e10vq
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2006
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 No. 1-13783
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
76-0542208
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
1800 West Loop South
Suite 500
Houston, Texas
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
77027-3233
(zip code) |
Registrants telephone number, including area code: (713) 860-1500
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, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated
filer in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes o NO þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to be
filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the
distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. Yes þ NO o
The number of shares outstanding as of May 8, 2006 of the issuers common stock was 36,795,336
and of the issuers restricted voting common stock was 2,605,709.
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX
2
Unless the context otherwise indicates, all references in this report to IES, the Company,
we, us, or our are to Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and its subsidiaries.
DISCLOSURE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This quarterly report on Form 10-Q includes certain statements that may be deemed
forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, all of which are based upon various estimates
and assumptions that the Company believes to be reasonable as of the date hereof. These statements
involve risks and uncertainties that could cause the Companys actual future outcomes to differ
materially from those set forth in such statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are
not limited to:
|
|
|
the Companys inability to consummate the confirmed plan of reorganization in
a timely manner or at all; |
|
|
|
|
the Companys inability to negotiate acceptable terms of and enter
into credit or bonding facilities; |
|
|
|
|
high costs associated with the Companys anticipated exit from bankruptcy; |
|
|
|
|
potential difficulty in fulfilling the restrictive terms of, and the high cost
of, the Companys credit facilities and term loan to be entered into in connection with the Companys
anticipated exit from bankruptcy; |
|
|
|
|
the Companys ability to continue as a going concern; |
|
|
|
|
the Companys ability to meet debt service obligations and related financial and other
covenants, and the possible resulting material default under the Companys credit agreements
which is not waived or rectified; |
|
|
|
|
limitations on the availability of sufficient credit to fund working capital; |
|
|
|
|
limitations on the availability and the increased costs of surety bonds required for certain projects; |
|
|
|
|
inability to reach agreements with the Companys surety companies to provide sufficient
bonding capacity; |
|
|
|
|
risk associated with failure to provide surety bonds on jobs where the Company has
commenced work or is otherwise contractually obligated to provide surety bonds; |
|
|
|
|
the inherent uncertainties relating to estimating future operating results and the
Companys ability to generate sales, operating income, or cash flow; |
|
|
|
|
potential difficulty in addressing a material weakness in the Companys internal controls
that has been identified by the Company and its independent auditors; |
3
|
|
|
fluctuations in operating results because of downturns in levels of construction,
seasonality and differing
regional economic conditions; |
|
|
|
|
general economic and capital markets conditions, including fluctuations in interest rates; |
|
|
|
|
inaccurate estimates used in entering into and executing contracts; |
|
|
|
|
inaccuracies in estimating revenue and percentage of
completion on contracts; |
|
|
|
|
difficulty in managing the operation of existing entities; |
|
|
|
|
the high level of competition in the construction industry both from third parties and ex-employees; |
|
|
|
|
increases in costs or limitations on availability of labor, especially qualified
electricians, steel, copper and gasoline; |
|
|
|
|
accidents resulting from the numerous physical hazards associated with the Companys work; |
|
|
|
|
loss of key personnel; |
|
|
|
|
business disruption and costs associated with the Securities and Exchange Commission
investigation or shareholder derivative action now pending; |
|
|
|
|
litigation risks and uncertainties, including in connection with the ongoing SEC
investigation; |
|
|
|
|
unexpected liabilities or losses associated with warranties or other liabilities
attributable to the retention of the legal structure or retained liabilities of business
units where the Company has sold substantially all of the assets; |
|
|
|
|
difficulties in integrating new types of work into existing
subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
|
inability of the Company to incorporate new accounting,
control and operating procedures; |
|
|
|
|
the loss of productivity, either at the corporate office or operating level; |
|
|
|
|
disruptions or inability to effectively manage internal growth or consolidations; |
|
|
|
|
distraction of management and costs associated with the Companys restructuring efforts,
including its Chapter 11 filings; |
|
|
|
|
recent adverse publicity about the Company, including its
Chapter 11 filing; |
|
|
|
|
IES shares being delisted from the NYSE and the inability to have its shares
listed on NASDAQ or other national exchange; |
4
|
|
|
the residual effect with customers and vendors from the bankruptcy process
leading to less work or less favorable delivery or credit terms; |
|
|
|
|
the delayed effect of fewer or smaller new projects awarded to the Company
during the bankruptcy and its effect on future financial results; |
|
|
|
|
the lowered efficiency and higher costs associated with projects at subsidiaries
that the Company has determined to wind down or close; |
|
|
|
|
the loss of employees during the bankruptcy process and the
winding down of subsidiaries; and |
|
|
|
|
distraction of management time in winding down and closing
subsidiaries. |
You should understand that the foregoing, as well as other risk factors discussed in this
document, including those listed in Part II. Item 1A. of this report under the heading Risk
Factors, and in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2005, could cause
future outcomes to differ materially from those expressed in such forward looking statements. We
undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise information concerning the Companys
restructuring efforts, borrowing availability, or its cash position or any forward-looking
statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this report.
Forward-looking statements are provided in this Form 10-Q pursuant to the safe harbor established
under the private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and should be evaluated in the context
of the estimates, assumptions, uncertainties, and risks described herein.
General information about us can be found at www.ies-co.com under Investor Relations. Our
annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K, as well
as any amendments to those reports, are available free of charge through our website as soon as
reasonably practicable after we file them with, or furnish them to, the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
5
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE INFORMATION)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(Audited) |
|
(Unaudited) |
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT ASSETS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
28,349 |
|
|
$ |
18,134 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
9,596 |
|
|
|
20,060 |
|
Accounts receivable: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade, net of allowance of $3,912 and $4,483, respectively |
|
|
180,305 |
|
|
|
164,032 |
|
Retainage |
|
|
48,246 |
|
|
|
41,286 |
|
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
24,678 |
|
|
|
22,447 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
22,563 |
|
|
|
23,579 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
24,814 |
|
|
|
26,837 |
|
Assets held for sale associated with discontinued operations |
|
|
14,017 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
352,568 |
|
|
|
316,633 |
|
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, net |
|
|
24,426 |
|
|
|
21,785 |
|
GOODWILL |
|
|
24,343 |
|
|
|
24,343 |
|
OTHER NON-CURRENT ASSETS |
|
|
15,035 |
|
|
|
7,036 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
416,372 |
|
|
$ |
369,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current maturities of long-term debt |
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
25 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
120,812 |
|
|
|
117,260 |
|
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
35,761 |
|
|
|
26,398 |
|
Liabilities related to assets held for sale associated with discontinued operations |
|
|
4,825 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Senior convertible notes, net (subject to compromise) |
|
|
50,691 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
Senior subordinated notes, net (subject to compromise) |
|
|
173,134 |
|
|
|
172,885 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
385,255 |
|
|
|
366,619 |
|
LONG-TERM DEBT, net of current maturities |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
OTHER NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES |
|
|
15,231 |
|
|
|
15,768 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
400,513 |
|
|
|
382,529 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $.01 par value, 10,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $.01 par value, 100,000,000 shares authorized, 39,024,209 and 39,042,426
shares issued, respectively |
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
Restricted voting common stock, $.01 par value, 2,605,709 shares issued, authorized and
outstanding |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Treasury stock, at cost, 2,416,377 and 2,254,590 shares, respectively |
|
|
(13,022 |
) |
|
|
(11,681 |
) |
Unearned restricted stock |
|
|
(1,183 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
430,996 |
|
|
|
429,059 |
|
Retained deficit |
|
|
(401,348 |
) |
|
|
(430,526 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit) |
|
|
15,859 |
|
|
|
(12,732 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity (deficit) |
|
$ |
416,372 |
|
|
$ |
369,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these
financial statements.
6
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE INFORMATION)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
534,323 |
|
|
$ |
504,256 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
469,879 |
|
|
|
438,424 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
64,444 |
|
|
|
65,832 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
69,924 |
|
|
|
68,895 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(5,480 |
) |
|
|
(3,063 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reorganization items (Note 1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,111 |
|
Other (income) expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net |
|
|
13,285 |
|
|
|
13,467 |
|
Other expense, net |
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,865 |
|
|
|
13,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
|
(19,345 |
) |
|
|
(28,979 |
) |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
664 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(20,009 |
) |
|
|
(29,490 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations (Note 2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations (including gain (loss)
on disposal of $(236) and $465, respectively) |
|
|
(10,514 |
) |
|
|
511 |
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) from discontinued operations |
|
|
(10,825 |
) |
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(30,834 |
) |
|
$ |
(29,178 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.75 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
(0.28 |
) |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.74 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.75 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
(0.28 |
) |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.74 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in the computation of earnings (loss) per share (Note 4): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
39,033,601 |
|
|
|
39,316,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
39,033,601 |
|
|
|
39,316,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these
financial statements.
7
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE INFORMATION)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
268,920 |
|
|
$ |
245,202 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
238,430 |
|
|
|
216,237 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
30,490 |
|
|
|
28,965 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
35,158 |
|
|
|
35,963 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(4,668 |
) |
|
|
(6,998 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reorganization items (Note 1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,111 |
|
Other (income) expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net |
|
|
4,441 |
|
|
|
7,585 |
|
Other (income) expense, net |
|
|
485 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,926 |
|
|
|
7,976 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
|
(9,594 |
) |
|
|
(27,085 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(9,959 |
) |
|
|
(27,385 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations (Note 2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations (including gain (loss)
on disposal of $(103) and $11, respectively) |
|
|
(2,961 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) from discontinued operations |
|
|
(3,267 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(13,226 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,380 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.70 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.70 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.70 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.70 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in the computation of earnings (loss) per share (Note 4): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
39,149,769 |
|
|
|
39,384,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
39,149,769 |
|
|
|
39,384,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these
financial statements.
8
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT)
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE INFORMATION)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted Voting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unearned |
|
|
Additional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Treasury Stock |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Paid-In |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Stockholders |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Deficit |
|
|
Equity (Deficit) |
|
BALANCE, September
30, 2005 |
|
|
39,024,209 |
|
|
$ |
390 |
|
|
|
2,605,709 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
|
(2,416,377 |
) |
|
$ |
(13,022 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,183 |
) |
|
$ |
430,996 |
|
|
$ |
(401,348 |
) |
|
$ |
15,859 |
|
Issuance of
stock
(unaudited) |
|
|
18,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
Vesting of
restricted stock
(unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
161,787 |
|
|
|
1,341 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,341 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adoption of SFAS
123R
(unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,183 |
|
|
|
(1,183 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash
compensation
(unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
561 |
|
Net loss (unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29,178 |
) |
|
|
(29,178 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE, March 31,
2006 (unaudited) |
|
|
39,042,426 |
|
|
$ |
390 |
|
|
|
2,605,709 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
|
2,254,590 |
|
|
$ |
(11,681 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
429,059 |
|
|
$ |
(430,526 |
) |
|
$ |
(12,732 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements are an integral part of
these financial statements.
9
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(IN THOUSANDS)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(30,834 |
) |
|
$ |
(29,178 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (income) loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
10,825 |
|
|
|
(312 |
) |
Bad debt expense |
|
|
1,213 |
|
|
|
2,382 |
|
Deferred financing cost amortization |
|
|
1,691 |
|
|
|
5,173 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
5,581 |
|
|
|
3,516 |
|
Impairment of long-lived assets |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
Impairment of goodwill |
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on sale of property and equipment |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
106 |
|
Non-cash compensation expense |
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
587 |
|
Non-cash interest charge for embedded conversion option |
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reorganization items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,960 |
|
Equity in losses of investment |
|
|
571 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax expense |
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of the effect of discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
13,629 |
|
|
|
22,106 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
(1,855 |
) |
|
|
(1,016 |
) |
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
(2,187 |
) |
|
|
2,231 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
(9,450 |
) |
|
|
(2,023 |
) |
Other non-current assets |
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
(225 |
) |
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
(5,564 |
) |
|
|
1,867 |
|
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
2,481 |
|
|
|
(9,363 |
) |
Other current liabilities |
|
|
(299 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
(499 |
) |
|
|
539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) continuing operations |
|
|
(11,753 |
) |
|
|
1,260 |
|
Net cash provided by discontinued operations |
|
|
8,648 |
|
|
|
2,326 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
|
(3,105 |
) |
|
|
3,586 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of property and equipment |
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
225 |
|
Investments in securities |
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
(450 |
) |
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(1,690 |
) |
|
|
(1,514 |
) |
Changes in restricted cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,464 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities of continuing operations |
|
|
(1,791 |
) |
|
|
(12,203 |
) |
Net cash provided by investing activities of discontinued operations |
|
|
23,594 |
|
|
|
5,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
21,803 |
|
|
|
(6,398 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings of debt |
|
|
9,772 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Borrowings on Senior Convertible Notes |
|
|
50,228 |
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of debt |
|
|
(65,589 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for debt issuance costs |
|
|
(3,876 |
) |
|
|
(1,409 |
) |
Payments for debt restructure costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,994 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of stock under employee stock purchase plan |
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock options |
|
|
625 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities of continuing operations |
|
|
(8,546 |
) |
|
|
(7,403 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(8,546 |
) |
|
|
(7,403 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |
|
|
10,152 |
|
|
|
(10,215 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period |
|
|
22,232 |
|
|
|
28,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period |
|
$ |
32,384 |
|
|
$ |
18,134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
9,811 |
|
|
$ |
2,953 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
966 |
|
Assets acquired under capital lease |
|
|
|
|
|
|
111 |
|
The accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these financial statements.
10
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(IN THOUSANDS)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(13,226 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,380 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (income) loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
3,267 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
Bad debt expense |
|
|
557 |
|
|
|
2,021 |
|
Deferred financing cost amortization |
|
|
1,691 |
|
|
|
4,565 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
3,102 |
|
|
|
1,834 |
|
Impairment of long-lived assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
359 |
|
Loss on sale of property and equipment |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
147 |
|
Non-cash compensation expense |
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
Non-cash interest charge for embedded conversion option |
|
|
(1,942 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Reorganization items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,960 |
|
Equity in losses of investment |
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax expense |
|
|
497 |
|
|
|
545 |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of the effect of discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
7,380 |
|
|
|
11,798 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
(225 |
) |
|
|
(279 |
) |
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
(2,358 |
) |
|
|
1,035 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
(434 |
) |
Other non-current assets |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
955 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
13,009 |
|
|
|
8,568 |
|
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
(6,181 |
) |
|
|
(5,655 |
) |
Other current liabilities |
|
|
(344 |
) |
|
|
51 |
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations |
|
|
6,601 |
|
|
|
2,028 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) discontinued operations |
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
|
6,744 |
|
|
|
2,024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of property and equipment |
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
Investments in securities |
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(783 |
) |
|
|
(577 |
) |
Changes in restricted cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(970 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities of continuing operations |
|
|
(940 |
) |
|
|
(1,387 |
) |
Net cash provided by investing activities of discontinued operations |
|
|
12,091 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
11,151 |
|
|
|
(1,387 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings of debt |
|
|
(228 |
) |
|
|
21 |
|
Borrowings on Senior Convertible Notes |
|
|
14,228 |
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of debt |
|
|
(29,888 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Payments for debt issuance costs |
|
|
(1,196 |
) |
|
|
(1,409 |
) |
Payments for debt restructure costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,994 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of stock under employee stock purchase plan |
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock options |
|
|
392 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities of continuing operations |
|
|
(16,438 |
) |
|
|
(7,382 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(16,438 |
) |
|
|
(7,382 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |
|
|
1,457 |
|
|
|
(6,745 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period |
|
|
30,927 |
|
|
|
24,879 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period |
|
$ |
32,384 |
|
|
$ |
18,134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
8,692 |
|
|
$ |
529 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
514 |
|
The accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these financial statements.
11
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
March 31, 2006
(UNAUDITED)
1. OVERVIEW
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. (the Company or IES), a Delaware corporation, was
founded in June 1997 to create a leading national provider of electrical services, focusing
primarily on the commercial and industrial, residential, low voltage and service and maintenance
markets.
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (the Financial
Statements) of the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States including Statement of Position 90-7 Financial Reporting by Entities
in Reorganization Under the Bankruptcy Code (SOP
90-7) and Article 10 of Regulation S-X in
accordance with interim SEC rules.
They do not include all of the information and footnotes required for complete
financial statements, and therefore should be reviewed in conjunction with the financial statements
and related notes thereto contained in the Companys annual report for the year ended September 30,
2005, filed on Form 10-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
SOP 90-7 requires the Company to, among other things, (1) identify transactions that are
directly associated with the bankruptcy proceedings from those events that occur during the normal
course of business, (2) identify pre-petition liabilities subject to compromise from those that are
not subject to compromise or post-petition liabilities, (3) apply fresh start accounting
rules upon emergence from bankruptcy which is expected to be May 2006.
In the opinion of management, all adjustments considered necessary for a fair presentation
have been included. Actual operating results for the six months ended March 31, 2006 are not
necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2006.
Update on Financial Restructuring
Voluntary
Reorganization Under Chapter 11
On February 14, 2006 (the Commencement Date), the Company and all of its domestic
subsidiaries (collectively, the Debtors) filed voluntary petitions for reorganization (the
Chapter 11 Cases) under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the Bankruptcy Code)
in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division (the
Bankruptcy Court). The Bankruptcy Court is jointly administering these cases as In re Integrated
Electrical Services, Inc. et. al., Case No. 06-30602-BJH-11.
Since the Commencement Date, the
Debtors have continued to operate their businesses and manage their properties as debtors in
possession in accordance with Sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. On February 27, 2006, the
United States Trustee appointed a committee authorized by the
Bankruptcy Code, and appointed by the Bankruptcy Court, to represent the
interest of the Companys unsecured creditors (Official
Committee of Unsecured Creditors). On March 8, 2006,
the United States Trustee appointed a committee authorized by the
Bankruptcy Code, and appointed by the Bankruptcy Court, to represent
the Interest of the Companys shareholders and other equity
interest holders (Official Equity Holders Committee).
On the Commencement Date,
the Debtors filed the required documents with the Bankruptcy Court on
the plan of reorganization which sets the intended plan of
reorganization (Joint Plan of Reorganization) and the related
informational disclosures (Disclosure Statement) with the
Bankruptcy Court. On March 10, 2006, the Debtors filed an
amendment to the Joint Plan of Reorganization and the related
Disclosure Statement (First
Amended Disclosure Statement) which set out additional
information updating the prior Disclosure Statement. On March 10, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court approved the adequacy of information in
the First Amended Disclosure Statement. On March 17, 2006, the
Debtors filed a second amendment to the Joint Plan of Reorganization (the
Plan) and the related second amendments to the Disclosure
Statement, each of which were distributed, along with ballots, to creditors and
equity interest holders entitled to vote on the Plan.
