our PA unit, our management determined
that a triggering event, as defined in SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” had occurred and, during the
second quarter of 2008, we performed an asset impairment analysis on our PA
manufacturing unit. We analyzed the undiscounted cash flow stream from our PA
business over the remaining life of the PA manufacturing unit and compared it to
the $6.6 million net book carrying value of our PA manufacturing unit. This
analysis showed that the undiscounted projected cash flow stream from our PA
business was less than the net book carrying value of our PA manufacturing unit.
As a result, we performed a discounted cash flow analysis and subsequently
concluded that our PA manufacturing unit was impaired and should be written down
to zero. This write-down caused us to record an impairment of $6.6 million
in June of 2008.
Interest income
We recorded $1.1 million of
interest income in the second quarter of 2008 compared to $0.6 million in the
second quarter of 2007. This increase was due to higher cash balances in 2008
compared to 2007.
Other expense
We recorded zero in other expense for
the second quarter of 2008 compared to $0.8 million for the second quarter
of 2007. The other expense recorded for the second quarter of 2007 resulted from
a write-down of our cost-method investment in an e-commerce commodity trading
business to its fair value of less than $0.2 million after receiving notice
of a distribution related to the pending sale of the business.
Benefit for income taxes
During the second quarter of 2008, we
recorded net tax expense of zero for income taxes from continuing operations,
compared to a $1.0 million benefit for income taxes from continuing
operations for the second quarter of 2007. The tax benefit in the second quarter
of 2007 was generated as a result of adjustments to other comprehensive income
for a curtailment gain on our defined benefit pension plan for our hourly paid
employees. Based on our net operating loss position and projections for the
year, we expect that any tax expense or benefit during 2008 will be fully offset
by a related change in our valuation allowance, resulting in an effective tax
rate of zero. For the three months ended June 30, 2008, this resulted in
$2.1 million of tax benefit which is offset by an increase to the valuation
allowance of $2.1 million. This increase in our valuation allowance brings
our total valuation allowance to $38.3 million.
Discontinued operations
During the second quarter of 2008, net
loss from discontinued operations was $1.6 million compared to net income
of $4.5 million for the second quarter of 2007. This decrease from net
income in 2007 to a net loss in 2008 was due to our exit from the styrene
business in late 2007.
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2008 Compared to Six Months Ended June 30, 2007
Revenues and income from continuing
operations
Our revenues were $86.0 million
for the six-month period ended June 30, 2008, a 29% increase from the
$66.8 million in revenues we recorded for the six-month period ended
June 30, 2007. We had a net loss from continuing operations of
$5.1 million in the first six months of 2008 compared to a net loss of
$4.0 million for the first six months of 2007.
Revenues from acetic acid operations
were approximately $68.1 million for the six-month period ended
June 30, 2008, a 31% increase from the $51.8 million in revenues we
received from these operations for the-six month period ended June 30,
2007. This increase in acetic acid revenues in the first six months of 2008 was
primarily due to increased sales volumes, improved profit sharing amounts and
increased cost reimbursements received from BP Chemicals due to increased cost
allocations to our acetic acid operating segment as a result of our exit from
the styrene business. Gross profit from our acetic acid operations increased
$1.1 million during the first six months of 2008 compared to the first six
months of 2007. This increase in gross profit from our
19
acetic acid operations
was due to higher profit sharing amounts.
Revenues from our plasticizers
operations were approximately $17.5 million for the six-month period ended
June 30, 2008; a 21% increase from the $14.5 million in revenues we
received from these operations for the six-month period ended June 30,
2007. Gross profit from our plasticizers operations for the first six months of
2008 increased $2.6 million from the first six months of 2007. These
increases in revenues and gross profit resulted primarily from reimbursement by
BASF for cost savings approved in 2008 by BASF, a $0.3 million gain on the
PA closure costs and $0.3 million from amortization of the early termination
payment received from BASF in the second quarter of 2008.
Selling, general and administrative
expenses
Our selling, general and administrative
expenses were $6.2 million for the six-month period ended June 30,
2008, compared to $4.8 million for the six-month period ended June 30,
2007. This increase in 2008 was due in large part to increased legal fees
related to the Gulf Hydrogen lawsuit and increased audit fees related to filing
the amended registration statement for the exchange offer for our 101/4% Secured Notes due 2015.
Impairment of long-lived assets
As a result of the Amended Plasticizers
Production Agreement and the shutdown of our PA unit, our management determined
that a triggering event, as defined in SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” had occurred and, during the
second quarter of 2008, we performed an asset impairment analysis on our PA
manufacturing unit. We analyzed the undiscounted cash flow stream from our PA
business over the remaining life of the PA manufacturing unit and compared it to
the $6.6 million net book carrying value of our PA manufacturing unit. This
analysis showed that the undiscounted projected cash flow stream from our PA
business was less than the net book carrying value of our PA manufacturing unit.
As a result, we performed a discounted cash flow analysis and subsequently
concluded that our PA manufacturing unit was impaired and should be written down
to zero. This write-down caused us to record an impairment of $6.6 million
in June of 2008.
Interest income
We recorded $2.4 million of
interest income for the first six months of 2008 compared to $0.7 million for
the first six months of 2007. This increase was due to higher cash balances in
2008 compared to 2007.
Other expense
We recorded zero in other expense for
the six-month period ended June 30, 2008, compared to $0.8 million for
the six-month period ended June 30, 2007. The other expense recorded in the
first six months of 2007 resulted from a write-down of our cost-method
investment in an e-commerce commodity trading business to its fair value of less
than $0.2 million after receiving notice of a distribution related to the
pending sale of the business.
Benefit for income taxes
During the six months ended
June 30, 2008 and 2007, we recorded net tax expense of zero and a net tax
benefit of $1.0 million, respectively, for income taxes from continuing
operations. The tax benefit in the second quarter of 2007 was generated as a
result of adjustments to other comprehensive income for a curtailment gain on
our defined benefit pension plan for our hourly paid employees. Based on our net
operating loss position and projections for the year, we expect that any tax
expense or benefit during 2008 will be fully offset by a related change in our
valuation allowance, resulting in an effective tax rate of zero. For the six
months ended June 30, 2008, this resulted in $2.1 million of tax
benefit being offset by a total increase of $2.1 million to our valuation
allowance. This brings our total valuation allowance to $38.3 million.
Discontinued operations
During the first six months of 2008,
net loss from discontinued operations was $7.8 million compared to net
income of $7.2 million for the first six months of 2007. This decrease from
net income in 2007 to a net loss in 2008 was due to our exit from the styrene
business in late 2007.
20
Liquidity and
Capital Resources
During March and April 2007, we
commenced a tender offer, or our tender offer, to repurchase all
$100.6 million of our outstanding 10% Senior Secured Notes due 2007, or our
Old Secured Notes. Concurrently with our tender offer, we solicited consents
from the holders of our Old Secured Notes to, among other things, eliminate
certain covenants contained in the indenture governing our Old Secured Notes and
related security documents. On March 30, 2007, we repurchased
$58 million in aggregate principal amount of Old Secured Notes, which were
validly tendered prior to the expiration of our tender offer, and paid the
accrued interest thereon and $0.1 million in consent fees. On
April 27, 2007, we redeemed all of our Old Secured Notes that were not
tendered pursuant to our tender offer for $44 million, which included
$1.5 million in accrued interest.
On March 29, 2007, we completed a
private offering of $150 million aggregate principal amount of unregistered
101/4% Senior Secured Notes due 2015, or our Secured
Notes, pursuant to a Purchase Agreement among us, Sterling Chemicals Energy,
Inc., or Sterling Energy, one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, and Jefferies
& Company, Inc. and CIBC World Markets Corp., as initial purchasers. In
connection with that offering, we entered into an indenture, dated
March 29, 2007, among us, Sterling Energy, as guarantor, and U. S. Bank
National Association, as trustee and collateral agent. On May 6, 2008,
Sterling Energy was merged with and into Sterling Chemicals, Inc. Upon
consummation of the merger, Sterling Energy no longer had independent existence
and, consequently, our Secured Notes are no longer guaranteed by Sterling
Energy. Pursuant to a registration rights agreement among us, Sterling Energy
and the initial purchasers, we agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to
file an exchange offer registration statement to exchange our unregistered
Secured Notes for a new issue of substantially identical debt securities
registered under the Securities Act, to cause the registration statement to
become effective by December 24, 2007 and to complete the exchange offer
within 50 days of the effective date of the registration statement. On
August 30, 2007, we made an initial filing of this required exchange offer
registration statement. However, the registration statement was not declared
effective by December 24, 2007 and, as a result, the interest rate on our
Secured Notes increased by 0.25% per annum on each of December 25, 2007,
March 24, 2008 and June 22, 2008. The registration statement was
declared effective on August 13, 2008 and we expect the interest rate on
our Secured Notes to revert back to the face amount of 101/4% per annum, effective September 12, 2008,
when the exchange offer is expected to close. The additional interest incurred
from December 25, 2007 through the expected closing of the exchange offer is
estimated to be approximately $.5 million.