On April 26, 2006,
the Bankruptcy Court entered an order (the Confirmation Order) approving
and confirming the Plan. The effective date of the Plan is expected to be in the first half of May
2006 (the Effective Date). The Plan was filed as Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys current report on
Form 8-K, filed on April 28, 2006. Capitalized terms used in this section but not defined herein
shall have the meaning set for in the Plan.
12
The Plan of Reorganization
The
primary purpose of the Plan is to complete a restructuring of the
capital structure of the Company (the Restructuring) to
improve free cash flow, strengthen the balance sheet and enhance
surety bonding capacity. Currently, the Company has a substantial
amount of debt outstanding under the Senior Subordinated Notes and
the Senior Convertible Notes. If the Company is not able to complete
the Restructuring, they will likely have to put together an
alternative plan. In managements opinion the financial condition and the value of the
securities are likely to be further affected negatively and
materially.
The
Restructuring will reduce the amount of our outstanding debt by
approximately $172.9 million plus accrued and unpaid interest by
converting all of the Senior Subordinated Notes into equity through
the transfer of Senior Subordinated Note claims in exchange for a
portion of shares of common stock in the reorganized company
(New IES Common Stock). Following completion of the
Restructuring, long-term debt is expected to be approximately
$61.3 million, made up of approximately $53 million
borrowed and outstanding under the term loan effective on the date
exiting bankruptcy (the Term Exit Credit Facility) and
approximately $8.3 million borrowed and outstanding under a
revolving exit facility (the Revolving Exit Credit
Facility). Among other things, in accordance with the Plan:
|
(i) |
|
Each holder of the Senior Subordinated Notes will receive, in exchange for its
total claim (including principal and interest), a pro rata portion of 82% of the
New IES Common Stock to be issued in accordance to the Plan, before
the effects of the options to be issued in the reorganized company
(New Options) issued in accordance with the Companys
2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the 2006 Equity Incentive
Plan). |
|
|
(ii) |
|
Each holder of the Companys common stock will receive a pro rata portion of
15% of the New IES Common Stock to be issued in accordance with the
Plan, before the effect of the New Options issued in accordance with
the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. |
|
|
(iii) |
|
Certain members of management will receive restricted shares
of New IES Common Stock equal to 3% of the New IES Common Stock to be
issued in accordance to the Plan, before the effect of the New
Options issued in accordance with the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. |
|
|
(iv) |
|
On the Effective Date, the equity interests would be made up
of New IES Common Stock issued to the holders of Senior Subordinated
Notes, holders of the Companys common stock and certain members of
management and New Options to be issued to certain key employees in
accordance with the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, which will be
exercisable for up to 10% of the New IES Common Stock on a fully
diluted basis. |
|
|
(v) |
|
The Companys obligations under certain existing
operating leases and trade credit extended to the Company by its
vendors and suppliers, would not be impaired. |
|
|
(vi) |
|
On the Effective Date, the Company will enter into a
revolving exit credit facility. |
|
|
(vii) |
|
The $50 million in outstanding Senior Convertible Notes and related guarantees
by the Companys domestic subsidiaries (IES Subsidiary
Guarantees) will be refinanced from the proceeds of the Term
Exit Credit Facility. |
|
|
(viii) |
|
On the Commencement Date, the Company filed motions to
approve a debtor in possession
bonding facility with Chubb (Chubb DIP Bonding Facility) and
SureTec Insurance Company (SureTec DIP Bonding Facility), including the
assumption of the underlying bonded contracts. The motions were approved on an interim
basis by the Bankruptcy Court on February 15, 2006 and on a final basis on March 13,
2006. Additionally, a debtor in possession bonding facility with
Scarborough (Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility) was approved on
a final basis on March 13, 2006. On the Effective Date, the
claims of the Company sureties, Chubb, SureTec and Scarborough, if any, will be reinstated under the Plan. |
13
Conditions to the Effective Date
The
following are conditions which must be satisfied or waived in a accordance with Article 9.04 of the Plan:
|
(i) |
|
The Confirmation Order has to be entered by the Bankruptcy Court. |
|
|
(ii) |
|
The Confirmation Order has to become a final order upon the expiration of ten days and the
completion of the required items set out in the first amendment to
the Joint Plan of Reorganization (Final Order). |
|
|
(iii) |
|
All authorizations, consents and regulatory approvals required, if any, in connection with the
conclusion of the Plan have to be obtained. |
|
|
(iv) |
|
All necessary documents to complete the issuance of the new common stock in place of the old common
stock (New Securities), issuance of new stock in replacement for the Senior Subordinated Notes (New Notes)
and new subsidiary guarantees, if applicable, will have been executed and delivered. |
|
|
(v) |
|
All other actions, documents, and agreements necessary to implement the Plan will have been produced or executed. |
|
|
(vi) |
|
All documents referenced in subsections (iv) and (v) of this paragraph, including all documents in the Plan Supplement, will
be reasonably acceptable to the Ad Hoc Committee. |
|
|
(vii) |
|
No stay of the consummation of the Plan will be in effect. |
It is also a condition to the effectiveness of the Plan that:
|
(i) |
|
The Term Exit Facility will have closed and cash from the proceeds of this facility will be available to pay the holders
of the allowed Senior Convertible Note claims as required by Article 3.03(e)(ii) of the Plan; |
|
|
(ii) |
|
The Bankruptcy Court will have entered an order, following a contingency hearing approving either (a) the reinstatement
treatment as set forth in the Plan, or (b) the new note exchange as set forth in the Plan; or |
|
|
(iii) |
|
If a requirement for a contingency hearing is waived by the holders of the Senior Convertible Notes, the Company will have reached
an agreement on the applicable treatment with the holders of the
Senior Convertible Notes. If a contingency hearing is called and the
Bankruptcy Court validates any objections by the trustee under the indenture for the Senior Convertible Notes or Holders
of Senior Convertible Note claims to confirmation of the Plan (whether these objections relate to the proposed treatment of the Senior
Convertible Note claims or other confirmation issues), the Bankruptcy Court will terminate the confirmation order. |
Surety
Update
The
Chubb Surety Agreement
The
Company is party to an Underwriting, Continuing Indemnity, and Security Agreement, dated January
14, 2005 (the Surety Agreement), with Chubb, which provides the provision of surety bonds to
support its contracts with certain customers.
In
connection with the Companys restructuring (See Part I, Item 2. Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Update on Financial Restructuring and
Subsequent Events), the Bankruptcy Court approved an interim order on February 15, 2006 granting
authority to enter into a postpetition financing agreement with Federal Insurance Company (the
Chubb DIP Agreement). The Chubb DIP Agreement provides Chubb, during the Companys Chapter 11 case, (i) in
its sole and absolute discretion to issue up to an aggregate of $48 million in new surety bonds,
with no more than $12 million in new surety bonds to be issued in any given month, and (ii) to give
permission for use of cash collateral in the form of proceeds of all contracts which Chubb had
issued surety bonds. The Company is being charged a bond premium of $25 per $1,000 of the contract price
related to any new surety bond. The Company provided $6 million in additional collateral in the form of cash
or letters of credit in installments of $1.5 million per month, to support the new surety bonds.
Pursuant to the Chubb DIP Agreement, the Company paid due diligence and facility fees of $500,000 each which
are included in reorganization items on the consolidated statement of operations.
Upon
emergence from Chapter 11, the Company expects to close into an exit bonding facility with the Chubb.
The exit bonding agreement provides Chubb in its sole and absolute discretion to issue up to an
aggregate of $70 million in new surety bonds, with no more than $10 million in new surety bonds to
be issued in any given month. The Company will pay a $1 million facility fee upon the closing into the
facility.
The SureTec DIP Bonding Facility
The
Company is party to a general agreement of indemnity dated September 21, 2005 and related
documents, with SureTec Insurance Company, which provides for the provision of surety bonds to
support the Companys contracts with certain of its customers.
The Bankruptcy Court approved an interim order on February 15, 2006 approving the assumption of
certain contracts with SureTec Insurance Company (the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility). The SureTec
DIP Bonding Facility provides SureTec, during the Companys Chapter 11 case, (i) in its sole and absolute
discretion and (ii) upon the Companys filing of a voluntary petition for bankruptcy, to issue up to an
aggregate of $10 million in surety bonds. Bonding in excess of $5 million is subject to SureTecs
receipt of additional collateral in the form of an additional irrevocable letter of credit from
BofA in the amount of $1.5 million. Pursuant to the SureTec DIP
Bonding Facility, the Company paid a fee of
$25,000. The SureTec DIP Bonding Facility is expected to remain in place with the same terms
subsequent to the Effective Date.
The Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility
The
Company is party to a general agreement of indemnity dated March 21, 2006 and related documents,
with Edmund C. Scarborough, Individual Surety, to supplement the bonding capacity under the Chubb
DIP Bonding Facility and the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility.
The Bankruptcy Court approved an order on March 10, 2006 approving debtor in possession surety
bonding facility with Edmund C. Scarborough, Individual Surety (the Scarborough DIP Bonding
Facility). Under the Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility, Scarborough has agreed to extend aggregate
bonding capacity not to exceed $100 million in additional bonding capacity with a limitation on
individual bonds of $15 million. Scarborough is an individual surety (as opposed to a corporate
surety, like Chubb or SureTec), and these bonds are not rated. However, the issuance of
Scarboroughs bonds to an oblige/contractor is backed by an instrument referred to as an
irrevocable trust receipt issued by First Mountain Bancorp as trustee for investors who pledge
assets to support the receipt and thus the bond. The bonds are also reinsured.
Scarboroughs obligation to issue new bonds is discretionary and the aggregate bonding is
subject to Scarboroughs receipt of an irrevocable letter of credit from SunTrust Bank in the
amount of $2.0 million to secure all of the Companys obligations to Scarborough; provided, however, upon
delivery of the letter of credit and payment of applicable bond premiums (estimated at 3.5% of the
face amount of each bond), Scarborough will issue bonds in the approximate amount of $23.8 million
covering the Companys backlog of existing and pending contracts/projects. Within 120 days of the letter of
credit issuance, the letter of credit will be cancelled in exchange for the sum of $2 million by
wire transfer to a trust account selected by Scarborough. BofA, as
the Companys debtor-in-possession working
capital lender, has a lien in the proceeds generated from the bonded contracts (the Proceeds).
BofA and Scarborough have entered into an intercreditor agreement. The Scarborough DIP Bonding
Facility is expected to remain in place with the same terms subsequent to the Effective Date.
Reorganization Items
Reorganization items refer to revenues, expenses (including professional fees), realized gains and
losses and provisions for losses that are realized or incurred in the bankruptcy proceedings. The
following table summarizes the components included in reorganization items on the consolidated
statements of operations for the six months ended March 31, 2006 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
Unamortized debt issuance costs (1) |
|
$ |
4,903 |
|
Unamortized debt discounts and other costs (2) |
|
|
539 |
|
Embedded derivative liabilities (3) |
|
|
(1,482 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Professional fees and other costs (4) |
|
|
8,151 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total reorganization items |
|
$ |
12,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Write off of unamortized debt issuance costs related to the allowed claims for
the senior subordinated notes and senior convertible notes. |
|
(2) |
|
Write off of unamortized debt discounts, premiums and other costs related to the
allowed claims for the senior subordinated notes and senior convertible notes. |
|
(3) |
|
Write off of embedded derivatives related to the allowed claim for the senior
convertible notes. |
|
(4) |
|
Costs for professional servicees including legal, financial advisory and related
services. |
Going Concern
The Companys
independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, included a
going concern modification in its audit opinion on the consolidated financial statements for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2005 included on Form 10-K as a result of its operating losses
during fiscal 2005 and the non-compliance with certain debt covenants subsequent to September 30,
2005. The
14
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the possible
future effects on the recoverability and classification of assets or the amounts and classification
of liabilities that may result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
As described above under Update on Financial
Restructuring, the Company has made substantial progress on
completing its financial restructuring and de-leveraging of the
balance sheet. The Company expects to emerge from bankruptcy in mid
May with adequate exit financing in place.
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
For a description of these policies, refer to Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements included in the Companys annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
September 30, 2005.
As a result of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, the Company prepares its financial statements
in accordance with SOP 90-7. SOP 90-7 requires the Company to, among other things, (1) identify
transactions that are directly associated with the bankruptcy proceedings from those events that
occur during the normal course of business, (2) identify pre-petition liabilities subject to
compromise from those that are not subject to compromise or
post-petition liabilities, and (3) apply
fresh start accounting rules upon emergence from
bankruptcy which is expected to be in May
2006.
REVENUE RECOGNITION
As of March 31, 2005 and 2006, costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on
uncompleted contracts include unbilled revenues for certain significant claims totaling
approximately $3.4 million and $3.5 million, respectively. In addition, accounts receivable as of
March 31, 2005 and 2006 related to these claims is approximately $1.9 million and $0.2 million,
respectively. Included in the claims amount at March 31, 2006 is
approximately $2.5 million related to a single contract at one of our subsidiaries.
This claim relates to a dispute with the customer over defects in the customers design
specifications. The Company does not believe that it is required to remediate defects in the
customers design specifications. If it is later determined that it is required to remediate such
defects, the Company could incur additional costs. Some or all of the costs may not be
recoverable.
SUBSIDIARY GUARANTIES
All of the Companys operating income and cash flows are generated by its 100% owned
subsidiaries, which are the subsidiary guarantors of the Companys outstanding 9 3/8% senior
subordinated notes due 2009 (the Senior Subordinated Notes). The Company is structured as a
holding company and substantially all of its assets and operations are held by its subsidiaries.
There are currently no significant restrictions on the Companys ability to obtain funds from its
subsidiaries by dividend or loan. The parent holding companys independent assets, revenues, income
before taxes and operating cash flows are less than 3% of the consolidated total. The separate
financial statements of the subsidiary guarantors are not included herein because (i) the
subsidiary guarantors are all of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of the Company; (ii) the
subsidiary guarantors have fully and unconditionally, jointly and severally guaranteed the Senior
Subordinated Notes; and (iii) the aggregate assets, liabilities, earnings and equity of the
subsidiary guarantors is substantially equivalent to the assets, liabilities, earnings and equity
of the Company on a consolidated basis. As a result, the presentation of separate financial
statements and other disclosures concerning the subsidiary guarantors is not deemed material.
15
USE OF ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States requires the use of estimates and assumptions by management in
determining the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosures of contingent liabilities
at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during
the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Estimates are primarily
used in the Companys revenue recognition of construction in progress, fair value assumptions in
analyzing goodwill and long-lived asset impairments, allowance for doubtful accounts receivable,
realizability of deferred tax assets and self-insured claims liabilities.
SEASONALITY AND QUARTERLY FLUCTUATIONS
The results of the Companys operations, primarily from residential construction, are
seasonal, dependent upon weather trends, with higher revenues typically generated during the spring
and summer and lower revenues during the fall and winter. The commercial and industrial aspect of
its business is less subject to seasonal trends, as this work generally is performed inside
structures protected from the weather. The Companys service business is generally not affected by
seasonality. In addition, the construction industry has historically been highly cyclical. The
Companys volume of business may be adversely affected by declines in construction projects
resulting from adverse regional or national economic conditions. Quarterly results may also be
materially affected by gross margins for both bid and negotiated projects, the timing of new
construction projects and any acquisitions. Accordingly, operating results for any fiscal period
are not necessarily indicative of results that may be achieved for any subsequent fiscal period.
STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
On October 1, 2005, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123
(revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, (SFAS 123(R)) which requires the measurement and
recognition of compensation expense for all share-based payment awards made to employees and
directors including employee stock options and employee stock purchases related to the employee
stock purchase plan (employee stock purchases) based on estimated fair values. SFAS 123(R)
supersedes the Companys previous accounting under Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (APB 25) for periods beginning in fiscal 2006. In
March 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107 (SAB
107) relating to SFAS 123(R). The Company has applied the provisions of SAB 107 in its adoption of
SFAS 123(R).
The Company adopted SFAS 123(R) using the modified prospective transition method, which
requires the application of the accounting standard as of October 1, 2005, the first day of the
Companys fiscal year 2006. The Companys consolidated financial statements as of and for the three
and six months ended March 31, 2006 reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R). In accordance with the
modified prospective transition method, the Companys consolidated financial statements for prior
periods have not been restated to reflect, and do not include, the impact of SFAS 123(R).
Stock-based compensation expense recognized under SFAS 123(R) for the three and six months ended
March 31, 2006 was $0.2 million and $0.6 million, respectively, before tax, which consisted of
stock-based compensation expense related to employee stock options and restricted stock grants (see
Note 6). There was no stock-based compensation expense related to employee stock options recognized
during the three and six months ended March 31, 2005. Additionally, the Company recorded no
compensation expense associated with the Employee Stock Purchase Plan which is defined as a
non-compensatory plan pursuant to Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 44 (See
Note 8).
SFAS 123(R) requires companies to estimate the fair value of share-based payment awards on the
date of grant using an option-pricing model. The value of the portion of the award that is
ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense over the requisite service periods in the
Companys consolidated statement of operations. Prior to the adoption of SFAS 123(R), the Company
accounted for stock-based awards to employees and directors using the intrinsic value method in
accordance with APB 25 as allowed under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS 123). Under the intrinsic value method, no
stock-based compensation expense had been recognized in the Companys consolidated statement of
operations because the exercise price of the Companys stock options granted to employees and
directors equaled the fair market value of the underlying stock at the date of grant.
Stock-based compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the value of the
portion of share-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period.
Stock-based compensation expense recognized in the Companys consolidated statement of operations
for the first quarter of fiscal 2006 included compensation expense for share-based payment awards
granted prior to, but not yet vested as of September 30, 2005 based on the grant date fair value
estimated in accordance with the pro forma provisions of SFAS 123 and compensation expense for the
share-based payment awards granted subsequent to September 30, 2005 based on the grant date fair
value estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 123(R). In conjunction with the adoption
of SFAS 123(R), the Company changed its method of attributing the value of stock-based compensation
expense related to stock options from the accelerated multiple-option approach to the straight-line
single option method. Compensation
16
expense for all share-based payment awards granted on or prior to September 30, 2005 will
continue to be recognized using the accelerated multiple-option approach while compensation expense
for all share-based payment awards granted subsequent to September 30, 2005 is recognized using the
straight-line single-option method. As stock-based compensation expense recognized in the
consolidated statement of operations for the three and six months ended March 31, 2006 is based on
awards ultimately expected to vest, it has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. SFAS 123(R)
requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent
periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. In the Companys pro forma information
required under SFAS 123 for the periods prior to fiscal 2006, the Company accounted for forfeitures
as they occurred. Furthermore, under the modified prospective transition method, SFAS 123 (R)
requires that compensation costs recognized prior to adoption be reversed to the extent of
estimated forfeitures and recorded as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle. The
effect of this reversal was immaterial for the three months ended December 31, 2005.
The Companys determination of fair value of share-based payment awards on the date of grant
using an option-pricing model is affected by the Companys stock price as well as assumptions
regarding a number of highly complex and subjective variables. These variables include, but are not
limited to the Companys expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards, and actual
and projected employee stock option exercise behaviors. Option-pricing models were developed for
use in estimating the value of traded options that have no vesting or hedging restrictions and are
fully transferable. Because the Companys employee stock options have certain characteristics that
are significantly different from traded options, and because changes in the subjective assumptions
can materially affect the estimated value, in managements opinion, the existing valuation models
may not provide an accurate measure of the fair value of the Companys employee stock options.
Although the fair value of employee stock options is determined in accordance with SFAS 123(R) and
SAB 107 using an option-pricing model, that value may not be indicative of the fair value observed
in a willing buyer/willing seller market transaction.
On November 10, 2005, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Staff
Position No. FAS 123(R)-3 Transition Election Related to Accounting for Tax Effects of Share-Based
Payment Awards. The Company has elected to adopt the alternative transition method provided in the
FASB Staff Position for calculating the tax effects of stock-based compensation pursuant to SFAS
123(R). The alternative transition method includes simplified methods to establish the beginning
balance of the additional paid-in capital pool (APIC pool) related to the tax effects of employee
stock-based compensation, and to determine the subsequent impact on the APIC pool and Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows of the tax effects of employee stock-based compensation awards that are
outstanding upon adoption of SFAS 123(R).
Pro Forma Information Under SFAS 123 for Periods Prior to Fiscal 2006
The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share assuming the
compensation costs for the Companys stock option and purchase plans had been determined using the
fair value method at the grant dates amortized on a pro rata basis over the vesting period as
required under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation for the three and six months ended March 31, 2005 (in thousands, except
for per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months |
|
|
Six months |
|
|
|
ended |
|
|
ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Net loss, as reported |
|
$ |
(13,226 |
) |
|
$ |
(30,834 |
) |
Add: Stock-based employee compensation
expense included in reported net
income, net of related tax effects |
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
629 |
|
Deduct: Total stock-based employee
compensation expense determined under
fair value based method for all
awards, net of related tax effects |
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
838 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net loss for SFAS No. 123 |
|
$ |
(13,473 |
) |
|
$ |
(31,043 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic as reported |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
Basic pro forma for SFAS No. 123 |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
Earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted as reported |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
Diluted pro forma for SFAS No. 123 |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
2. BUSINESS DIVESTITURES
Discontinued Operations
17
During October 2004, the Company announced plans to begin a strategic alignment including
the planned divestiture of certain commercial segments, underperforming subsidiaries and those that
rely heavily on surety bonding for obtaining a majority of their projects. This plan included
management actively seeking potential buyers of the selected companies among other activities
necessary to complete the sales. Management expected to be able to sell all considered subsidiaries
at their respective fair market values at the date of sale determined by a reasonably accepted
valuation method. The discontinued operations disclosures include only those identified
subsidiaries qualifying for discontinued operations treatment for the periods presented.
In December 2005, the Company completed its previously announced divestiture program. Since
its start in October 2004, the Company sold 14 units, primarily operating in the commercial and
industrial markets, for total consideration to date of $61.2 million and has closed two units.
These 16 units had combined net revenues of $154.1 million and an operating loss of $12.9 million
in fiscal 2005.
During the six months ended March 31, 2005, the Company completed the sale of seven business
units as part of the plan described above. During the quarter ended December 31, 2005, the Company
completed the sale of the last business unit under the plan described above. These sales generated
a pre-tax gain (loss) of $(0.2) million and $0.5 million, respectively, and have been recognized in
the six months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006 as discontinued operations in the respective
consolidated statements of operations. All prior year amounts have been reclassified as
appropriate. Depreciation expense associated with discontinued operations for the three and six months ended
March 31, 2005 was $0.4 million and $0.9 million, respectively.
There were no depreciation expense for the three and six months ended March 31, 2006.
Summarized financial data
for discontinued operations are outlined below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
Revenues |
|
$ |
43,071 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
101,202 |
|
|
$ |
5,464 |
|
Gross profit |
|
|
4,477 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
7,719 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
Pretax income (loss) |
|
|
(2,961 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(10,514 |
) |
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of |
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
$ |
8,456 |
|
|
$ |
159 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
464 |
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
900 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
3,421 |
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
768 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other noncurrent assets |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
14,017 |
|
|
$ |
258 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
$ |
3,411 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
1,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
4,825 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets |
|
$ |
9,192 |
|
|
$ |
207 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill Impairment Associated with Discontinued Operations
During the three and six months ended March 31, 2005, the Company recorded a goodwill
impairment charge of $3.4 million and $8.6 million, respectively, related to the identification of
certain subsidiaries for disposal by sale prior to the end of the fiscal second quarter ended March
31, 2005. This impairment charge is included in the net loss from discontinued operations caption
in the statement of operations. The impairment charge was calculated based on the assessed fair
value ascribed to the subsidiaries identified for disposal less the net book value of the assets
related to those subsidiaries. The fair value utilized in this calculation was the same as that
discussed in the following paragraph addressing the impairment of discontinued operations. Where
the fair value did not exceed the net book value of a subsidiary including goodwill, the goodwill
balance was impaired as appropriate. This impairment of goodwill was determined prior to the
disclosed calculation of any additional impairment of the identified subsidiary disposal group as
required pursuant to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. There was no goodwill impairment during the three and
six months ended March 31, 2006 related to discontinued operations.
18
Impairment Associated with Discontinued Operations
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, during the three and six months ended March 31, 2005,
the Company recorded an impairment charge of $0.3 million and $1.0 million, respectively, related
to the identification of certain subsidiaries for disposal by sale prior to the end of the fiscal
2005. The impairment was calculated as the difference between the fair values, less costs to sell,
assessed at the date the companies individually were selected for sale and their respective net
book values after all other adjustments had been recorded. In determining the fair value for the
disposed assets and liabilities, the Company evaluated past performance, expected future
performance, management issues, bonding requirements, market forecasts and the carrying value of
such assets and liabilities and received a fairness opinion from an independent consulting and
investment banking firm in support of this determination for certain of the subsidiaries included
in the assessment. The impairment charge was related to subsidiaries included in the commercial and
industrial segment of the Companys operations (see Note 5). There was no impairment charge for
long-lived assets during the three and six months ended March 31, 2006 related to discontinued
operations.
Exit of Certain Operations
As
a result of disappointing operating results, the Board of Directors directed senior management to
develop alternatives with respect to certain underperforming subsidiaries.
These subsidiaries are included in the Companys commercial and industrial segment.
On March 28, 2006,
senior management committed to an exit plan (the Exit Plan) with respect to those underperforming
subsidiaries. The Exit Plan commits to a shut-down or consolidation of the operations of these
subsidiaries or the sale or other disposition of the subsidiaries, whichever comes earlier.
As a result of the Exit Plan, the Company expects to incur total expenditures in the estimated range of
$5.9 million to $11.1 million, which include the following:
|
|
|
An estimated $2.3 million to $5.4 million for direct labor and material costs; |
|
|
|
|
An estimated $1.3 million to $1.5 million for lease exit and other related costs; and |
|
|
|
|
An estimated $2.3 million to $4.2 million for severance, retention and other employment-related costs. |
As a result of inherent uncertainty in the Exit Plan and in monetizing approximately $30.6 million in net working
capital related to these subsidiaries, the Company could experience
potential losses to its working capital. These losses could range
from $8.1 million to $10.0 million. At March 31, 2006,
the Company has recorded adequate reserves to reflect the estimated net realizable value of the working capital, however, subsequent events
such as loss of personnel or specific customer knowledge, may impact the ability to
collect. During the three months ended March 31, 2006, we incurred approximately $4.5 million of
incremental costs related to the Exit Plan consisting of
$1.5 million in contract labor, $0.2 million
in severance or retention costs, $0.2 million in lease exit
costs, and $2.6 million in allowances related to accounts receivables, inventory and costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts. These costs are included in income
(loss) from continuing operations.
In
its assessment of the estimated net realizable value related to accounts
receivable at these subsidiaries, the Company increased its general
allowance for doubtful accounts based on considering various factors
including the fact that these businesses were being shut down and the
associated increased risk of collection and the age of the
receivables. This approach is a departure from the Companys
normal practice of carrying general allowances for bad debt based on
a minimum fixed percent of total receivables. The Company believes
this approach is reasonable and prudent given the circumstances.
The Exit Plan is expected to be substantially completed by September 30, 2006. During the
execution of the Exit Plan, the Company expects to continue to pay its vendors and suppliers in the ordinary
course of business and to complete all projects that are currently in progress.
Revenue for these subsidiaries totaled $172.8 million for fiscal year 2005, representing 16%
of our total revenues for fiscal 2005. Revenue for these subsidiaries totaled $18.3 million and
$50.9 million for the three and six months ended March 31, 2006 and $53.9 million and $113.8
million for the three and six months ended March 31, 2005.
3. DEBT
Pre-Petition Chapter 11 Debt Structure
As
further described in Part I, Item 2. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Update on Financial Restructuring and Subsequent
Events, on February 14, 2006, the Debtors filed the
Chapter 11 Cases. As of the Commencement Date, the Companys indebtedness consisted of the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, Senior Convertible Notes and Senior Subordinated Notes.
Credit Facility
On August 1, 2005, the Company entered into a three-year $80 million asset-based revolving
credit facility (the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) with Bank of America, N.A., as administrative
agent (BofA). The Pre-Petition Credit Facility replaced the Companys existing revolving credit
facility with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., which was scheduled to mature on August 31, 2005.
19
The Company and each of its operating subsidiaries are co-borrowers and are jointly and
severally liable for all obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The Companys other
subsidiaries have guaranteed all of the obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The
obligations of the borrowers and the guarantors are secured by a pledge of substantially all of the
assets of the Company and its subsidiaries, excluding any assets pledged to secure surety bonds
procured by the Company and its subsidiaries in connection with their operations.
The Pre-Petition Credit Facility allowed the Company and the other borrowers to obtain
revolving credit loans and provided for the issuance of letters of credit. The amount available at
any time under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility for revolving credit loans or the issuance of
letters of credit was determined by a borrowing base calculated as a percentage of accounts
receivable, inventory and equipment. The borrowings were limited to $80 million.
The Company amended the Pre-Petition Credit Facility to provide relief for the fixed charge
covenant for the months of August and September 2005, and eliminated the requirement for a fixed
charge coverage test to be performed in September and October 2005. The second amendment obtained
limited availability under the facility by requiring the Company to have at least $12.0 million in
excess funds availability at all times.
On January 3, 2006, the Company entered into a further amendment, effective December 30, 2005,
to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The amendment eliminated the fixed charge coverage test for
the period ending November 30, 2005 and provided that the test for the period ending December 31,
2005 would not be made until the delivery on or before January 16, 2006 of financial statements
covering such period. The amendment further provided a limited waiver of any event of default that
would otherwise exist with respect to the audited annual financial statements for the period ending
September 30, 2005. Subsequent amendments further extended the delivery date for financial
statements covering the periods ending December 31, 2005 to January 26, 2006. These amendments
required the payments of fees upon their execution. These fees were capitalized as deferred
financing costs to be amortized over the life of the facility.
As of January 26, 2006, the Company failed to meet the fixed charge coverage test for the
period ending December 31, 2005, constituting an event of default under the Pre-Petition Credit
Facility. Additionally, the Company was in default with respect to the pledge of its ownership
interest in EnerTech Capital Partners II L.P. to BofA as collateral under the Pre-Petition Credit
Facility. By reason of the existence of these defaults, BofA did not have any obligation to make
additional extensions of credit under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility and had full legal right to
exercise its rights and remedies under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility and related agreements.
On January 27, 2006, the Company entered into a forbearance agreement (Forbearance
Agreement) with BofA in connection with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The Forbearance
Agreement provided for BofAs forbearance from exercising its rights and remedies under the
Pre-Petition Credit Facility and related agreements from January 27, 2006 through the earliest to
occur of (i) 5:00 p.m. CST on February 28, 2006 or (ii) the date that any Forbearance Default (as
defined in the Forbearance Agreement) occurred. Notwithstanding the forbearance, on January 26,
2006, BofA sent a blockage notice to the senior subordinated notes indenture trustee preventing
any payments from being made on such notes. Lastly, under the Forbearance Agreement, BofA had no
obligation to make any loans or otherwise extend any credit to the Company under the Pre-Petition
Credit Facility. Any agreement by BofA to make any loans or otherwise extend any further credit was
in the sole discretion of BofA.
Capitalized terms used but not defined under this heading have the meaning set forth in the
Loan and Security Agreement dated as of August 1, 2005, and filed as exhibit 10.1 to the Form 8-K
dated August 4, 2005.
Senior Convertible Notes (subject to compromise)
On November 24, 2004, (the Issue Date) the Company entered into a purchase agreement for a
private placement of $36.0 million aggregate principal amount of Senior Convertible Notes.
Investors in the notes agreed to a purchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the
notes. The notes require payment of interest semi-annually in arrears at an annual rate of 6.5%,
have a stated maturity of November 1, 2014, constitute senior unsecured obligations, are guaranteed
on a senior unsecured basis by the Companys significant domestic subsidiaries, and are convertible
at the option of the holder under certain circumstances into shares of the Companys common stock
at an initial conversion price of $3.25 per share, subject to adjustment. On November 1, 2008, the
Company has the option to redeem the Senior Convertible Notes, subject to certain conditions.
The net proceeds from the sale of the notes were used to prepay a portion of the Companys
senior secured credit facility and for general corporate purposes. The notes, the guarantees and
the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the notes to be offered have not been
registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any state securities laws and, unless
so registered, the securities may not be offered or sold in the United States except pursuant to an
exemption from, or in a transaction not subject to, the registration requirements of the Securities
Act and applicable state securities laws.
We were required to file a registration statement (the Shelf Registration Statement)
with the SEC within 180 days of the issue date of the Issue Date. In addition, we have to
ensure that the Shelf Registration Statement be declared effective within 360 days of the Issue
Date. Failure to do either of these would result in liquidated damages to be paid to the
noteholders in the amount of 0.25% per annum for the first 90 days and 0.50% per annum thereafter.
In addition, if any of the notes are ever surrendered for repurchase and not so paid, the notes
will accrue default interest of 1.0% per annum until they are paid or duly provided for. We did not cause the Shelf Registration Statement to become effective by November 23, 2005 and
therefore began incurring liquidated damages.
On February 24, 2005 and following shareholder approval, the Company sold $14 million in
principal of its Series B 6.5% Senior Convertible Notes due 2014, pursuant to separate option
exercises by the holders of the aforementioned $36 million aggregate principal amount of Senior
Convertible Notes issued by the Company in an initial private placement on November 24, 2004.
A default under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, the DIP Credit Facility or the Senior Subordinated
Notes resulting in acceleration that is not cured within 30 days is also a cross default under the
Senior Convertible Notes. In addition, other events of default under the Senior Convertible Notes
indenture include, but are not limited to, a change of control, the delisting of the Companys
stock from a national exchange or the commencement of a bankruptcy proceeding.
The Senior Convertible Notes are a hybrid instrument comprised of two components: (1) a debt
instrument and (2) certain embedded derivatives. The embedded derivatives include a redemption
premium and a make-whole provision. In accordance with the guidance that Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 133, as amended, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, (SFAS 133) and Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 00-19, Accounting for Derivative
Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock (EITF 00-19) provide, the embedded
derivatives must be removed from the debt host and accounted for separately as a derivative
instrument. These derivative instruments were marked-to-market each reporting period.
During the three months ending December 31, 2004, the Company was required to also value the
portion of the Senior Convertible Notes that would settle in cash because of shareholder approval
of the Senior Convertible Notes had not yet been obtained. The calculation of the fair value of the
conversion option was performed utilizing the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following
assumptions effective at the three months ending December 31, 2004: expected dividend yield of
0.00%, expected stock price volatility of 40.00%, weighted average risk free interest rate ranging
from 3.67% to 4.15% for four to ten years, respectively, and an expected term of four to ten years.
The valuation of the other embedded derivatives was derived by other valuation methods, including
present value measures and binomial models. The initial value of this derivative at December 31,
2004 was $1.4 million and the value at December 31, 2004 was $4.0 million, and consequently, a $2.6
million mark to market loss was recorded. The value of this derivative immediately prior to the
affirmation shareholder vote was $2.0 million and accordingly, the Company recorded a mark to market
gain of $2.0 million during the three months ended March 31, 2005 for a net mark to market loss of
$0.6 million during the six months ended March 31, 2005. There have been no mark to market gain or
losses during the six months ended March 31, 2006. For the periods ending March 31, 2005 and March
31, 2006, the fair value of the two remaining derivatives was $1.6 million and $1.5 million
respectively. Additionally, at March 31, 2005 the Company recorded a net discount of $0.8 million,
which was being amortized over the remaining term of the Senior Convertible Notes.
In accordance with SOP 90-7, Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the
Bankruptcy Code, the Senior Convertible Notes are an allowable claim per the Court Order dated
March 17, 2006. As a result, the Company wrote off unamortized deferred financing costs of $2.7
million, derivative liabilities of $1.5 million and net
discounts of $0.7 million to reorganization
items on the Consolidated Statements of Operations for a
net pre-tax impact of $1.9 million.
Repayment Notice from Senior Convertible Notes
On January 19, 2006, the holders of the outstanding Series A and Series B 6.5% Senior
Convertible Notes, delivered written notice (the Notices) to the Company alleging that a
Termination of Trading constituted a Fundamental Change, each as defined under the indenture
dated as of November 24, 2004 (the Indenture). In accordance with the Indenture, a Termination of
Trading is deemed to have occurred if the Companys common stock, into which the Senior Convertible
Notes are convertible, is neither listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange (the NYSE)
or the American Stock Exchange nor approved for listing on the Nasdaq National Market or the Nasdaq
SmallCap Market, and no American Depositary Shares or similar instruments for such common stock are
so listed or approved for listing in the United States.
A Termination of Trading occurred with respect to the Senior Convertible Notes when the
Company was notified on December 15, 2005 that its common stock had been suspended from trading on
the NYSE. This constituted an Event of Default under the Indenture. The Company is, therefore,
required to repurchase the Senior Convertible Notes in cash at a purchase price equal to 100% of
the principal amount of the Senior Convertible Notes plus accrued and unpaid interest and
Liquidated Damages (as defined in the Indenture).