Our indenture contains affirmative and
negative covenants and customary events of default, including payment defaults,
breaches of covenants and certain events of bankruptcy, insolvency and
reorganization. If an event of default occurs and is continuing, other than an
event of default triggered upon certain bankruptcy events, the trustee under our
indenture or the holders of at least 25% in principal amount of our outstanding
Secured Notes may declare our Secured Notes to be due and payable immediately.
Upon an event of default, the trustee may also take actions to foreclose on the
collateral securing our outstanding Secured Notes, subject to the terms of an
intercreditor agreement dated March 29, 2007, among us, Sterling Energy,
the trustee and The CIT Group/Business Credit, Inc. Our indenture does not
require us to maintain any financial ratios or satisfy any financial maintenance
tests. We are currently in compliance with all of the covenants contained in our
indenture.
Interest is due on our outstanding
Secured Notes on April 1 and October 1 of each year. Our outstanding Secured
Notes, which mature on April 1, 2015, are senior secured obligations and
rank equally in right of payment with all of our existing and future senior
indebtedness. Subject to specified permitted liens, our outstanding Secured
Notes are secured (i) on a first priority basis, by all of our fixed assets
and certain related assets, including, without limitation, all property, plant
and equipment and (ii) on a second priority basis, by our other assets,
including, without limitation, accounts receivable, inventory, capital stock of
our domestic restricted subsidiaries, intellectual property, deposit accounts
and investment property.
On December 19, 2002, we entered
into a Revolving Credit Agreement, or our revolving credit facility, with The
CIT Group/Business Credit, Inc., as administrative agent and a lender, and
certain other lenders. Under our revolving credit facility, we and Sterling
Energy were co-borrowers and were jointly and severally liable for any
indebtedness thereunder. After the merger of Sterling Energy with and into
Sterling Chemicals, Inc., Sterling Energy ceased to be a co-borrower under our
revolving credit facility. Our revolving credit facility is secured by first
priority liens on all of our accounts receivable, inventory and other specified
assets. On March 29, 2007, we amended and restated our revolving credit facility
to, among other things, extend the term of our revolving credit facility until
March 29, 2012, reduce the maximum commitment thereunder to
$50 million, make certain changes to the calculation of the borrowing base
and lower the interest rates and fees charged thereunder. Borrowings under our
revolving credit facility now bear interest, at our option, at an annual rate of
a base rate plus 0.0% to 0.50% or the LIBOR rate plus 1.50% to 2.25%, depending
on our borrowing availability at the time. We are also required to pay an
aggregate commitment fee of 0.375% per year (payable monthly) on any unused
portion of our revolving credit facility. Available credit under our revolving
credit facility is subject to a monthly borrowing base of 70% of eligible
accounts receivable plus 65% of eligible inventory. As of December 31,
2007, our borrowing base exceeded the maximum commitment under our revolving
credit facility, making the total credit available under our revolving credit
facility $50 million. However, since that time, the
21
monetization of
accounts receivable and inventory associated with our exit from the styrene
business significantly decreased the borrowing base under our revolving credit
facility. In response to the expected continued lower levels of accounts
receivable and inventory, as well as our lesser need for a working capital
facility, on June 30, 2008, we reduced our commitment under our revolving
credit facility to $25 million. As of June 30, 2008, total credit
available under our revolving credit facility was limited to $17.3 million,
there were no loans outstanding and we had $4.1 million in letters of
credit outstanding, resulting in borrowing availability of $13.2 million.
Pursuant to Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 95-22, “Balance Sheet
Classification of Borrowings under Revolving Credit Agreements That Include both
a Subjective Acceleration Clause and a Lock-Box Arrangement,” any balances
outstanding under our revolving credit facility would be classified as a current
portion of long-term debt.
Our revolving credit facility contains
numerous covenants and conditions, including, but not limited to, restrictions
on our ability to incur indebtedness, create liens, sell assets, make
investments, make capital expenditures, engage in mergers and acquisitions and
pay dividends. Our revolving credit facility also includes various circumstances
and conditions that would, upon their occurrence and subject in certain cases to
notice and grace periods, create an event of default thereunder. Our revolving
credit facility does not require us to maintain any financial ratios or satisfy
any financial maintenance tests. We are currently in compliance with all of the
covenants contained in our revolving credit facility.