The amount due under the Senior Convertible Notes, including the principal plus accrued and
unpaid interest and Liquidated Damages, is approximately $51.8 million. The holders elected to
exercise their repurchase rights following a Termination of Trading under the terms of the
Indenture.
As discussed below under the caption Term Exit Facility, the Company intends to refinance the
Senior Convertible Notes as part of its Chapter 11 plan of reorganization.
Senior Subordinated Notes (subject to compromise)
The Company has outstanding two different series of senior subordinated notes with similar
terms. The notes bear interest at 9 3/8% and will mature on February 1, 2009. Interest
is paid in arrears on the notes on February 1 and August 1 of each year. The notes are unsecured
senior subordinated obligations and are subordinated to all other existing and future senior
indebtedness. The notes are guaranteed on a senior subordinated basis by all the Companys
subsidiaries. Under the terms of the notes, the Company is required to comply with various
affirmative and negative covenants including (1) restrictions on additional indebtedness, and (2)
restrictions on liens, guarantees and dividends. At March 31, 2006, the Company had $172.9 million
in outstanding senior subordinated notes. An interest payment of approximately $8.1 million on the
Senior Subordinated Notes was due on February 1, 2006. The Company did not make this interest
payment. Under the indenture for the Senior Subordinated Notes, this non-payment did not become an
Event of Default until 30 days after the due date for such payment. The Company filed for Chapter
11 reorganization on February 14, 2006 in order to be able to exchange the entire amount of its
Senior Subordinated Notes for equity of Reorganized IES. At
March 31, 2006, the Company has $8.8 million recorded for accrued interest related to the senior subordinated notes which represents interest
owed through February 14, 2006, the Commencement Date, as allowed by the claim. This excludes
approximately $2.0 million of disallowed contractual interest from the Commencement Date to March
31, 2006.
In accordance with SOP 90-7, Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the
Bankruptcy Code, the Senior Subordinated Notes were an allowable claim per the Court Order dated
March 17, 2006. As a result, the Company wrote off unamortized
deferred financing costs of $2.2
million, net discount of $1.5 million, and the unamortized gain on the terminated interest rate
swaps, previously disclosed, of $1.7 million to reorganization costs on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations for a net pre-tax impact of $2.0 million.
Post-Petition Chapter 11 Debt Structure
As
a result of the Debtors commencement of the Chapter 11
Cases, the Company was required
to obtain debtor-in-possession financing. During the pendency of the
Chapter 11 Cases, the Company obtained the DIP Credit Facility.
Debtor-in-Possession Financing
On
February 14, 2006, in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases, the
Company entered into the debtor-in-possession loan and security
agreement (the DIP Credit Facility) with B of A and the
other lenders party thereto (the DIP Lenders). The DIP
Credit Facility was approved by the bankruptcy Court on an interim
basis on February 15, 2006, and on a final basis on March 10, 2006.
The DIP Credit Facility provides for an aggregate financing of $80 million during the Chapter 11
case, consisting of a revolving credit facility of up to $80 million, with a $72 million sub-limit
for letters of credit. All letters of credit and other obligations outstanding under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility constitute obligations and liabilities under the DIP Credit Facility. Accordingly, the Company wrote off
approximately $3.8 million in unamortized deferred financing costs related to the Pre-Petition
Credit Facility during the quarter ended March 31, 2006.
20
The Company has utilized the DIP Credit Facility to issue
letters of credit for (i) certain of the Companys insurance programs; (ii) its surety programs;
and (iii) certain jobs. The remainder of the proceeds of the DIP Credit Facility will be used for general
corporate purposes.
Loans under the DIP Credit
Facility bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5% or the base rate plus 1.5%
as further discussed therein. The DIP Credit Facility matures on the earliest to occur of (i)
the expiration of a period of 12 months from the closing date of the DIP Credit Facility, (ii) 45 days
after the commencement of the Chapter 11 cases if a final order approving the DIP Credit Facility has not
been entered by the Bankruptcy Court, (iii) the effective date of an approved plan of
reorganization or (iv) termination of the DIP Credit Facility.
The DIP Credit Facility is entitled to super-priority administrative expense status pursuant to
Section 364(c)(1) of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the Bankruptcy Code) and is
secured by a first priority security interest, subject to certain permitted liens, in the
collateral. The DIP Credit Facility contemplates customary affirmative, negative and financial covenants
that impose substantial restrictions on the Companys financial and business operations, including
the ability to, among other things, incur or secure other debt, make loans, make investments, sell
assets, pay dividends or repurchase stock.
The financial covenants require the Company to:
|
|
|
Maintain a Days Payable Outstanding not to exceed 25 days; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a Days Sales Outstanding of no more than 85 days; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a minimum cumulative earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation,
amortization and restructuring expenses beginning with the period ended March
2006; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a minimum rolling four-week total cash receipts, based on a
percentage of a pre-determined budget; |
|
|
|
|
Ensure that cash disbursements do not exceed a pre-determined budget by more
than the allowed percentages on both an aggregate basis and on a line item basis
unless otherwise allowed by BofA; and |
|
|
|
|
Maintain cash collateral in a cash collateral account in at least the amounts
specified in the credit agreement. |
The DIP Credit Facility contains events of default customary for debtor-in-possession financings,
including cross defaults and certain change of control events. Upon the occurrence of an event of
default, the outstanding obligations under the DIP Credit Facility may be accelerated and become due and
payable immediately.
At
March 31, 2006, we had no outstanding borrowings under the
DIP Credit Facility, $59.1 million of letters of credit
outstanding, and available capacity under the DIP Credit Facility of
$20.0 million.
The Company was in compliance
with all the covenants under the DIP Credit Facility at March 31, 2006.
On May 10, 2006, the Company delivered its compliance certificate to BofA and was out of
compliance with the minimum cumulative EBITDA covenant. The Company expects to re-finance the DIP
Credit Facility upon emerging from bankruptcy in mid-May. See further discussion below under the caption
The Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Company
capitalized $1.4 million in debt issuance costs during the quarter related to the
DIP Credit Facility, which will be amortized to interest expense over the expected life of the facility.
Amortization during the quarter ended March 31, 2006 was approximately $0.5 million.
Anticipated Post-Chapter 11 Debt Structure
As
further described in Part I, Item 2. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operation, on April 26, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court entered the Confirmation Order approving the Plan.
As
a result, the Debtors anticipated that, following consummation of the
transactions contemplated by the Plan, the Companys long-term debt will be approximately $61.3 million, comprised of approximately $53 million borrowed and outstanding under the Term Exit Credit Facility and approximately $8.3 million borrowed and outstanding under the Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Revolving Exit Credit Facility
In connection with the Companys emergence from Chapter 11, the Company expects to enter into a revolving credit facility (the Exit Credit Facility). On February 10, 2006,
the Company accepted a financing commitment letter (the Exit Credit
Commitment Letter) from BofA for a senior secured
post-confirmation Revolving Exit Credit Facility. The Exit Credit Commitment Letter states that BofA and any other lenders
that choose to participate (collectively, the Exit Credit
Lenders) will provide a Revolving Exit Credit
Facility in the aggregate amount of up to $80 million, with a $72 million sub-limit for letters of
credit, for the purpose of refinancing the DIP Credit Facility and to provide letters of credit and
financing subsequent to confirmation of a plan of reorganization. BofA has committed to lend up to
$40 million of the Exit Credit Facility and will seek to syndicate the remaining amount.
Loans
under the Revolving Exit Credit Facility will bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5% or the base rate
plus 1.5% on the terms set in the Revolving Exit Credit Commitment Letter. In addition, the Company will be
charged monthly in arrears (i) an unused line fee of either 0.5% or 0.375% depending on the
utilization of the credit line, (ii) a letter of credit fee equal to the applicable per annum LIBOR
margin times
21
the amount of all outstanding letters of credit and (iii) certain other fees and charges as
specified in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter.
The Revolving Exit Credit Facility will mature two years after the closing date. The Revolving Exit Credit
Facility will be secured by first priority liens on substantially all of the Companys existing and
future acquired assets, exclusive of collateral provided to sureties, on the terms set in the Exit
Credit Commitment Letter. The Revolving Exit Credit Facility will
contain customary affirmative, negative and
financial covenants binding the Company as described in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter.
The Exit Credit Commitment Letter provides that the Exit Credit Lenders are obligated to
provide the Revolving Exit Credit Facility only upon satisfaction of certain conditions, including, without
limitation (i) the completion of definitive documentation and other documents as may be requested
by BofA, (ii) the absence of a material adverse change in business, assets, liabilities, financial
condition, business prospects or results of operation, other than the Chapter 11 Cases, since the
date of the Exit Credit Commitment Letter, (iii) BofAs receipt of satisfactory financial
projections and financial statements, (iv) BofAs satisfaction with the relative rights of BofA and
the Companys sureties, including agreements with its sureties for the issuance of up to $75
million in bonds, and (v) BofAs satisfaction with the Debtors plan of reorganization, including
the treatment of certain creditors, and the order confirming the plan.
The Exit Credit Commitment Letter is filed as Exhibit 10.3 on Form 8-K dated February 15, 2006
and the summary of certain terms and conditions of the Revolving Exit Credit Facility is qualified in its
entirety by reference to this exhibit.
22
Term Exit Credit Facility
In connection with the Companys emergence from Chapter 11, the Company expects to enter into a
term loan (the Term Exit Credit Facility) for the purpose of refinancing the Senior Convertible Notes.
On February 10, 2006, the Company accepted a commitment letter (the Term Exit Commitment
Letter) from Eton Park Fund, L.P. and an affiliate and Flagg Street Partners LP and affiliates
(collectively, the Term Exit Lenders) for a senior
secured term loan in the amount of $53 million.
The loan under the
Term Exit Credit Facility will bear interest at 10.75% per annum, subject to
adjustment as set forth in the Term Exit Commitment Letter. Interest will be payable in cash, in
arrears, quarterly, provided that, in the sole discretion of the Company, until the third
anniversary of the closing date, the Company shall have the option to direct that interest be paid
by capitalizing such interest as additional loans under the Term Exit
Credit Facility. Subject to the Term
Exit Lenders right to demand repayment in full on or after the fourth anniversary of the closing
date, the Term Exit Credit Facility will mature on the seventh anniversary of the closing date at which
23
time all principal will become
due. The Term Exit Credit Facility contemplates customary affirmative,
negative and financial covenants binding on the Company, including, without limitation, a
limitation on indebtedness of $90 million under the Revolving Exit Credit Facility with a sublimit on funded
outstanding indebtedness of $25 million, as more fully described in the Term Exit Commitment
Letter. Additionally, the Term Exit Credit Facility includes provisions for optional and mandatory
prepayments on the conditions set forth in the Term Exit Commitment Letter. The Term Exit Credit Facility
will be secured by substantially the same collateral as the Revolving Exit Credit Facility, and will be
second in priority to the liens securing the Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Term Exit Commitment Letter provides that the Term Exit Lenders are obligated to provide
the Term Exit Credit Facility only upon the satisfaction of certain conditions, including, without
limitation, completion of definitive documentation and other ancillary documents as may be
requested by the Term Exit Lenders, the Term Exit Lenders satisfaction with the final confirmation
order confirming the Debtors plan of reorganization and the occurrence of the effective date of the
plan, the Companys repayment of the DIP Credit Facility or its conversion into the Revolving Exit Credit Facility,
delivery of interim financial statements as well as any financial documentation delivered to BofA,
and the Term Exit Lenders satisfaction with the terms
and conditions of the Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Term Exit Commitment Letter is filed as Exhibit 10.4 to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
February 15, 2006 and the foregoing summary of certain terms and conditions of the Term Exit
Credit Facility is qualified in its entirety by reference to such exhibit.
In
accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) 86-30,
Classifications of Obligations When a Violation is Waived by the
Creditor, the Company has classified the long-term portion of
their senior convertible notes and senior subordinated notes as
current liabilities on the balance sheet due to certain defaults
thereunder. Even if the Company emerges from bankruptcy, which is
expected in mid-May, the Company will still have substantial
indebtedness under its revolving and term exit credit facilities.
Debt consists of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes, due February 1, 2009, bearing
interest at 9.375% with an effective interest rate of 7.5% |
|
$ |
62,885 |
|
|
$ |
62,885 |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes, due February 1, 2009, bearing
interest at 9.375% with an effective interest rate of 7.5% |
|
|
110,000 |
|
|
|
110,000 |
|
Senior Convertible Notes, due November 1, 2014, bearing
interest at 6.5% with an effective interest rate of 6.5% |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
Other |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt |
|
|
222,944 |
|
|
|
223,052 |
|
LessShort-term debt and current maturities of long-term debt |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
LessSenior Convertible Notes |
|
|
(50,000 |
) |
|
|
(50,000 |
) |
LessSenior Subordinated Notes |
|
|
(172,885 |
) |
|
|
(172,885 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt |
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
4. EARNINGS PER SHARE
The following table reconciles the numerators and denominators of the basic and diluted
earnings per share for the six and three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006 (in thousands, except
share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(30,834 |
) |
|
$ |
(29,178 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstandingbasic |
|
|
39,033,601 |
|
|
|
39,316,704 |
|
Effect of dilutive stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstandingdiluted |
|
|
39,033,601 |
|
|
|
39,316,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.74 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.74 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(13,226 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,380 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstandingbasic |
|
|
39,149,769 |
|
|
|
39,384,545 |
|
Effect of dilutive stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstandingdiluted |
|
|
39,149,769 |
|
|
|
39,384,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.70 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.34 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.70 |
) |
Stock options of 3.0 million and 2.1 million for the the six months ended March 31, 2005 and
2006, and stock options of 3.5 million and 2.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005
and 2006 representing common stock shares, respectively, were excluded from the computation of
diluted earnings (loss) per share because the options exercise prices were greater than the average market
price of the Companys common stock.
The
Company expects significant future dilution to earnings (loss) per share as a result of the
Restructuring.
5. OPERATING SEGMENTS
The Company follows SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information (SFAS 131). Certain information is disclosed, per SFAS 131, based on the way
management organizes financial information for making operating decisions and assessing
performance.
The Companys reportable segments are strategic business units that offer products and
services to two distinct customer groups. They are managed separately because each business
requires different operating and marketing strategies. These segments, which contain different
economic characteristics, are managed through geographical regions.
The accounting policies of the segments are the same as those described in the summary of
significant accounting policies. The Company evaluates performance based on income from operations
of the respective business units prior to home office expenses. Management allocates costs between
segments for selling, general and administrative expenses, goodwill impairment, depreciation
expense, capital expenditures and total assets.
25
Segment information for continuing operations for the six and three months ended March 31,
2005 and 2006 is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2005 |
|
|
Commercial and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Industrial |
|
Residential |
|
Corporate |
|
Total |
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
392,792 |
|
|
$ |
141,531 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
534,323 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
358,111 |
|
|
|
111,768 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
469,879 |
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
34,681 |
|
|
|
29,763 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,444 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
34,648 |
|
|
|
19,711 |
|
|
|
15,565 |
|
|
|
69,924 |
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
10,052 |
|
|
$ |
(15,565 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,480 |
) |
|
|
|
Other data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
$ |
3,798 |
|
|
$ |
524 |
|
|
$ |
1,259 |
|
|
$ |
5,581 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
1,690 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
301,524 |
|
|
|
92,531 |
|
|
|
88,237 |
|
|
|
482,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
|
Commercial and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Industrial |
|
Residential |
|
Corporate |
|
Total |
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
321,442 |
|
|
$ |
182,814 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
504,256 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
290,189 |
|
|
|
148,235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
438,424 |
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
31,253 |
|
|
|
34,579 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,832 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
32,498 |
|
|
|
20,794 |
|
|
|
15,603 |
|
|
|
68,895 |
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
$ |
(1,245 |
) |
|
$ |
13,785 |
|
|
$ |
(15,603 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,063 |
) |
|
|
|
Other data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
$ |
1,751 |
|
|
$ |
557 |
|
|
$ |
1,208 |
|
|
$ |
3,516 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
873 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
1,625 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
192,934 |
|
|
|
93,150 |
|
|
|
83,455 |
|
|
|
369,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2005 |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Industrial |
|
Residential |
|
Corporate |
|
Total |
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
200,794 |
|
|
$ |
68,126 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
268,920 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
185,696 |
|
|
|
52,734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
238,430 |
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
15,098 |
|
|
|
15,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,490 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
17,858 |
|
|
|
9,761 |
|
|
|
7,539 |
|
|
|
35,158 |
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
$ |
(2,760 |
) |
|
$ |
5,631 |
|
|
$ |
(7,539 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,668 |
) |
|
|
|
Other data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
$ |
2,222 |
|
|
$ |
260 |
|
|
$ |
620 |
|
|
$ |
3,102 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
285 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
783 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
301,524 |
|
|
|
92,531 |
|
|
|
88,237 |
|
|
|
482,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Industrial |
|
Residential |
|
Corporate |
|
Total |
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
152,660 |
|
|
$ |
92,542 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
245,202 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
141,600 |
|
|
|
74,637 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216,237 |
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
11,060 |
|
|
|
17,905 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,965 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
17,712 |
|
|
|
10,828 |
|
|
|
7,423 |
|
|
|
35,963 |
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
$ |
(6,652 |
) |
|
$ |
7,077 |
|
|
$ |
(7,423 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,998 |
) |
|
|
|
Other data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
$ |
859 |
|
|
$ |
281 |
|
|
$ |
694 |
|
|
$ |
1,834 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
232 |
|
|
|
577 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
192,934 |
|
|
|
93,150 |
|
|
|
83,455 |
|
|
|
369,539 |
|
The Company does not have operations or long-lived assets in countries outside of the United
States.
26
6. 1999 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN
In November 1999, the Board of Directors adopted the 1999 Incentive Compensation Plan (the
1999 Plan). The 1999 Plan authorizes the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors or the
Board of Directors to grant employees of the Company awards in the form of options, stock
appreciation rights, restricted stock or other stock based awards. The Company has up to 5.5
million shares of common stock authorized for issuance under the 1999 Plan.
In December 2003, the Company granted a restricted stock award of 242,295 shares under its
1999 Plan to certain employees. This award vests in equal installments on December 1, 2004 and
2005, provided the recipient is still employed by the Company. The market value of the stock on the
date of grant for this award was $2.0 million, which is recognized as compensation expense over the
related two year vesting period. On December 1, 2004, 113,248 restricted shares vested under this
award. During the period December 1, 2003 through November 30, 2004, 15,746 shares of those
originally awarded were forfeited. From December 1, 2004 through December 31, 2005, an additional
34,984 shares have been forfeited. On December 1, 2005, the remaining 78,317 restricted shares
vested under this award.
In January 2005, the Company granted a restricted stock award of 365,564 shares under its 1999
Plan to certain employees. This award vests in equal installments on January 3, 2006 and 2007,
provided the recipient is still employed by the Company. The market value of the stock on the date
of grant for this award was $1.7 million, which is recognized as compensation expense over the
related two year vesting period. On January 3, 2006, 147,141 restricted shares vested under this
award. Through March 31, 2006, a total of 62,998 shares were forfeited under this grant.
During the three and six months ended March 31, 2005, the Company amortized $0.4 million and
$0.6 million, respectively, to expense in connection with these awards. Effective October 1, 2005,
the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards 123 (revised 2004), Stock Based
Payments (SFAS 123(R) (See Note 2). During the three and six months ended March 31, 2006, the
Company recognized $0.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively, in compensation expense related to
these awards in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 123 (R).
Upon emerging from bankruptcy, this incentive plan will be cancelled and replaced by a new
incentive plan.
7. EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
The Company has an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the ESPP), which provides for the sale of
common stock to participants as defined at a price equal to the lower of 85% of the Companys
closing stock price at the beginning or end of the option period, as defined. The ESPP is intended
to qualify as an Employee Stock Purchase Plan under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended. In the six months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006, 61,935 and no shares were issued
under the ESPP, respectively. The Company suspended contributions to the Plan from the period
January 1, 2005 through the present and may elect to continue to do so in the future.
Upon emerging from bankruptcy, the Company intends to cancel the ESPP.
8. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Legal Matters
The Company and its subsidiaries are involved in various legal proceedings that have arisen in
the ordinary course of business. While it is not possible to predict the outcome of such
proceedings with certainty and it is possible that the results of legal proceedings may materially
adversely affect us. In the opinion of the Company, all such proceedings are either adequately
covered by insurance or, if not so covered, should not ultimately result in any liability which
would have a material adverse effect on the financial position, liquidity or results of operations
of the Company. The Company expenses routine legal costs related to proceedings as incurred.
The following is a discussion of certain significant legal matters the Company is currently
involved in:
In re Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 4:04-CV-3342; in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division:
27
Between August 20 and October 4, 2004, five putative securities fraud class actions were filed
against IES and certain of its officers and directors in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas. The five lawsuits were consolidated under the caption In re Integrated
Electrical Services, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 4:04-CV-3342. On March 23, 2005, the Court
appointed Central Laborer Pension Fund as lead plaintiff and appointed lead counsel. Pursuant to
the parties agreed scheduling order, lead plaintiff filed its amended complaint on June 6, 2005.
The amended complaint alleges that defendants violated Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements during the proposed class
period of November 10, 2003 to August 13, 2004. Specifically, the amended complaint alleges that
defendants misrepresented the Companys financial condition in 2003 and 2004 as evidenced by the
restatement, violated generally accepted accounting principles, and misrepresented the sufficiency
of the Companys internal controls so that they could engage in insider trading at
artificially-inflated prices, retain their positions at the Company, and obtain a credit facility
for the Company.
On August 5, 2005, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state
a claim. The defendants argued, among other things, that the amended complaint fails to allege
fraud with particularity as required by Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and fails
to satisfy the heightened pleading requirements for securities fraud class actions under the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Specifically, defendants argue that the amended
complaint does not allege fraud with particularity as to numerous GAAP violations and opinion
statements about internal controls, fails to raise a strong inference that defendants acted
knowingly or with severe recklessness, and includes vague and conclusory allegations from
confidential witnesses without a proper factual basis. Lead plaintiff filed its opposition to the
motion to dismiss on September 28, 2005, and defendants filed their reply in support of the motion
to dismiss on November 14, 2005.
On December 21, 2005, the Court held a telephonic hearing relating to the motion to dismiss.
On January 10, the Court issued a memorandum and order dismissing with prejudice all claims filed
against the Defendants. Plaintiff in the securities class action filed its notice of appeal on
February 2, 2006. On February 28, 2006 IES filed a suggestion of bankruptcy informing the Court
that the action was automatically stayed because IES had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. On March
20, 2006 Plaintiffs filed a partial opposition to IESs suggestion of bankruptcy arguing that the
action against non-bankrupt co-defendants was not stayed. No dates for briefing the appeal have
been set or determined.
Radek v. Allen, et al., No. 2004-48577; in the 113th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas:
On September 3, 2004, Chris Radek filed a shareholder derivative action in the District Court
of Harris County, Texas naming Herbert R. Allen, Richard L. China, William W. Reynolds, Britt Rice,
David A. Miller, Ronald P. Badie, Donald P. Hodel, Alan R. Sielbeck, C. Byron Snyder, Donald C.
Trauscht, and James D. Woods as individual defendants and IES as nominal defendant. On July 15,
2005, plaintiff filed an amended shareholder derivative petition alleging substantially similar
factual claims to those made in the putative class action, and making common law claims against the
individual defendants for breach of fiduciary duties, misappropriation of information, abuse of
control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment. On September 16,
2005, defendants filed special exceptions or, alternatively, a motion to stay the derivative
action. On November 11, 2005, Plaintiff filed a response to defendants special exceptions and
motion to stay. A hearing on defendants special exceptions and motion to stay took place on
January 9, 2006. Following that hearing, the parties submitted supplemental briefing relating to
the standard for finding director self-interest in a derivative case.
On February 10, 2006 the Court granted Defendants Special Exceptions and dismissed the suit
with prejudice. On March 10, 2006 Plaintiff filed a motion asking the court to reconsider its
ruling. Also on March 10, 2006 IES filed a suggestion of bankruptcy with the Court suggesting that
this case had been automatically stayed pursuant to the bankruptcy laws. On April 4, 2006
Plaintiff filed a response to IESs suggestion of bankruptcy opposing the application of the
automatic stay. The Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration on April 24,
2006 but deferred any ruling until the bankruptcy proceedings are completed.
SEC Investigation:
On August 31, 2004, the Fort Worth Regional Office of the SEC sent a request for information
concerning IESs inability to file its third fiscal quarter of 2004 10-Q in a timely fashion, the
internal investigation conducted by counsel to the Audit Committee of the companys Board of
Directors, and the material weaknesses identified by IESs auditors in August 2004. In December
2004, the Commission issued a formal order authorizing the staff to conduct a private investigation
into these and related matters.
On April 20, 2006, the Company received a Wells Notice from the staff of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (Staff). In addition, the Company has been informed that Wells Notices have
been issued to its current chief financial officer and certain former executives of the Company.
The Staff has indicated that the Wells Notices relate to the accounting treatment and
28
disclosure of two receivables that were written down in 2004, the Companys contingent liabilities
disclosures in various prior periods, and the Companys failure to disclose a change in its policy
for bad debt reserves and resulting write-down of such reserves that occurred in 2003 and 2004. The
possible violations referenced in the Wells Notices to the Company and its chief financial officer
include violations of the books and records, internal controls and antifraud provisions of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company first disclosed the existence of the SEC inquiry into
this matter in November 2004.
A Wells Notice indicates that the Staff intends to recommend that the agency bring an
enforcement action against the recipients for possible violations of federal securities laws.
Recipients of Wells Notices have the opportunity to submit a statement setting forth their
interests and position with respect to any proposed enforcement action. In the event the Staff
makes a recommendation to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the statement will be forwarded
to the Commission for consideration. An adverse outcome in this matter could have a material
adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash
flows.
Sanford Airport Authority vs. Craggs Construction et al (Florida Industrial Electric):
This is a property damage suit for which the Company believes will be covered by insurance but
at this time coverage has been denied. In January 2003, the Sanford Airport Authority (Sanford)
hired Craggs Construction Company (Craggs) to manage construction of an airport taxiway and related
improvements. Craggs entered into a subcontract with Florida Industrial Electric (FIE) to perform
certain of the electrical and lighting work. During the construction
of the project, Sanford terminated Craggs contract. Sanford retained a new
general contractor to complete the project and asked that FIE remain on the project to complete its
electrical work. Sanford then filed its lawsuit against Craggs for breach of contract, claiming
Craggs failure to properly manage the project resulted in interference, delays, and deficient
work. Sanfords allegations include damage caused by the allegedly improper installation of the
runway lighting system. Craggs filed a third party complaint against FIE, alleging breach of
contract, contractual indemnity, and common law indemnity based on allegations that FIE failed to
perform its work properly.
Sanford alleges over $2.5 million in total damages; it is unclear how much of this amount
Craggs will allege arises from FIEs work. On April 27,
2006, the Company received notice that Craggs had
filed suit against its surety, Federal Insurance Company. Craggs claims the surety performance
bond is liable due to FIEs alleged negligence. We will defend the case for the surety and
indemnify them against any losses.
Florida Power & Light Company, vs. Qualified Contractors, Davis Electrical Constructors, Inc., et
al.:
This is a property damage suit covered by insurance. Florida Power & Light Company (FPL)
retained Black & Veatch (B&V) to manage FPLs Sanford Repowering Project, including oversight of
the construction of turbine generators. In February 2002, Davis Electrical completed its
electrical and tubing installation for turbine #5C, the turbine at issue. The turbine was fired for
the first time in March 2002, and was scheduled to begin commercial operation in early June 2002.
After operating for 375 hours, the turbine suffered a failure during the first on-line water
washing of its compressor, resulting in damage to the entire turbine. FPL and its insurance
companies covered the cost of repairs, which are claimed to total approximately $9.2 million. FPL
and its insurers then filed suit against Davis, QCI and B&V, asserting that the parties breached
their warranties and contracts in failing to properly install the on-line water wash system for
turbine #5C. B&V was dismissed on Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs have appealed that dismissal.
Trial before the judge began January 19, 2006, and was completed January 25, 2006. The judge
requested proposed findings of fact and law from both parties, which were due by February 21, 2006
but stayed by the bankruptcy. Upon the Companys exit from
bankruptcy proceedings, the Company anticipates the judge
will issue her ruling within weeks of receipt of the parties briefings.
Cynthia People v. Primo Electric Company, Inc., Robert Wilson, Ray Hopkins, and Darcia Perini; In
the United States District Court for the District of Maryland; C.A. No. 24-C-05-002152:
On March 10, 2005, one of IES wholly-owned subsidiaries was served with a lawsuit filed by an
ex-employee alleging thirteen causes of action including employment, race and sex discrimination as
well as claims for fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence and conversion.
On each claim plaintiff is demanding $5-10 million in compensatory and $10-20 million in punitive
damages; attorneys fees and costs. This action was filed after the local office of the EEOC
terminated their process and issued plaintiff a right-to-sue letter per her request. IES will
vigorously contest any claim of wrongdoing in this matter and does not believe the claimed damages
bear any likelihood of being found in this case. However, if such damages were to be found, it
would have a material adverse effect on consolidated financial condition and cash flows.
29
Scott Watkins Riviera Electric:
There is a potential personal injury that, if filed, is expected to be covered by our general
liability policy and subject to our deductible. On September 9, 2005, Watkins suffered burn
injuries while working at a job location in Colorado. It is unclear what work he was performing,
but investigation to date indicates he was working on the fire suppression system. After gaining
access to the electrical panel, it appears Watkins used a crescent wrench for his work and during
the work the crescent wrench crossed two live electrical contacts which caused an arc flash,
resulting in burns to Mr. Watkins. It remains unknown how Watkins gained access to the electrical
panel. No litigation has been filed and the investigation is still underway. Watkins counsel
stated at a hearing before the bankruptcy judge that the litigation, although not filed yet, will
seek damages that exceed $26.0 million.
The
Company and its subsidiaries are involved in these and various other legal proceedings that have
and do arise in the ordinary course of business. While it is not possible to predict the outcome of
any of these proceedings or other litigation or claims with certainty, it is possible that the
results of those legal proceedings and claims may have a material adverse effect on a subsidiary or
the consolidated entity.
Other Commitments and Contingencies
Some of the Companys customers and vendors require the Company to post letters of credit as a
means of guaranteeing performance under its contracts and ensuring payment by the Company to
subcontractors and vendors. If the customer has reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter
of credit, the Company would be required to reimburse its creditor for the letter of credit.
Depending on the circumstances surrounding a reimbursement to its creditor, the Company may have a
charge to earnings in that period. To date the Company has not had a situation where a customer or
vendor has had reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter of
credit. At March 31, 2006, $4.0 million of the Companys outstanding letters of credit were to collateralize its customers and
vendors.
Some of the underwriters of the Companys casualty insurance program require it to post
letters of credit as collateral. This is common in the insurance industry. To date the Company has
not had a situation where an underwriter has had reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter
of credit. At March 31, 2006, $33.5 million of the Companys outstanding letters of credit were to
collateralize its insurance program.
Many
of the Companys customers require it to post performance and payment bonds issued by a
surety. Those bonds guarantee the customer that the Company will perform under the terms of a
contract and that it will pay its subcontractors and vendors. In the event that the Company fails
to perform under a contract or pay subcontractors and vendors, the customer may demand the surety
to pay or perform under the Companys bond. The Companys relationship with its sureties is such
that it will indemnify the sureties for any expenses they incur in connection with any of the bonds
they issue on the Companys behalf. To date, the Company has not incurred significant expenses to
indemnify its sureties for expenses they incurred on the Companys behalf. As of March 31, 2006,
the Companys cost to complete projects covered by surety bonds was approximately $69.0 million and
the Company utilized a combination of cash, accumulated interest
thereon and letters of credit totaling $40.3 million to collateralize the
Companys bonding program.
The Company has committed to invest up to $5.0 million in EnerTech Capital Partners II L.P.
(EnerTech). EnerTech is a private equity firm specializing in investment opportunities emerging
from the deregulation and resulting convergence of the energy, utility and telecommunications
industries. Through March 31, 2006, the Company had invested $4.3 million under its commitment to
EnerTech.
The recently completed asset divestiture program involved the sale of substantially all of the
assets and liabilities of certain wholly owned subsidiary business units. As part of these sales,
the purchasers assumed all liabilities except those specifically retained by the Company. These
transactions do not include the sale of the legal entity or Company subsidiary and as such the
Company retained certain legal liabilities. In addition to specifically retained liabilities,
contingent liabilities exist in the event the purchasers are unable or unwilling to perform under
their assumed liabilities. These contingent liabilities may include items such as:
|
|
Joint responsibility for any liability to the surety bonding company if the purchaser fails to perform the work |
30
|
|
Liability for contracts for work not finished if the contract has not been assigned and a release obtained from the customer |
|
|
|
Liability on ongoing contractual arrangements such as real property and equipment leases where no assignment and release
has been obtained |
9. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
Confirmation of the Plan of Reorganization
On April 26, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order approving and confirming the Plan.
The Effective Date of the Plan is expected to be in the first half of May 2006. See Note 1.
Overview Update on Financial Restructuring and Subsequent Events.
Delisting from the NYSE
As previously disclosed in our Current Reports on Form 8-K filed with the SEC, on December 15,
2005 the NYSE suspended trading of our common stock and informed us of the NYSEs intent to submit
an application to the SEC to de-list our common stock after completion of applicable procedures,
including any appeal by IES of the NYSEs staffs decision. On December 30, 2005, in accordance
with Rule 804.00 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual, the Company appealed the NYSEs staffs decision by
requesting a review by the designated committee of the Board of Directors of the NYSE (the
Committee) of the staffs determination to suspend the trading of our common stock and an oral
presentation before the Committee. On April 11, 2006, the Company received notification from the NYSE that
the Committee met on April 5, 2006 to consider its appeal. The Committee affirmed the NYSE staffs
decision to suspend and delist the Companys common stock. Furthermore, the Committee directed the
NYSE staff to submit an application to the Securities and Exchange Commission to strike the common
stock from listing in accordance with Section 12 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company is in the process of
filing an application for listing on NASDAQ.
DIP
Credit Facility Compliance
On
May 10, 2006, the Company delivered its compliance certificate
to BofA under the DIP Credit
Facility. The Company was not in compliance with the minimum cumulative EBITDA test. The Company
expects to re-finance the DIP Credit Facility at the Effective Date. See Note 1 and Note 3.
31
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
INTRODUCTION
The following should be read in conjunction with the response to Part I, Item 1 of this
Report. Any capitalized terms used but not defined in this Item have the same meaning given to them
in Part I, Item 1.
Update on Financial Restructuring and Subsequent Events
Voluntary Reorganization Under Chapter 11
On February 14, 2006 (the Commencement Date), we filed voluntary petitions for
reorganization along with all of our domestic subsidiaries, (the Chapter 11 Cases) under Chapter
11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the Bankruptcy Code) in the United States Bankruptcy
Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division (the Bankruptcy Court). The Bankruptcy
Court is jointly administering these cases as In re Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. et. al.,
Case No. 06-30602-BJH-11.
Since the Commencement Date, we have continued to operate our businesses and manage our
properties as debtors in possession in accordance with Sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy
Code. On February 27, 2006, the United States Trustee appointed a committee authorized by the
Bankruptcy Code, and appointed by the Bankruptcy Court, to represent the interest of our unsecured
creditors (the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors). On March 8, 2006, the United States
Trustee appointed a committee authorized by the Bankruptcy Code, and appointed by the Bankruptcy
Court, to represent the interest of our shareholders and other equity
interest holders (the Official
Equity Holders Committee).
On the Commencement Date, we filed the required documents with the Bankruptcy Court on our
plan of reorganization which sets the intended plan of reorganization
(the Joint Plan of
Reorganization) and the related informational disclosures (the Disclosure Statement) with the
Bankruptcy Court. On March 10, 2006, we filed an amendment to the Joint Plan of Reorganization and
the related disclosure statement (the First Amended Disclosure Statement) which set out additional
information updating the prior Disclosure Statement. On March 10, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court
approved the adequacy of information in the First Amended Disclosure Statement. On March 17, 2006,
we filed a second amendment to the Joint Plan of Reorganization (the Plan) and the related second
amendments to the disclosure statement (the Second Amended
Disclosure Statement), each of which were distributed, along with ballots, to
creditors and equity interest holders entitled to vote on the Plan.
On April 26, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order (the Confirmation Order) approving
and confirming the Plan. The effective date of the Plan is expected to be in the first half of May
2006 (the Effective Date). The Plan was filed as Exhibit 2.1 to our current report on Form 8-K,
filed on April 28, 2006.