Our liquidity (i.e., cash and
cash equivalents plus total credit available under our revolving credit
facility) was $173.7 million at June 30, 2008, an increase of
$35.8 million compared to our liquidity at December 31, 2007. This
increase was primarily due to the monetization of the working capital from our
prior styrene business. As a result of our exit from the styrene business, we
expect our future cash flows from operations to be significantly less volatile
than previous years. We expect to have positive cash flows from continuing
operations for the reasonably foreseeable future, and we believe that our cash
on hand and cash generated from continuing operations, along with credit
available under our revolving credit facility, will be sufficient to meet our
short-term and long-term liquidity needs for the reasonably foreseeable future.
Working
Capital
Our working capital was
$148.9 million on June 30, 2008, a decrease of $17.4 million from
our working capital of $166.3 million on December 31, 2007. This
decrease in working capital resulted from the increase in the current portion of
the deferred income from our supply agreement with NOVA to $12.4 million
from $7.5 million due to a shortening of the non-compete period from eight
to five years, and a net $10 million decrease in cash, after monetization
of our styrene working capital, due to capital expenditures and styrene closure
costs.
Cash
Flow
Net cash provided by operations was
$63.1 million for the first six months of 2008, compared to net cash used
in operations of $1.0 million during the first six months of 2007. This
improvement in net cash flow provided by operations in the first six months of
2008 was primarily due to monetization of our styrene working capital of
approximately $67.0 million. Net cash flow used in investing activities was
$2.8 million during the first six months of 2008, compared to $4.2 million
for the first six months of 2007, primarily due to a decrease in capital
expenditures as a result of our styrene shutdown. There was no cash flow
provided by financing activities in the first six months of 2008 compared to
$41.6 million provided in the first six months of 2007. This decrease was
due to the 2007 refinancing discussed above.
Capital
Expenditures
Our capital expenditures were
$2.8 million during the first six months of 2008 compared to
$4.4 million during the first six months of 2007. We expect our capital
expenditures for the remainder of 2008 to be approximately $9.6 million. We
expect to incur $3.8 million for a capital project to prevent the discharge
of process wastewater during periods of heavy rain at our Texas City facility.
We also expect to incur $2.4 million related to our portion of a capital
project to be implemented with BP Chemicals to construct an acetic acid
pipeline. The remaining $3.4 million is primarily for routine safety,
environmental and replacement capital.
Recent
Developments
On May 27, 2008, we entered into a
Third Amended and Restated Plasticizers Production Agreement, or our Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement, with BASF Corporation, or BASF, with an
effective date of April 1, 2008. The Amended Plasticizers Production
Agreement amended certain provisions of the Second Amended and Restated
Plasticizers Production Agreement between us and BASF dated as of
January 1, 2006, or the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement. The Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement was entered into in connection with BASF’s
nomination of zero pounds of phthalic anhydride, or PA, under the Old
Plasticizers Production Agreement in response to deteriorating market conditions
which were not expected to improve over the next few years, causing the shutdown
of our PA unit.
22
The Amended Plasticizers Production
Agreement relieves BASF of most of its obligations under the Old Plasticizers
Production Agreement related to our PA manufacturing unit. BASF’s obligations
under the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement related to our esters
manufacturing unit were not affected by the Amended Plasticizers Production
Agreement and are continuing in accordance with the same terms as existed under
the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement. In exchange for being relieved of its
obligations related to our PA manufacturing unit, BASF is required to pay us an
aggregate amount of approximately $3.2 million, $3.0 million of which
was paid in May 2008, and the balance of which is due and payable on or
before August 15, 2008. However, we are obligated to refund 75% of this
amount if we restart our PA manufacturing unit before January 1, 2009, 50%
of this amount if we restart our PA manufacturing unit during 2009 and 25% of
this amount if we restart our PA manufacturing unit during 2010. The
$3.2 million represents the termination of BASF’s obligations under the Old
Plasticizers Production Agreement with respect to the operation of our PA
manufacturing unit, and will be recognized using the straight-line method over
the restricted period of April 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010 under
the Amended Plasticizers Production Agreement. During the first half of 2008,
BASF is also required to pay us approximately $3.7 million for
reimbursement of certain direct fixed and variable costs associated with the
shutdown and decontamination of our PA manufacturing unit, which amounts are not
subject to refund. All direct fixed and variable costs associated with the
shutdown and decontamination of our PA unit have been incurred and expensed, and
the $3.7 million in cost reimbursements, has been recognized as revenue in
the first six months of 2008. The quarterly fixed periodic payments under the
Old Plasticizers Production Agreement with respect to the operation of our PA
and esters manufacturing units were not changed under the Amended Plasticizers
Agreement. However, these quarterly fixed periodic payments are now solely
related to the operation of our esters manufacturing unit under the Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement.