The Plan of Reorganization
The primary purpose of the Plan is to complete a restructuring of our capital structure (the
Restructuring) to improve free cash flow, strengthen the balance sheet and enhance surety bonding
capacity. Currently, we have a substantial amount of debt outstanding under the Senior Subordinated
Notes and the Senior Convertible Notes. If we are not able to complete the Restructuring, we will
likely have to put together an alternative plan. Our financial condition and the value of our
securities are likely to be further affected negatively and materially.
The
Restructuring will reduce the amount of our outstanding debt by
approximately $172.9 million
plus accrued and unpaid interest by converting all of the Senior Subordinated Notes into equity
through the transfer of Senior Subordinated Note claims in exchange for a portion of shares
of common stock in the reorganized company (the New IES Common Stock). Following completion of the
Restructuring, our long-term debt is expected to be approximately $61.3 million, made up of
approximately $53 million borrowed and outstanding under the term loan effective on the date
exiting bankruptcy (the Term Exit Credit Facility) and approximately $8.3 million borrowed and
outstanding under a revolving exit facility (the Revolving Exit
Credit Facility). Among other things, in accordance with the Plan:
|
|
|
Each holder of Senior Subordinated Notes will receive, in exchange for its total
claim (including principal and interest), a pro rata portion of 82% of the New IES
Common Stock to be issued in accordance to the Plan, before the effect of the options
to be issued in the reorganized company (the New Options) issued in accordance with our
2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan). |
32
|
|
|
Each holder of our common stock will receive a pro rata portion of 15% of the New
IES Common Stock to be issued in accordance to the Plan, before the effect of the New
Options issued in accordance with our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. |
|
|
|
|
Certain members of our management will receive restricted shares of New IES Common
Stock equal to 3% of the New IES Common Stock to be issued in accordance to the Plan,
before the effect of the New Options issued in accordance with our 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan. |
|
|
|
|
On the Effective Date, the equity interests would be made up of New IES Common Stock
issued to the holders of Senior Subordinated Notes, holders of our
common stock, certain members of management and New Options to be issued to certain key employees in
accordance with the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, which will be exercisable for up to 10%
of the New IES Common Stock on a fully diluted basis. |
|
|
|
|
Our obligations under certain existing operating leases and trade credit extended to
us by our vendors and suppliers, would not be impaired. |
|
|
|
|
On the Effective Date, we will enter into a revolving exit credit facility. |
|
|
|
|
The $50 million in outstanding Senior Convertible Notes and related guarantees by
our subsidiaries (the IES Subsidiary Guarantees) will be refinanced from the proceeds of
the Term Exit Credit Facility. |
|
|
|
|
On the Commencement Date, we filed motions to approve a debtor in possession bonding
facility with Chubb (the Chubb DIP Bonding Facility) and SureTec Insurance Company
(the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility), including the assumption of the underlying bonded
contracts. The motions were approved on an interim basis by the Bankruptcy Court on
February 15, 2006 and on a final basis on March 13, 2006. Additionally, a debtor in
possession bonding facility with Scarborough (the Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility) was
approved on a final basis on March 13, 2006. On the Effective Date, the claims of our
sureties, Chubb, SureTec and Scarborough, if any, will be reinstated under the Plan. |
Conditions to the Effective Date
The following are conditions which must be satisfied or waived in accordance with Article 9.04
of the Plan:
|
(i) |
|
The Confirmation Order has to be entered by the Bankruptcy Court. |
|
|
(ii) |
|
The Confirmation Order has to become a final order upon the expiration of ten
days and the completion of the required items set out in the first amendment to the
Joint Plan of Reorganization (Final Order). |
|
|
(iii) |
|
All authorizations, consents and regulatory approvals required, if any, in
connection with the conclusion of the Plan have to be obtained. |
|
|
(iv) |
|
All necessary documents to complete the issuance of the New
IES Common Stock in
place of the old common stock, issuance of new stock in replacement
for the Senior Subordinated Notes and new subsidiary guarantees, if
applicable, will have been executed and delivered. |
|
|
(v) |
|
All other actions, documents, and agreements necessary to implement the Plan
will have been produced or executed. |
|
|
(vi) |
|
All documents referenced in subsections (iv) and (v) of this paragraph,
including all documents in the Plan Supplement, will be reasonably acceptable to the Ad
Hoc Committee. |
|
|
(vii) |
|
No stay of the consummation of the Plan will be in effect. |
It is also a condition to the effectiveness of the Plan that:
|
(i) |
|
The Term Exit Facility will have closed and cash from the proceeds of this
facility will be available to pay the holders of the allowed Senior Convertible Note
claims as required by Article 3.03(e)(ii) of the Plan; |
33
|
(ii) |
|
The Bankruptcy Court will have entered an order, following a contingency
hearing approving either (a) the reinstatement treatment as set forth in the Plan, or
(b) the new note exchange as set forth in the Plan; or |
|
|
(iii) |
|
If a requirement for a contingency hearing is waived by the holders of the
Senior Convertible Notes, we will have reached an agreement on the applicable treatment
with the holders of the Senior Convertible Notes. If a contingency hearing is called
and the Bankruptcy Court validates any objections by the trustee under the indenture
for the Senior Convertible Notes or Holders of Senior Convertible Note claims to
confirmation of the Plan (whether these objections relate to the proposed treatment of
the Senior Convertible Note claims or other confirmation issues), the Bankruptcy Court
will terminate the confirmation order. |
Reorganization Items
Reorganization items refer to revenues, expenses (including professional fees), realized gains and
losses and provisions for losses that are realized or incurred in the
bankruptcy proceedings. The following
table summarized the components included in reorganization items on the consolidate statements of
operations for the six months ended March 31, 2006 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
Unamortized debt issuance costs(1) |
|
$ |
4,903 |
|
Unamortized debt discounts and other costs(2) |
|
|
539 |
|
Embedded derivative liabilities(3) |
|
|
(1,482 |
) |
Professional fees and other costs(4) |
|
|
8,151 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total reorganization items |
|
$ |
12,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Write off of unamortized debt issuance costs related to the allowed claims for the senior subordinated
notes and senior convertible notes. |
|
(2) |
|
Write off of unamortized debt discounts, premiums and other costs related to the allowed claims for
the senior subordinated notes and senior convertible notes. |
|
(3) |
|
Write off of embedded derivatives related to the allowed claim for the senior convertible notes. |
|
(4) |
|
Costs for professional services including legal, financial advisory and related services. |
Going Concern
Our independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, included a going concern
modification in its audit opinion on our consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2005 included on Form 10-K as a result of our operating losses during fiscal
2005 and our non-compliance with certain debt covenants subsequent to
September 30, 2005. As described above under Update on Financial
Restructuring, we have made substantial progress on
completing our financial restructuring and de-leveraging of the
balance sheet. We expect to emerge from bankruptcy in mid
May with adequate exit financing in place.
Delisting from the NYSE
As previously disclosed, on December 15, 2005, in our Current Reports on Form 8-K filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), the NYSE suspended trading of our common stock and
informed us of the NYSEs intent to submit an application to the SEC to delist our common stock
after completion of applicable procedures, including any appeal by us of the NYSEs staffs
decision. On December 30, 2005, in accordance with Rule 804.00 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual,
we appealed the NYSEs staffs decision by requesting a review by the designated committee of the
Board of Directors of the NYSE (the Committee) of the staffs determination to suspend the
trading of our common stock and an oral presentation before the Committee.
On April 11, 2006, we received notification from the NYSE that the Committee met on April 5,
2006 to consider the appeal. The Committee affirmed the NYSE staffs decision to suspend and delist
the common stock. In addition, the Committee directed the NYSE staff to submit an application to
the SEC to strike the common stock from listing in accordance with Section 12 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
Our common stock is currently trading on the OTC Pink Sheets under the ticker symbol IESRQ.PK.
Application for Listing on NASDAQ
We have submitted the initial application to list our new common stock on NASDAQ upon emerging
from Chapter 11. IES new common stock has been approved
for quotation on the NASDAQ National Market, subject to its issuance
on or about the Effective Date. The NASDAQ has assigned the stock
symbol IESC, as the trading symbol for the Companys new common
stock.
Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities
Following
disappointing operating results, the Board of Directors directed senior management to develop
alternatives with respect to certain underperforming subsidiaries. On March 28, 2006, senior
management committed to an exit plan (the Exit Plan) with respect to those underperforming
subsidiaries. The Exit Plan commits to a shut-down or consolidation of the operations of the
subsidiaries or the sale or other disposition of the subsidiaries, whichever comes earlier.
As a result of the Exit Plan, we expect to incur total expenditures in the estimated range of
$5.9 million to $11.1 million, which include the following:
|
|
|
An estimated $2.3 million to $5.4 million for direct labor and material costs; |
|
|
|
|
An estimated $1.3 million to $1.5 million for lease exit and other related costs; and |
|
|
|
|
An estimated $2.3 million to $4.2 million for severance, retention and other employment-related costs. |
As
a result of inherent uncertainty in the Exit Plan and in monetizing approximately $30.6 million
in net working
capital from these subsidiaries, we could experience potential losses to our
working capital. These losses could range from $8.1 million to
$10.0 million. At March 31, 2006, we have recorded adequate
reserves to reflect the estimated net realizable value of the working capital,
however, subsequent events such as loss of personnel or specific
customer knowledge, may impact the ability to collect. During the three months ended
34
March 31,
2006, we incurred approximately $4.5 million of incremental costs related to the
Exit Plan consisting of $1.5 million in direct labor,
$0.2 million in severance or retention costs,
$0.2 million in lease exit costs, and $2.6 million in
working capital asset impairments including accounts receivables,
inventory and costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on
uncompleted contracts. These costs are included in income (loss) from continuing
operations.
In
its assessment of the estimated net realizable value related to accounts
receivable at these subsidiaries, we increased our general allowance
for doubtful accounts based on considering various factors including
the fact that these business were being shut down and the associated
increased risk of collection and the age of the receivables. This
approach is a departure from our normal practice of carrying general
allowances for bad debt based on a minimum fixed percent of total
receivables. The Company believes this approach is reasonable and
prudent given the circumstances.
The Exit Plan is expected to be substantially completed by September 30, 2006. During the
execution of the Exit Plan, we expect to continue to pay our vendors and suppliers in the ordinary
course of business and to complete all projects that are currently in progress.
Revenue for these subsidiaries totaled $172.8 million for fiscal year 2005, representing 16%
of our total revenues for fiscal 2005. Forecasted revenues for these subsidiaries were
approximately $73.8 million for fiscal year 2006, representing approximately 8% of our total
forecasted revenues in fiscal 2006. Further information can be
obtained on the Exit Plan in Form 8-K/A dated April 3, 2006.
Repayment Notice from Senior Convertible Notes
On January 19, 2006, the holders of the outstanding Series A and Series B 6.5% Senior
Convertible Notes, delivered written notice (the Notices) to us alleging that a Termination of
Trading constituted a Fundamental Change, each as defined under the indenture dated as of
November 24, 2004 (the Indenture). In accordance with the Indenture, a Termination of Trading is
deemed to have occurred if our common stock, into which the Senior Convertible Notes are
convertible, is neither listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange (the NYSE) or the
American Stock Exchange nor approved for listing on the Nasdaq National Market or the Nasdaq
SmallCap Market, and no American Depositary Shares or similar instruments for such common stock are
so listed or approved for listing in the United States.
A Termination of Trading occurred with respect to the Senior Convertible Notes when we were
notified on December 15, 2005 that our common stock had been suspended from trading on the NYSE.
This constituted an event of default under the Indenture. We are, therefore, required to repurchase
the Senior Convertible Notes in cash at a purchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of
the Senior Convertible Notes plus accrued and unpaid interest and Liquidated Damages (as defined in
the Indenture).
The amount due under the Senior Convertible Notes, including the principal plus accrued and
unpaid interest and Liquidated Damages, is approximately $51.8 million. The holders elected to
exercise their repurchase rights following a Termination of Trading under the terms of the
Indenture.
As mentioned in Part I, Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Update on Financial Restructuring
and Subsequent Events, all amounts due under the outstanding Senior Convertible Notes will be refinanced from the proceeds of the Term
Exit Facility.
Pre-Petition
Chapter 11
As
further described in Part 1, Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations Update on Financial Restructuring
and Subsequent Events, on February 14, 2006, the Company
filed the Chapter 11 Cases. As of the Commencement Date, the
Debtors indebtedness consisted of the Pre-Petition Credit
Facility, Senior Convertible Notes and Senior Subordinated Notes.
Amendments to the Credit Facility
As previously stated, it was necessary for us to seek multiple amendments to the $80 million
asset-based revolving credit facility (the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) with Bank of America,
N.A., as administrative agent (BofA) in the first and second quarters of fiscal 2006 in order to
avoid non-compliance with the fixed charge coverage test as set in the Pre-Petition Credit
Facility. The effect of these amendments were to postpone the fixed charge coverage test and also
provide a limited waiver of any Event of Default that would otherwise exist with respect to the
audited annual financial statements for the year ended September 30, 2005.
We then failed to meet the fixed charge coverage test for the period ending December 31, 2005,
constituting a default under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. In addition, we were in default,
under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, with respect to the pledge of ownership interest in
EnerTech Capital Partners II L.P. (EnerTech) to BofA as collateral. Due to the existence of these
defaults, BofA did not have any obligation to make additional extensions of credit under the
Pre-Petition Credit Facility and had full legal right to exercise its rights and remedies under the
Pre-Petition Credit Facility and related agreements.
We
then entered into a forbearance agreement (the Forbearance Agreement) with BofA in connection
with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The Forbearance Agreement stated BofA was to refrain from
exercising its rights and remedies under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility and related agreements.
Under the Forbearance Agreement, BofA had no obligation to make any loans or otherwise extend any
credit to us under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. Any agreement by BofA to make any loans or
otherwise extend any further credit was in the sole discretion of BofA.
35
Capitalized terms used but not defined under this heading have the meaning set forth in the
Loan and Security Agreement dated as of August 1, 2005, and filed as exhibit 10.1 to the Form 8-K
dated August 4, 2005.
In
accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) 86-30,
Classifications of Obligations When a Violation is Waived by
the Creditor, we have classified the long-term portion of our
senior convertible notes and senior subordinated notes as current
liabilities on the balance sheet due to certain defaults thereunder.
Even if we emerge from bankruptcy, which we expect to do in mid-May,
we will still have substantial indebtedness under our revolving and
term exit credit facilities.
We have since accepted a financing commitment letter, dated February 1, 2006 (the Commitment
Letter), with BofA, see Part I, Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Debtor-in-Possession Financing. All obligations, including
the Pre-Petition Credit Facility dated August 1, 2005 will constitute obligations and liabilities
under a debtor-in-possession credit facility.
Amendment to Surety Pledge Agreement
On January 17, 2006, we entered into an amendment to the surety agreements with Chubb,
including (i) the Restated Pledge Agreement, dated January 14, 2005, and (ii) the Underwriting,
Continuing Indemnity and Security Agreement, dated January 14, 2005. The amendment provides for
Chubbs issuance of surety bonds to support the projects in an aggregate amount of up to $20
million between the date of the amendment and February 14, 2006, the date we filed a voluntary
petition for relief under the Bankruptcy Code. We are currently in negotiations with the existing
surety bond providers regarding post-emergence surety bonding.
Appointment of Chief Restructuring Officer
On January 26, 2006, effective as of January 23, 2006, we entered into an engagement letter
with Glass and Associates, Inc. (Glass). Glass has agreed to provide us with the services of
Sanford Edlein, who will serve as the Chief Restructuring Officer in connection with the
restructuring. The services of Mr. Edlein and other Glass employees will include working with us
and our advisors to implement and manage the restructuring process, with Mr. Edlein, as Chief
Restructuring Officer, having responsibility and authority to implement and manage all aspects of
our restructuring. Mr. Edlein will report to, and be subject to the exclusive supervision of, the
Special Restructuring Committee of the Board of Directors, which consists of four independent
directors of the Board of Directors.
Employment Agreement with Byron Snyder
On February 13, 2006 (the Employment Agreement Effective Date), we entered into an
Employment and Consulting Agreement (the Employment Agreement) with C. Byron Snyder, President
and Chief Executive Officer. The terms of the Employment Agreement are from the Employment
Agreement Effective Date through February 13, 2008 (the Agreement Term), unless terminated
earlier. Further details can be obtained on the Employment Agreement as Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K
dated February 15, 2006. Mr. Snyder will remain employed as Chief Executive Officer from the
Employment Agreement Effective Date, through (i) any date after the Employment Agreement Effective
Date as specified by the Board of Directors or (ii) the effective date of employment of a
replacement Chief Executive Officer, whichever comes earlier. Following the expiration of the
Agreement Term, Mr. Snyder will perform consulting and advisory services.
Mr. Snyder
will receive monthly compensation of $20,833 and will be granted an option to
purchase 51,471 shares of our new common stock in accordance with the terms of the Option
Agreement, (see Option Agreement attached as Exhibit A to Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K dated February
15, 2006). The options will be granted on the first business day following the
effective date of the plan of reorganization in mid-May 2006. In the event that the Employment Agreement
is terminated due to death, disability or is without cause, Mr. Snyder shall be entitled to the
monthly compensation described above for the remainder of the Agreement Term. If the Employment
Agreement is terminated by Mr. Snyder for any reason or by us with cause, then we will have no
further obligation to pay the monthly compensation.
During the Agreement Term and for a period of two years following termination of the
Employment Agreement, Mr. Snyder is bound by non-competition and confidentiality provisions similar
to those of the other senior officers.
We have initiated a search for a new chief executive officer and have selected a national
recognized firm to assist with this effort. Our search committee has worked diligently to identify
the best person to lead the company and we have met with many outstanding candidates. We expect to
conclude this process in the coming months.
36
Post-Petition
Chapter 11
As
a result of our commencement of the Chapter 11
Cases, we were required to obtain debtor-in-possession
financing. During the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases, the
Company obtained a DIP credit facility and DIP surety agreements.
Debtor-in-Possession Financing
On
February 14, 2006, in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases, we
entered into the debtor-in-possession loan and security agreement (the
DIP Credit Facility) with B of A and the other lenders
party thereto (the DIP Lenders). The DIP Credit Facility
was approved by the Bankruptcy Court on an interim basis on February
15, 2006, and on a final basis on March 10, 2006.
The
DIP Credit Facility provides for aggregate financing of $80 million during the Chapter 11 case,
consisting of a revolving credit facility of up to $80 million, with a $72 million sub-limit for
letters of credit. All letters of
credit and other obligations outstanding under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are obligations and
liabilities under the DIP Credit Facility. Accordingly, we wrote off approximately $3.8 million in
unamortized deferred financing costs during the quarter ended March 31, 2006 related to the
Pre-Petition Credit Facility.
We have utilized the DIP Credit Facility to issue letters of credit for
(i) our insurance programs; (ii) our surety programs; and (iii) certain jobs. The remainder of the
proceeds of the DIP Credit Facility will be used for general corporate purposes.
Loans
under the DIP Credit Facility bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5% or the
base rate plus 1.5% as further discussed therein.
The DIP Credit Facility matures on the earliest to occur of (i)
the expiration of a period of 12 months from the closing date of the DIP Credit Facility, (ii) 45 days
after the commencement of the Chapter 11 cases if a final order approving the DIP Credit Facility has not
been entered by the Bankruptcy Court, (iii) the effective date of an approved plan of
reorganization or (iv) termination of the DIP Credit Facility.
The DIP Credit Facility is entitled to super-priority administrative expense status in accordance
with Section 364(c)(1) of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the Bankruptcy Code) and
is secured by a first priority security interest, subject to certain liens, in the collateral. The
DIP Credit Facility contemplates customary affirmative, negative and financial covenants that impose
substantial restrictions on our financial and business operations, including the ability to, among
other things, incur or secure other debt, make loans, make investments, sell assets, pay dividends
or repurchase stock.
The financial covenants require us to:
|
|
|
Maintain a Days Payable Outstanding not to exceed 25 days; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a Days Sales Outstanding of no more than 85 days; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a minimum cumulative earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation,
amortization and restructuring expenses beginning with the period ended March 2006; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a minimum rolling four-week total cash receipts, based on a percentage of a
pre-determined budget; |
|
|
|
|
Ensure that cash disbursements do not exceed a pre-determined budget by more than the
allowed percentages on both an aggregate basis and on a line item basis unless otherwise
allowed by BofA; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain cash collateral in a cash collateral account in at least the amounts
specified in the credit agreement. |
The DIP Credit Facility contains events of default customary for debtor-in-possession financings,
including cross defaults and certain change of control events. Upon the occurrence of an event of
default, the outstanding obligations under the DIP Credit Facility may be accelerated and become due and
payable immediately.
We were in compliance with all the covenants under the DIP Credit Facility at March 31, 2006. On May
10, 2006, we delivered our compliance certificate to BofA and we were out of compliance with the
minimum cumulative EBITDA covenant. We expect to re-finance the DIP Credit Facility upon emerging from
bankruptcy in mid-May. See further discussion below under the caption Exit Credit Facility.
We capitalized $1.4 million in debt issuance costs during the quarter related to the DIP Credit
Facility, which are being amortized to interest expense over the expected life of the facility.
Amortization during the quarter ended March 31, 2006 was approximately $0.5 million.
37
Surety
Update
The
Chubb Surety Agreement
The
Company is party to an Underwriting, Continuing Indemnity, and Security Agreement, dated January
14, 2005 (the Surety Agreement), with Chubb, which provides the provision of surety bonds to
support its contracts with certain customers.
In
connection with the Companys restructuring (See Part I, Item 2. Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Update on Financial Restructuring and
Subsequent Events), the Bankruptcy Court approved an interim order on February 15, 2006 granting
authority to enter into a postpetition financing agreement with Federal Insurance Company (the
Chubb DIP Agreement). The Chubb DIP Agreement provides Chubb, during the Companys Chapter 11 case, (i) in
its sole and absolute discretion to issue up to an aggregate of $48 million in new surety bonds,
with no more than $12 million in new surety bonds to be issued in any given month, and (ii) to give
permission for use of cash collateral in the form of proceeds of all contracts which Chubb had
issued surety bonds. The Company is being charged a bond premium of $25 per $1,000 of the contract price
related to any new surety bond. The Company provided $6 million in additional collateral in the form of cash
or letters of credit in installments of $1.5 million per month, to support the new surety bonds.
Pursuant to the Chubb DIP Agreement, the Company paid due diligence and facility fees of $500,000 each which
are included in reorganization items on the consolidated statement of operations.
Upon
emergence from Chapter 11, the Company expects to close into an exit bonding facility with the Chubb.
The exit bonding agreement provides Chubb in its sole and absolute discretion to issue up to an
aggregate of $70 million in new surety bonds, with no more than $10 million in new surety bonds to
be issued in any given month. The Company will pay a $1 million facility fee upon the closing into the
facility.
The SureTec DIP Bonding Facility
The
Company is party to a general agreement of indemnity dated September 21, 2005 and related
documents, with SureTec Insurance Company, which provides for the provision of surety bonds to
support the Companys contracts with certain of its customers.
The Bankruptcy Court approved an interim order on February 15, 2006 approving the assumption of
certain contracts with SureTec Insurance Company (the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility). The SureTec
DIP Bonding Facility provides SureTec, during the Companys Chapter 11 case, (i) in its sole and absolute
discretion and (ii) upon the Companys filing of a voluntary petition for bankruptcy, to issue up to an
aggregate of $10 million in surety bonds. Bonding in excess of $5 million is subject to SureTecs
receipt of additional collateral in the form of an additional irrevocable letter of credit from
BofA in the amount of $1.5 million. Pursuant to the SureTec DIP
Bonding Facility, the Company paid a fee of
$25,000. The SureTec DIP Bonding Facility is expected to remain in place with the same terms
subsequent to the Effective Date.
The Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility
The
Company is party to a general agreement of indemnity dated March 21, 2006 and related documents,
with Edmund C. Scarborough, Individual Surety, to supplement the bonding capacity under the Chubb
DIP Bonding Facility and the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility.
The Bankruptcy Court approved an order on March 10, 2006 approving debtor in possession surety
bonding facility with Edmund C. Scarborough, Individual Surety (the Scarborough DIP Bonding
Facility). Under the Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility, Scarborough has agreed to extend aggregate
bonding capacity not to exceed $100 million in additional bonding capacity with a limitation on
individual bonds of $15 million. Scarborough is an individual surety (as opposed to a corporate
surety, like Chubb or SureTec), and these bonds are not rated. However, the issuance of
Scarboroughs bonds to an oblige/contractor is backed by an instrument referred to as an
irrevocable trust receipt issued by First Mountain Bancorp as trustee for investors who pledge
assets to support the receipt and thus the bond. The bonds are also reinsured.
Scarboroughs obligation to issue new bonds is discretionary and the aggregate bonding is
subject to Scarboroughs receipt of an irrevocable letter of credit from SunTrust Bank in the
amount of $2.0 million to secure all of the Companys obligations to Scarborough; provided, however, upon
delivery of the letter of credit and payment of applicable bond premiums (estimated at 3.5% of the
face amount of each bond), Scarborough will issue bonds in the approximate amount of $23.8 million
covering the Companys backlog of existing and pending contracts/projects. Within 120 days of the letter of
credit issuance, the letter of credit will be cancelled in exchange for the sum of $2 million by
wire transfer to a trust account selected by Scarborough. BofA, as
the Companys debtor-in-possession working
capital lender, has a lien in the proceeds generated from the bonded contracts (the Proceeds).
BofA and Scarborough have entered into an intercreditor agreement. The Scarborough DIP Bonding
Facility is expected to remain in place with the same terms subsequent to the Effective Date.
Anticipated
Post-Chapter 11
As
further described in Part I, Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations, on April 26, 2006, the Bankruptcy
Court entered the Confirmation Order approving the Plan.
As
a result, the Company anticipates that, following consummation of the
transactions contemplated by the Plan, the Companys long-term
debt will be approximately $61.3 million, comprised of
approximately $53 million borrowed and outstanding under the
Term Exit Credit Facility and approximately $8.3 million
borrowed and outstanding under the Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Revolving Exit Credit Facility
38
In
connection with our emergence from Chapter 11, we expect to enter
into a revolving credit facility (the Revolving Exit Credit
Facility). On February 10, 2006, we accepted a financing commitment letter (the Exit Credit Commitment
Letter) from BofA for a senior secured post-confirmation
Revolving Exit
Credit Facility (the Revolving Credit
Facility). The Exit Credit Commitment Letter states that BofA and any other lenders that choose to
participate (collectively, the Exit Credit Lenders) will
provide a Revolving Exit Credit Facility in the
aggregate amount of up to $80 million, with a $72 million sub-limit for letters of credit, for the
purpose of refinancing the DIP Credit Facility and to provide letters of credit and financing subsequent
to confirmation of a plan of reorganization. BofA has committed to lend up to $40 million of the
Revolving Exit Credit Facility and will seek to syndicate the remaining amount.
Loans
under the Revolving Exit Credit Facility will bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5% or the base rate
plus 1.5% on the terms set in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter. In addition, we will be charged
monthly in arrears (i) an unused line fee of either 0.5% or 0.375% depending on the utilization of
the credit line, (ii) a letter of credit fee equal to the applicable per annum LIBOR margin times
the amount of all outstanding letters of credit and (iii) certain other fees and charges as
specified in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter.
The
Revolving Exit Credit Facility will mature two years after the
closing date. The Revolving Exit Credit
Facility will be secured by first priority liens on substantially all of our existing and future
acquired assets, exclusive of collateral provided to sureties, on the terms set in the Exit Credit
Commitment Letter. The Revolving Exit Credit Facility will contain customary affirmative, negative and financial
covenants binding us as described in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter.
The
Exit Credit Commitment Letter provides that the Exit Credit Lenders are obligated to
provide the Revolving Exit Credit Facility only upon satisfaction of certain conditions, including, without
limitation (i) the completion of definitive documentation and other documents as may be requested
by BofA, (ii) the absence of a material adverse change in our business, assets, liabilities,
financial condition, business prospects or results of operation, other than the Chapter 11 Cases,
since the date of the Exit Credit Commitment Letter, (iii) BofAs receipt of satisfactory financial
projections and financial statements, (iv) BofAs satisfaction with the relative rights of BofA and
our sureties, including agreements with our sureties for the issuance of up to $75 million in
bonds, and (v) BofAs satisfaction with the plan of reorganization, including the treatment of
certain creditors, and the order confirming the plan.
The Exit Credit Commitment Letter is filed as Exhibit 10.3 on Form 8-K dated February 15, 2006
and the summary of certain terms and conditions of the Revolving Exit Credit Facility is qualified in its
entirety by reference to this exhibit.
The Term Exit Credit Facility
On February 10, 2006, we accepted a commitment letter (the Term Exit Commitment Letter) from
Eton Park Fund, L.P. and an affiliate and Flagg Street Partners LP and affiliates (collectively,
the Term Exit Lenders) for a senior secured term loan in the amount of $53 million (the Term
Exit Credit Facility). The primary purpose of the Term Exit Credit Facility is to refinance our 6.5% senior convertible
notes due 2014 (the Senior Convertible Notes).
The loan under the Term Exit Credit Facility will bear interest at 10.75% per annum, subject to
adjustment as set in the Term Exit Commitment Letter. Interest will be payable in cash, in arrears,
quarterly, provided that, in the sole discretion of us, until the third anniversary of the closing
date, we will have the option to direct that interest be paid by capitalizing the interest as
additional loans under the Term Exit Credit Facility. Absent the Term Exit Lenders right to demand
repayment in full on or after the fourth anniversary of the closing date, the Term Exit Credit Facility
will mature on the seventh anniversary of the closing date. The Term
Exit Credit Facility will contain
customary affirmative, negative and financial covenants binding on us, including, without
limitation, a limitation on indebtedness of $90 million under
the Revolving Exit Credit Facility with a
sublimit on funded outstanding indebtedness of $25 million, as more fully described in the Term
Exit Commitment Letter. Additionally, the Term Exit Credit Facility includes provisions for optional
and mandatory prepayments on the conditions set in the Term Exit Commitment Letter. The Term Exit
Credit Facility will be secured by substantially the same collateral
as the Revolving Exit Credit Facility and will
be second in priority to the liens securing the Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Term Exit Commitment Letter provides that the Term Exit Lenders are obligated to provide
the Term Exit Credit Facility only upon the satisfaction of certain conditions, including, without
limitation, (i) completion of definitive documentation and other documents as may be requested by
the Term Exit Lenders, (ii) the Term Exit Lenders satisfaction with the final confirmation order
confirming the Debtors plan of reorganization and the occurrence of the effective date of the
plan, (iii) the repayment of the DIP Credit Facility or its
conversion into the Revolving Exit Credit
Facility, (iv) delivery of interim financial statements as well as any financial documentation
delivered to BofA, and (v) the Term Exit Lenders satisfaction with the terms and conditions of the
Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Term Exit Commitment Letter is filed as Exhibit 10.4 on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
February 15, 2006 and the summary of certain terms and conditions of the Term Exit Credit Facility is
qualified in its entirety by reference to this exhibit.
39
Critical Accounting Policies
In response to the SECs Release No. 33-8040, Cautionary Advice Regarding Disclosure About
Critical Accounting Policies, we have identified the accounting principles, which we believe are
most critical to our reported financial status by considering accounting policies that involve the
most complex or subjective decisions or assessments. We identified our most critical accounting
policies to be those related to revenue recognition, the assessment of goodwill impairment, our
allowance for doubtful accounts receivable, the recording of our self-insurance liabilities and our
estimation of the valuation allowance for deferred tax assets. These accounting policies, as well
as others, are described in the Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of our
annual report on Form 10-K for the year ending September 30, 2005 and at relevant sections in this
discussion and analysis.
As a result of our Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding, we prepare our financial statements in
accordance with Statement of Position 90-7 Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under
the Bankruptcy Code (SOP 90-7). SOP 90-7 requires us to, among other things, (1) identify
transactions that are directly associated with the bankruptcy proceedings from those events that
occur during the normal course of business, (2) identify pre-petition liabilities subject to
compromise from those that are not subject to compromise or post-petition liabilities, and (3)
apply fresh start start accounting rules upon emergence from bankruptcy which is expected to be
May 2006.
We enter into contracts principally on the basis of competitive bids. We frequently negotiate
the final terms and prices of those contracts with the customer. Although the terms of our
contracts vary considerably, most are made on either a fixed price or unit price basis in which we
agree to do the work for a fixed amount for the entire project (fixed price) or for units of work
performed (unit price). We also perform services on a cost-plus or time and materials basis. We are
generally able to achieve higher margins on fixed price and unit price than on cost-plus contracts.
We currently generate, and expect to continue to generate, more than half of our revenues under
fixed price contracts. Our most significant cost drivers are the cost of labor, the cost of
materials and the cost of casualty and health insurance. These costs may vary from the costs we
originally estimated. Variations from estimated contract costs along with other risks inherent in
performing fixed price and unit price contracts may result in actual revenue and gross profits or
interim projected revenue and gross profits for a project differing from those we originally
estimated and could result in losses on projects. Depending on the size of a particular project,
variations from estimated project costs could have a significant impact on our operating results
for any fiscal quarter or year. We believe our exposure to losses on fixed price contracts is
limited in aggregate by the high volume and relatively short duration of the fixed price contracts
we undertake. Additionally, we derive a significant amount of our revenues from new construction
and from the southern part of the United States. Downturns in new construction activity in the
southern part of the United States could negatively affect our results.
We complete most projects within one year. We frequently provide service and maintenance work
under open-ended, unit price master service agreements which are renewable annually. We recognize
revenue on service, time and material work when services are performed. Work performed under a
construction contract generally provides that the customers accept completion of progress to date
and compensate us for services rendered measured in terms of units installed, hours expended or
some other measure of progress. Revenues from construction contracts are recognized on the
percentage-of-completion method in accordance with the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants Statement of Position (SOP) 81-1, Accounting for Performance of Construction-Type and
Certain Production-Type Contracts. Percentage-of-completion for construction contracts is measured
principally by the percentage of costs incurred and accrued to date for each contract to the
estimated total costs for each contract at completion. We generally consider contracts
substantially complete upon departure from the work site and acceptance by the customer. Contract
costs include all direct material and labor costs and those indirect costs related to contract
performance, such as indirect labor, supplies, tools, repairs and depreciation costs. Changes in
job performance, job conditions, estimated contract costs, profitability and final contract
settlements may result in revisions to costs and income and the effects of these revisions are
recognized in the period in which the revisions are determined. Provisions for total estimated
losses on uncompleted contracts are made in the period in which such losses are determined.
We evaluate goodwill for potential impairment in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. Included in this
evaluation are certain assumptions and estimates to determine the fair values of reporting units
such as estimates of future cash flows, discount rates as well as assumptions and estimates related
to the valuation of other identified intangible assets. Changes in these assumptions and estimates
or significant changes to the market value of our common stock could materially impact our results
of operations or financial position. During the six months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006, we
recorded goodwill impairments of $0.6 million and $ million, respectively.
In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-lived
Assets, we periodically assess whether any impairment indicators exist. If we determine impairment
indicators exist, we conduct an evaluation to determine whether any impairment has occurred. This
evaluation includes certain assumptions and estimates to determine fair value of asset groups
including estimates about future cash flows, discount rates, among others. Changes in these
assumptions and estimates or significant
40
changes to the market value of our common stock could materially impact our results of
operations or financial projections. During the six months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006, we
recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $0.1 million and $0.4 million, respectively, related to
long-lived assets of continuing operations.
We provide an allowance for doubtful accounts for unknown collection issues, in addition to,
reserves for specific accounts receivable where collection is considered doubtful. Inherent in the
assessment of the allowance for doubtful accounts are certain judgments and estimates including,
among others, our customers access to capital, our customers willingness to pay, general economic
conditions and the ongoing relationships with our customers.
In addition to these factors, our business and the method of accounting for construction
contracts requires the review and analysis of not only the net receivables, but also the amount of
billings in excess of costs and costs in excess of billings integral to the overall review of
collectibility associated with our billings in total. The analysis management utilizes to assess
collectibility of our receivables includes detailed review of older balances, analysis of days
sales outstanding where we include in the calculation, in addition to accounts receivable balances
net of any allowance for doubtful accounts, the level of costs in excess of billings netted against
billings in excess of costs, and the ratio of accounts receivable, net of any allowance for
doubtful accounts plus the level of costs in excess of billings, to revenues. These analyses
provide an indication of those amounts billed ahead or behind the recognition of revenue on our
construction contracts and are important to consider in understanding the operational cash flows
related to our revenue cycle.
We are insured for workers compensation, automobile liability, general liability, employment
practices and employee-related health care claims, subject to large deductibles. Our general
liability program provides coverage for bodily injury and property damage that is neither expected
nor intended. Losses up to the deductible amounts are accrued based upon our estimates of the
liability for claims incurred and an estimate of claims incurred but not reported. The accruals are
derived from actuarial studies, known facts, historical trends and industry averages utilizing the
assistance of an actuary to determine the best estimate of the ultimate expected loss. We believe
such accruals to be adequate. However, self-insurance liabilities are difficult to assess and
estimate due to unknown factors, including the severity of an injury, the determination of our
liability in proportion to other parties, the number of incidents not reported and the
effectiveness of our safety program. Therefore, if actual experience differs from the assumptions
used in the actuarial valuation, adjustments to the reserve may be required and would be recorded
in the period that the experience becomes known.