In addition, under the Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement, (i) the methods for calculating payments
required to be made by BASF for achieving reductions in direct fixed and
variable costs and (ii) BASF’s right to terminate the Agreement in the
event that direct fixed and variable costs exceed a specified threshold (unless
we elect to cap BASF’s reimbursement obligations) have both been modified to
exclude costs savings and direct fixed and variable costs pertaining to our PA
manufacturing unit.
After April 1, 2008, the Amended
Plasticizers Production Agreement also removed all restrictions or rights BASF
formerly had during the term of the Old Plasticizers Production Agreement with
respect to our use or disposition of the PA manufacturing unit, including a
limited purchase right, the right to request capacity increases and consultation
rights regarding future capital expenditures with respect to our PA
manufacturing unit.
As a result of the Amended Plasticizers
Production Agreement and subsequent permanent shutdown of our PA unit, our
management determined that a triggering event, as defined in SFAS No. 144,
“Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” had occurred
and during the second quarter of 2008, we performed an asset impairment analysis
on our PA manufacturing unit. We analyzed the undiscounted cash flow stream from
our PA business over the remaining life of the PA manufacturing unit and
compared it to the $6.6 million net book carrying value of our PA
manufacturing unit. This analysis showed that the undiscounted projected cash
flow stream from our PA business was less than the net book carrying value of
our PA manufacturing unit. As a result, we performed a discounted cash flow
analysis and subsequently concluded that our PA manufacturing unit was impaired
and should be written down to zero. This write-down caused us to record an
impairment of $6.6 million in June 2008.
Other than the impairment discussed
above, we do not believe the shutdown of our PA manufacturing unit will have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows as the required quarterly fixed periodic payments previously related to
the PA manufacturing unit will continue throughout the original term of the
contract, however have been allocated to the operations of the esters
manufacturing unit, and all decontamination and shutdown costs were reimbursed
by BASF.
Effective as of May 27, 2008, John
V. Genova was appointed as our President and Chief Executive Officer and was
elected as a member of our Board of Directors. Mr. Genova succeeded Richard
K. Crump, who retired as President and Chief Executive Officer as of
May 27, 2008. Mr. Crump remains a member of our Board of Directors.
Contractual Cash
Obligations
As of June 30, 2008, there have
been no significant changes to the contractual obligations disclosed in our
Annual Report.
Critical Accounting
Policies, Use of Estimates and Assumptions
The preparation of financial statements
in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management
to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the
condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes. Actual results
could differ from those estimates. On an ongoing basis, we review our estimates,
including those related to the allowance for doubtful accounts, recoverability
of long-lived assets, deferred tax asset valuation allowance, litigation,
environmental liabilities, pension and post-retirement benefits and various
other operating allowances and accruals, based on currently available
information. Changes in facts and circumstances may alter such estimates and
affect our results of operations and financial position in future periods. There
have been no material changes or developments in our evaluation of the
accounting estimates or the underlying assumptions or methodologies that we
believe to be critical accounting policies disclosed in our Annual Report.
New Accounting
Standards
In September 2006, the Financial
Accounting Standards Board, or the FASB, issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value
23
Measurements,” or SFAS
No. 157. This statement establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures about fair
value measurements for financial assets and liabilities, as well as for any
other assets and liabilities that are carried at fair value on a recurring basis
in financial statements. SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim
periods within those fiscal years. We adopted SFAS No. 157 in the first
quarter of 2008 and determined it had no impact on our condensed consolidated
financial statements.
In February 2008, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157”, which
defers the effective date of SFAS No. 157 to fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years, for all
non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for items that are
recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring
basis (at least annually). An entity that has issued interim or annual financial
statements reflecting the application of the measurement and disclosure
provisions of SFAS No. 157 prior to February 12, 2008, must continue
to apply all provisions of SFAS No. 157. We are currently evaluating the
impact of our adoption of the deferred portion of SFAS No. 157, effective
January 1, 2009, on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities,” or SFAS No. 159. SFAS No. 159, which amends SFAS
No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities,” allows certain financial assets and liabilities to be recognized,
at our election, at fair market value, with any gains or losses for the period
recorded in the statement of operations. SFAS No. 159 is effective for
fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and did not have a material
impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations,” or SFAS
No. 141R. SFAS No. 141R broadens the guidance of SFAS No. 141,
extending its applicability to all transactions and other events in which one
entity obtains control over one or more other businesses. It broadens the fair
value measurement and recognition of assets acquired, liabilities assumed and
interests transferred as a result of business combinations. SFAS No. 141R
expands on required disclosures to improve the statement users’ abilities to
evaluate the nature and financial effects of business combinations. SFAS
No. 141R is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2008. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 141R to have a material
impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements; an amendment of ARB No. 51,” or SFAS No. 160. This
statement establishes the accounting and reporting standards for a
noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a
subsidiary. This statement clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a
subsidiary is an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be
reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. SFAS No. 160
requires retroactive adoption of the presentation and disclosure requirements
for existing minority interests and applies prospectively to business
combinations for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. We do not
expect the adoption of SFAS No. 160 to have a material impact on our
condensed consolidated financial statements.
In March 2008, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures About Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities,” or SFAS No. 161. This statement requires enhanced disclosures
about an entity’s derivative and hedging activities, with the intent to provide
users of financial statements with an enhanced understanding of (a) how and
why an entity uses derivative instruments, (b) how derivative instruments
and related hedged items are accounted for under SFAS No. 133, “Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” and its related
interpretations and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items
affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows.
SFAS No. 161 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2008. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 161 to
have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS
No. 162, “The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles”, or
SFAS No. 162. SFAS No. 162 identifies the sources of accounting
principles and the framework for selecting the principles to be used in the
preparation of financial statements that are presented in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. SFAS No. 162
is effective 60 days following the SEC’s approval of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board’s amendments to Statements on Auditing Standards
Section 411, “The Meaning of ‘Present fairly in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles’. ”SFAS No. 162 is not expected to have a
material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In June 2008, the FASB issued FASB
Staff Position Emerging Issues Task Force, “Determining Whether Instruments
Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities,” or
FSP EITF 03-6-1, which addresses whether instruments granted in share-based
payment transactions are participating securities prior to vesting and,
therefore, need to be included in earnings allocation in computing earnings per
share under the two-class method as described in SFAS No. 128, “Earnings
Per Share.” Under the guidance in FSP EITF 03-6-1, unvested share-based payment
awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents
(whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and must be included in
the computation of
24
earnings per share
pursuant to the two class method. FSP EITF 03-6-1 is effective for fiscal
periods beginning after December 15, 2008 and all prior-period earnings per
share data presented is required to be adjusted retrospectively. Early
application is not permitted. We are currently evaluating the potential impact
of the adoption of FSP EITF 03-6-1 to our condensed consolidated financial
statements.
Item 3.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Our financial results can be affected
by volatile changes in raw materials, natural gas and finished product sales
prices. Borrowings under our revolving credit facility bear interest, at our
option, at an annual rate of a base rate plus 0.0% to 0.50% or the LIBOR rate
plus 1.50% to 2.25%, depending on our borrowing availability at the time. There
were no borrowings under our revolving credit facility during the first six
months of 2008. Our $150 million of Secured Notes bear interest at an
annual rate of 101/4%, payable
semi-annually on April 1 and October 1 of each year. Pursuant to a registration
rights agreement among us, Sterling Energy and Jefferies & Company, Inc. and
CIBC World Markets Corp., as the initial purchasers, we agreed to use
commercially reasonable efforts to file an exchange offer registration statement
to exchange our unregistered Secured Notes for a new issue of substantially
identical debt securities registered under the Securities Act, to cause the
registration statement to become effective by December 24, 2007 and to
complete the exchange offer within 50 days of the effective date of the
registration statement. On August 30, 2007, we made an initial filing of
the required exchange offer registration statement for our Secured Notes.
However, the registration statement was not declared effective by
December 24, 2007 and, as a result, the interest rate on our Secured Notes
increased by 0.25% per annum on each of December 25, 2007, March 24,
2008 and June 22, 2008. The registration statement was declared effective
on August 13, 2008 and we expect the interest rate on our Secured Notes to
revert back to the face amount of 101/4% per annum, effective September 12, 2008,
when the exchange offer is expected to close. The additional interest incurred
from December 25, 2007 through the expected closing of the exchange offer is
estimated to be approximately $.5 million.
Item 4T.
Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and
procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed
in our reports under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC,
and that such information 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. Management
necessarily applied its judgment in assessing the costs and benefits of such
controls and procedures which, by their nature, can provide only reasonable
assurance regarding management’s control objectives.
Evaluation of
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We carried out an evaluation, under the
supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the
design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to
Exchange Act Rule 13a-15, as of the end of the fiscal period covered by this
Form 10-Q. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief
Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Rules 13a-15(a) and 15d-15(e) of the Exchange Act) were
effective to provide reasonable assurance regarding management’s control
objectives as of the end of the period covered by this Form 10-Q.
There have been no changes in our
internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Exchange Act
Rule 13a-15, in the period covered by this Form 10-Q that have materially
affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
25
PART II.
OTHER
INFORMATION
Item 1.
Legal Proceedings
The information under “Legal
Proceedings” in Note 6 to the condensed consolidated financial statements
included in Item 1 of Part I of this report is hereby incorporated by
reference.
Item 4.
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
Our Annual Meeting of Stockholders was
held on April 29, 2008. At the Annual Meeting:
| |
• |
|
seven of our incumbent directors were re-elected; |
| |
| |
• |
|
the appointment of Grant Thornton LLP as our independent registered
accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008 was
ratified and approved; |
| |
| |
• |
|
a proposal to amend our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation to remove provisions relating to our emergence from
bankruptcy was approved; |
| |
| |
• |
|
a proposal to amend our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation to remove provisions relating to our 10% Senior Secured
Notes due 2007 was approved; |
| |
| |
• |
|
a proposal to amend our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation to prohibit our common stockholders from voting on certain
amendments to our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation
relating solely to the terms of any of our outstanding preferred stock was
approved; |
| |
| |
• |
|
a proposal to amend our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation to exempt us from the requirement that directors be elected
by ballot was approved; |
| |
| |
• |
|
a proposal to amend our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation to modify the director exculpation provisions thereof was
approved; |
| |
| |
• |
|
a proposal to amend our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation to modify the indemnification provisions thereof was
approved; and |
| |
| |
• |
|
a proposal to amend and restate our Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation was approved. |
Under the Restated Certificate of
Designations, Preferences, Rights and Limitations of our Series A
Convertible Preferred Stock, or our Preferred Stock, the holders of our
Preferred Stock, voting separately as a class, are entitled to elect a
percentage of our directors determined by the aggregate amount of shares of our
Preferred Stock and our common stock beneficially owned by Resurgence Asset
Management, L.L.C. and certain permitted transferees. Currently, the holders of
our Preferred Stock are entitled to elect a majority of our directors. All of
our other directors are elected by the holders of our Preferred Stock and the
holders of our common stock, voting together as a single class. For purposes of
class voting, each share of our Preferred Stock has the right to one vote for
each share of our common stock into which such share is convertible on the
record date for such vote, which was 1,000 shares on the record date for the
Annual Meeting. At the Annual Meeting, four of our directors were elected by the
holders of our Preferred Stock and three of our directors were elected by the
holders of our Preferred Stock and the holders of our common stock, voting
together as a single class. The voting results for the re-election of our seven
incumbent directors are set forth below:
Directors elected by the holders of our
Preferred Stock:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Director |
|
For |
|
Withheld |
|
Byron J. Haney |
|
|
4,792.635 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
Steven L.
Gidumal |
|
|
4,792.635 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
Philip M.
Sivin |
|
|
4,792.635 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
Karl W.
Schwarzfeld |
|
|
4,792.635 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
26
Directors elected by the holders of our
Preferred Stock and the holders of our common stock, voting together as a single
class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Director |
|
For |
|
Withheld |
|
Richard K.
Crump |
|
|
6,842,051 |
|
|
|
81,626 |
|
|
John W. Gildea |
|
|
6,923,616 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
Dr. Peter Ting Kai
Wu |
|
|
6,923,616 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Our shares of Preferred Stock and our
shares of common stock voted together as a single class on the ratification and
approval of the appointment of Grant Thornton LLP as our independent registered
accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008. For purposes
of class voting, each share of our Preferred Stock has the right to one vote for
each share of our common stock into which such share is convertible on the
record date for such vote, which was 1,000 shares on the record date for the
Annual Meeting. The voting results for the ratification and approval of the
appointment of Grant Thornton LLP as our independent registered accounting firm
for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008 are set forth below:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
6,923,638 |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Our shares of Preferred Stock and our
shares of common stock voted together as a single class on the proposals to
amend our Certificate of Incorporation. For purposes of class voting, each share
of our Preferred Stock has the right to one vote for each share of our common
stock into which such share is convertible on the record date for such vote,
which was 1,000 shares on the record date for the Annual Meeting. The voting
results for each of the proposals to amend our Certificate of Incorporation are
set forth below:
Approval of Amendments to Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to Remove Provisions Relating to Our
Emergence From Bankruptcy (“Proposed Amendment #1”). With respect to the
approval of Proposed Amendment #1 by the holders of Preferred Stock and the
holders of Common Stock, voting as a single class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
6,923,638 |
|
|
955 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Approval of Amendments to Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to Remove Provisions Relating to Our
10% Senior Secured Notes due 2007 (“Proposed Amendment #2”). With respect to the
approval of Proposed Amendment #2 by the holders of Preferred Stock and the
holders of Common Stock, voting as a single class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
6,922,722 |
|
|
250,904 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Approval of Amendment to Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to Prohibit Our Common Stockholders
from Voting on Certain Amendments to Our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation Relating Solely to the Terms of Any of our Outstanding Preferred
Stock (“Proposed Amendment #3”). With respect to the approval of Proposed
Amendment #3 by the holders of Preferred Stock and the holders of Common Stock,
voting as a single class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
6,590,263 |
|
|
333,406 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Approval of Amendment to Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to Exempt us From the Requirement That
Directors be Elected by Ballot (“Proposed Amendment #4”). With respect to the
approval of Proposed Amendment #4 by the holders of Preferred Stock and the
holders of Common Stock, voting as a single class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
7,259,042 |
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Approval of Amendments to Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to Modify the Director Exculpation
Provisions Thereof (“Proposed Amendment #5”). With respect to the approval of
Proposed Amendment #5 by the holders of
27
Preferred Stock and the
holders of Common Stock, voting as a single class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
6,923,587 |
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Approval of Amendments to Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to Modify the Indemnification
Provisions Thereof (“Proposed Amendment #6”). With respect to the approval of
Proposed Amendment #6 by the holders of Preferred Stock and the holders of
Common Stock, voting as a single class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
6,923,604 |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Approval of Amendment and Restatement
of Our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation (“Proposed Amendment
#7”). With respect to the approval of Proposed Amendment #7 by the holders of
Preferred Stock and the holders of Common Stock, voting as a single class:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For |
|
Against |
|
Abstain |
|
6,923,604 |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
There were no broker non-votes on any
matter voted on at the Annual Meeting.
Item 6.
Exhibits
The following are filed or furnished as
part of this Form 10-Q:
| |
|
|
|
|
| Exhibit |
|
|
|
| Number |
|
|
Description of Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
— |
|
Second Amended and Restated Certification of
Incorporation of Sterling Chemicals, Inc. (incorporated by reference to
Annex A to our definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A filed on
April 15, 2008) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10.1 |
|
— |
|
Third Amended and Restated Plasticizers
Production Agreement dated effective as of April 1, 2008 between BASF
Corporation and Sterling Chemicals, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 25, 2008) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+10.2 |
|
— |
|
Employment Agreement between Sterling Chemicals,
Inc. and John V. Genova, dated effective as of May 27, 2008
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on May 27, 2008) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**15.1 |
|
— |
|
Letter of Grant Thornton LLP regarding unaudited
interim financial information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**31.1 |
|
— |
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief
Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**31.2 |
|
— |
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief
Financial Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**32.1 |
|
— |
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief
Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**32.2 |
|
— |
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief
Financial Officer |
|
|
|
| ** |
|
Filed or furnished herewith |
| |
| # |
|
Portions of this Exhibit have been omitted and filed separately with
the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to a request for
confidential treatment |
| |
| + |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or
arrangement |
28
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this
report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
STERLING CHEMICALS,
INC. (Registrant) |
|
| Date: August 14, 2008 |
By |
/s/ JOHN
V. GENOVA |
|
| |
|
John V. Genova |
|
| |
|
President and Chief Executive
Officer |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| Date: August 14, 2008 |
By |
/s/ JOHN
R. BEAVER |
|
| |
|
John R. Beaver |
|
| |
|
Senior Vice President-Finance and Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) |
|
29
EXHIBIT INDEX
| |
|
|
|
|
| Exhibit |
|
|
|
| Number |
|
|
Description of Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
— |
|
Second Amended and Restated Certification of
Incorporation of Sterling Chemicals, Inc. (incorporated by reference to
Annex A to the Company’s definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A
filed on April 15, 2008) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10.1 |
|
— |
|
Third Amended and Restated Plasticizers
Production Agreement dated effective as of April 1, 2008 between BASF
Corporation and Sterling Chemicals, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 25, 2008). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+10.2 |
|
— |
|
Employment Agreement between Sterling Chemicals,
Inc. and John V. Genova, dated effective as of May 27, 2008
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on May 27, 2008). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**15.1 |
|
— |
|
Letter of Grant Thornton LLP regarding unaudited
interim financial information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**31.1 |
|
— |
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief
Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**31.2 |
|
— |
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief
Financial Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**32.1 |
|
— |
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief
Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**32.2 |
|
— |
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief
Financial Officer |
|
|
|
| ** |
|
Filed or furnished herewith |
| |
| # |
|
Portions of this Exhibit have been omitted and filed separately with
the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to a request for
confidential treatment |
| |
| + |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or
arrangement |