We regularly evaluate valuation allowances established for deferred tax assets for which
future realization is uncertain. We perform this evaluation at least annually at the end of each
fiscal year. The estimation of required valuation allowances includes estimates of future taxable
income. In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets at March 31, 2006, we considered that
it was more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets would be realized. The
ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable
income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. We consider the
scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income and tax planning
strategies in making this assessment.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2005 COMPARED TO THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 31, 2006
The following table presents selected unaudited historical financial information for the six
months ending March 31, 2005 and 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
% |
|
2006 |
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
534.3 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
504.3 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
Cost of services (including depreciation) |
|
|
469.9 |
|
|
|
88 |
% |
|
|
438.5 |
|
|
|
87 |
% |
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
64.4 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
65.8 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
Selling, general & administrative expenses |
|
|
69.9 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
68.9 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
Reorganization items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
12.1 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
Interest and other expense, net |
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(19.3 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
)% |
|
|
(29.0 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
)% |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(20.0 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
)% |
|
|
(29.5 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
)% |
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
% |
|
2006 |
|
% |
Net income (loss) from discontinued operations |
|
|
(10.8 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(30.8 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
)% |
|
$ |
(29.2 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
)% |
|
|
|
REVENUES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of Total Revenues |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
74 |
% |
|
|
64 |
% |
Residential |
|
|
26 |
% |
|
|
36 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
Total
revenues decreased $30.0 million, or 5.6%, from
$534.3 million for the six months ended
March 31, 2005, to $504.3 million for the six months ended March 31, 2006. This decrease in
revenues is primarily the result of a decrease in revenues of $71.4 million in commercial and
industrial revenues offset by an increase of $41.3 million in residential revenues for the six
months ended March 31, 2006.
In March 2006, we committed to a plan (Exit Plan) to exit certain business units in our
commercial and industrial segments (see Part I, Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal
Activities). These business units accounted for
$113.8 million and $50.2 million in revenues for
the six months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006, respectively.
Commercial
and industrial revenues decreased $71.4 million, or 18.2%, from $392.8 million for
the six months ended March 31, 2005, to $321.4 million for
the six months ended March 31, 2006.
Of the $71.4 million decrease in revenues, $63.6 is associated with the business units in the Exit
Plan. For the remaining businesses the decrease in revenues for the six months ending March 31,
2006 is primarily the result of lack of bonding, more selective bidding, and the impact of the
bankruptcy on new business development.
Residential revenues increased $41.3 million, or 29.2%, from $141.5 million for the six months
ended March 31, 2005 to $182.8 million for the six months
ended March 31, 2006, primarily as a
result of continuing increased demand for new single-family and multi-family housing in the markets
we serve.
GROSS PROFIT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Gross Profit Margins |
|
|
As a Percent of Segment Revenues |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
8.8 |
% |
|
|
9.7 |
% |
Residential |
|
|
21.0 |
% |
|
|
18.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company |
|
|
12.1 |
% |
|
|
13.1 |
% |
|
|
|
Gross
profit increased $1.4 million, or 2.2%, from $64.4 million
for the six months ended
March 31, 2005, to $65.8 million for the six months ended March 31, 2006. Gross profit margin as a
percentage of revenues increased from 12.1% to 13.1% for the six
months ended March 31, 2005
compared to six months ended March 31, 2006. The increase in gross profit dollars from the six
months ended March 31, 2005 compared to the six months ended March 31, 2006 was primarily due to
increased gross profits
42
resulting from increased revenues in our residential segment. The increase
in gross margin from the six months ended March 31, 2005 compared to the six months ended March 31,
2006 is attributable to a shift in our revenue mix to include more residential revenue, which has a
higher gross margin, and improved profitability in our commercial and industrial segments.
The business units associated with the Exit Plan accounted for gross profit of $2.1 million
for the six months ended March 31, 2005 and a negative gross profit of $4.9 million for the six
months ended March 31, 2006. Commercial and industrial gross
profit decreased $3.4 million, or 9.9%, from $34.7 million
for the six months ended March 31, 2005 to $31.3 million for the six
months ended March 31, 2006. Commercial and industrial gross profit margin as a percentage of
revenues increased from 8.8% for the six months ended March 31, 2005, to 9.7% for the six months
ended March 31, 2006. Of the $3.4 million decrease in gross profit, $7.0 million is associated
with the Exit Plan business units. For the remaining businesses, the increase in gross profit
margin as a percentage of revenues was primarily the result of increased job profitability at
specific subsidiaries and improvement in gross profit for commercial and industrial as we complete
older less profitable work.
Residential gross profit increased $4.8 million, or 16.1%, from $29.8 million for the six
months ended March 31, 2005, to $34.6 million for the six
months ended March 31, 2006 due to
higher sales volume. Residential gross profit margin as a percentage of revenues decreased from
21.0% for the six months ended March 31, 2005, to 18.9% for the six months ended March 31, 2006.
This decrease is due to the increase in costs of materials, particularly copper wire, which have
not fully been passed to customers.
SELLING, GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Selling, general and administrative expenses decreased $1.0 million, or 1.5%, from $69.9
million for the six months ended March 31, 2005, to $68.9 million for the six months ended March
31, 2006. Selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenues increased from
13.1% for the six months ended March 31, 2005 to 13.7% for the
six months ended March 31, 2006.
Employment expenses decreased $1.2 million due to a reduction in work force. There were reductions
in occupancy expense of $1.1 million as a result of consolidation of offices and renegotiation of
more favorable terms in existing locations, net of early lease terminations of $0.5 which occurred
in the second quarter of 2006. Depreciation expense decreased $0.4 million as a result of the
impairment and write down of assets in accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-lived Assets taken in fiscal year 2005 and a reduction of $0.9 million in
insurance expense. These reductions were partially offset by
additional costs incurred of $1.2 million for bad debt expense and $1.2
million for legal fees during the six months ended March 31, 2006 resulting from litigation. An
additional $0.4 million in professional fees was incurred during the first quarter of fiscal 2006
related to our debt restructuring efforts.
The Exit Plan business units, accounted for selling, general and administrative expenses of
$8.6 million for the six months ended March 31, 2005 and $8.6 million for the six months ended
March 31, 2006.
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS
Income (loss) from operations increased $2.4 million from an operating loss of $5.5 million
for the six months ended March 31, 2005, to an operating loss of $3.1 million for the six months
ended March 31, 2006. This increase in income (loss) from operations was attributed to increased
demand for new single-family and mutli-family housing during the six months ended March 31, 2006
over the same period in the prior year improving gross profit by $1.4 million. This increased
demand has shifted the revenue mix to include more residential revenue, which has higher gross
margins, coupled with improved profitability in the commercial and industrial segments. Also
attributing to the improvement in income from operations is the decrease in selling, general and
administrative costs of $1.0 million during the six months ended March 31, 2006.
In addition, the businesses associated with the Exit Plan, accounted for losses from
operations of $6.5 million for the six months ended March 31, 2005 and losses of $13.5 million for
the six months ended March 31, 2006.
REORGANIZATION ITEMS
During the quarter ended March 31, 2006, in connection with our restructuring, we recorded
reorganization items totaling $12.1 million. Reorganization items incurred were $8.1 million in
professional fees related to the bankruptcy and a non-cash charge of $4.0 million to write off
certain unamortized debt issuance costs, debt discounts and premiums, and embedded derivative
liabilities related to our senior convertible notes and senior subordinated notes.
43
NET INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE
Interest and other expense, net decreased from $13.8 million for the six months ending March
31, 2005, to $13.8 million for the six months ending March 31, 2006. The decrease in net interest
and other expense was the result of having only 45 days of interest accrued for the Senior
Subordinated Notes in the second quarter of 2006 up to the date of filing Chapter 11 (see Part 1,
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations -
Senior Convertible Notes) versus interest accrued for the full six months ended March 31, 2005,
which resulted in a $2.0 million decrease in interest expense for the six months ended March 31,
2006. There was also a $0.7 million in non-cash mark-to-market interest associated with the
embedded conversion option within our Senior Convertible notes issued in November 2004, no such
event occurred for the six months ending March 31, 2006. In addition, there was $0.3 million in
interest income related to the cash collateral held by our surety, not in the six months ending March 31, 2005. This
was partially offset by deferred financing costs of $3.8 million associated with the Pre-Petition
Credit Facility written off in the second quarter 2006 as a result of entering the DIP Credit
Facility.
PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES
Our effective
tax rate decreased from a negative rate of 3.3% for the six months ending March
31, 2005 to a negative rate of 2.5% for the six months ending March 31, 2006. This decrease is
attributable to a pretax net loss, permanent differences required to be added back for income tax
purposes, an additional valuation allowance against certain federal and state deferred tax assets
and a change in contingent tax liabilities.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2005 COMPARED TO THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 31, 2006
The following table presents selected unaudited historical financial information for the three
months ending March 31, 2005 and 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
% |
|
2006 |
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions) |
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
268.9 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
245.2 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
Cost of services (including depreciation) |
|
|
238.4 |
|
|
|
89 |
% |
|
|
216.2 |
|
|
|
88 |
% |
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
30.5 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
29.0 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
Selling, general & administrative expenses |
|
|
35.2 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
36.0 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(4.7 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
(7.0 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
Reorganization items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
12.1 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
Interest and other expense, net |
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(9.6 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
)% |
|
|
(27.1 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
)% |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(10.0 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
)% |
|
|
(27.4 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
)% |
Net loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
(3.2 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(13.2 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
)% |
|
$ |
(27.4 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
)% |
|
|
|
REVENUES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of Total Revenues |
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
75 |
% |
|
|
62 |
% |
Residential |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
38 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
44
Total revenues decreased $23.7 million, or 8.8%, from $268.2 million for the three months
ending March 31, 2005, to $245.2 million for the three months ending March 31, 2006. This decrease
in revenues is primarily the result of a decrease in revenues of $48.1 million in commercial and
industrial revenues offset by an increase of $24.4 million in residential revenues for the three
months ending March 31, 2006.
In March 2006, we committed to a plan (Exit Plan) to exit certain business units in our
commercial and industrial segments (see Part I, Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal
Activities). These business units accounted for $53.9 million and $17.6 million in revenues for
the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006, respectively.
Commercial and industrial revenues decreased $48.1 million, or 24.0%, from $200.8 million for
the three months ending March 31, 2005, to $152.7 million for the three months ending March 31,
2006. Of the $48.1 million decrease in revenues, $36.3 is associated with the business units in the
Exit Plan. For the remaining businesses, the decrease in revenues for the three months ending March
31, 2006 is primarily the result of lack of bonding, more selective bidding and the impact on new
business development due to the bankruptcy.
Residential revenues increased $24.4 million, or 35.8%, from $68.1 million for the three
months ending March 31, 2005 to $92.5 million for the three months ending March 31, 2006, primarily
as a result of continuing increased demand for new single-family and multi-family housing in the
markets we serve.
GROSS PROFIT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Gross Profit Margins |
|
|
As a Percent of Segment Revenues |
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
7.2 |
% |
Residential |
|
|
22.6 |
% |
|
|
19.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company |
|
|
11.3 |
% |
|
|
11.8 |
% |
|
|
|
Gross
profit decreased $1.5 million, or 5.0%, from $30.5 million for the three months ending
March 31, 2005, to $29.0 million for the three months ending March 31, 2006. Gross profit margin as
a percentage of revenues increased from 11.3% to 11.8% for the three months ending March 31, 2005
compared to three months ending March 31, 2006. The decrease in gross profit dollars from the three
months ending March 31, 2005 compared to the three months ending March 31, 2006 was primarily due
to reduced gross profit margins on higher revenue in our residential segment. The increase in gross
margin from the three months ended
March 31, 2005 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2006 is attributable to a shift in
our revenue mix to include more residential revenue, which has a higher gross margin and improved
profitability in our commercial and industrial segment.
The business units associated with the Exit Plan accounted for negative gross profit margin of
$0.3 million and $6.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006, respectively.
Commercial and industrial gross profit decreased $4.0 million, or 26.7%, from $15.1 million for the
three months ending March 31, 2005 to $11.1 million for the three months ending March 31, 2006.
Commercial and industrial gross profit margin as a percentage of revenues decreased from 7.5% for
the three months ending March 31, 2005, to 7.2% for the three months ending March 31, 2006. Of the
$4.0 million decrease in gross profit, $6.4 million is associated with the Exit Plan business
units. For the remaining businesses, the increase in gross profit margin as a percentage of
revenues was primarily the result of increased job profitability at specific subsidiaries and
improvement in gross profit for commercial and industrial as we complete older less profitable
work.
Residential gross profit increased $2.5 million, or 16.3%, from $15.4 million for the three
months ending March 31, 2005, to $17.9 million for the three months ending March 31, 2006 driven by
continued strong demand for single family housing. Residential gross profit margin as a percentage
of revenues decreased from 22.6% for the three months ending March 31, 2005, to 19.4% for the three
months ending March 31, 2006. This decrease is due to the increase in costs of materials,
particularly copper wire, which have not fully been passed to customers.
45
SELLING, GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Selling, general and
administrative expenses increased $0.8 million, or 2.3%, from $35.2
million for the three months ending March 31, 2005, to $36.0 million for the three months ending
March 31, 2006. Selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenues increased
from 13.1% for the three months ending March 31, 2005 to 14.7% for the three months ending March
31, 2006. Employment expenses decreased $0.2 million due to a reduction in work force. There were
also reductions in occupancy expense of $0.5 million as a result of consolidation of offices and
renegotiation of more favorable terms in existing locations, net of early lease terminations
expense of $0.5 which occurred in the second quarter of 2006, and a reduction of $0.4 million in
insurance expense. These reductions were partially offset by additional costs incurred of $0.3
million for travel and $1.5 million for bad debt expense.
The business units associated with the Exit Plan accounted for selling, general and
administrative expenses of $4.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and $5.4 million
for the three months ended March 31, 2006.
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS
Income
(loss) from operations increased $2.3 million from an operating loss of $4.7 million
for the three months ending March 31, 2005, to an operating loss of $7.0 million for the three
months ending March 31, 2006. This decrease in income (loss) from
operations was attributed to the decrease of $1.5 million in gross profit during the three months ending March 31, 2006
over the same period in the prior year and the decrease in selling, general and administrative
costs of $0.8 million during the three months ending March 31, 2006.
The
business units included in the Exit Plan accounted for losses from operations of
$4.6 million and $12.1 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2005 and 2006, respectively. Of the $2.3 million decrease in
income (loss)
from operations, $7.5 million is associated with the Exit Plan business units. For the remaining businesses, the increase in income (loss) form operations was primarily the result of increased demand for new single-family and multi-family housing.
REORGANIZATION ITEMS
During the quarter ended March 31, 2006, in connection with our restructuring, we recorded
reorganization items totaling $12.1 million. Reorganization items incurred were $8.1 million in
professional fees related to the bankruptcy and a non-cash charge of $4.0 million to write off
certain unamortized debt issuance costs, debt discounts and premiums, and embedded derivative
liabilities related to our senior convertible notes and senior subordinated notes.
NET INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE
Interest and other expense, net increased from $4.9 million for the three months ending March
31, 2005, to $8.0 million for the three months ending March 31, 2006. This increase was primarily a
result of deferred financing costs of $3.8 million associated with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility
written off in the second quarter 2006 as a result of entering the DIP Credit Facility. This was
partially offset by having only 45 days of interest accrued for the Senior Subordinated Notes in
the second quarter of 2006 up to the date of filing Chapter 11 (see Part 1, Item 2. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Senior Convertible
Notes) versus interest accrued for the full three months ended March 31, 2005, which resulted in a
$2.0 million decrease in interest expense for the three months ended March 31, 2006. There was
also a $2.0 million decrease in non-cash mark-to-market interest associated with the embedded
conversion option within our Senior Convertible Notes issued in November 2004, no such event
occurred for the three months ending March 31, 2006.
PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES
Our
effective tax rate increased from a negative rate of 5.3% for the three months ending
March 31, 2005 to a negative rate of 1.1% for the three months ending March 31, 2006. This decrease
is attributable to a pretax net loss, permanent differences required to be added back for income
tax purposes, an additional valuation allowance against certain federal and state deferred tax
assets and a change in contingent tax liabilities.
RECONCILIATION
OF NET LOSS TO PRIOR GUIDANCE
The
net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2006 was
$27.4 million. On April 21, 2006, we filed on Form 8-K
estimated results for the three months ended March 31, 2006. The
estimated range for the net loss for the three months ended
March 31, 2006 was $12.5 million to $15.8 million. The
primary difference between our actual net loss and the previously
estimated net loss is attributable to: 1) an adjustment of
$12.1 million to expense reorganization items related to the Restructuring and 2) an adjustment of
$2.6 million to adjust to estimated net realizable value the accounts
receivable, inventory and costs and estimated earnings in excess of
billings on uncompleted contracts related to the business units
to be shut down or consolidated pursuant to the Exit Plan.
DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
During October 2004, we announced plans to begin a strategic alignment including the planned
divestiture of certain commercial segments, underperforming subsidiaries and those that rely
heavily on surety bonding for obtaining a majority of their projects. This plan included management
actively seeking potential buyers of the selected companies among other activities necessary to
complete the sales. Management expected to be able to sell all considered subsidiaries at their
respective fair market values at the date of sale determined by a reasonably accepted valuation
method. The discontinued operations disclosures include only those identified subsidiaries
qualifying for discontinued operations treatment for the periods presented.
46
In December 2005, we completed our previously announced divestiture program. Since our start
in October 2004, we sold 14 units, primarily operating in the commercial and industrial markets,
for total consideration to date of $61.2 million and have closed two units. These 16 units had
combined net revenues of $154.1 million and an operating loss of $12.9 million in fiscal 2005.
During the
six months ended March 31, 2005, we completed the sale of seven business units as
part of the plan described above. During the quarter ended December 31, 2005, we completed the sale
of the last business unit under the plan described above. These sales generated a pre-tax gain
(loss) of $(0.2) million and $0.5 million, respectively, and have been recognized in the six months
ended March 31, 2005 and 2006 as discontinued operations in the respective consolidated statements
of operations. All prior year amounts have been reclassified as appropriate. Depreciation expense
associated with discontinued operations for the three and six months
ended March 31, 2005 was $0.4 million and $0.9
million, respectively. There was no depreciation expense for the
three and six months ended March 31, 2006. Summarized financial data for discontinued operations are outlined below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
43,071 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
101,202 |
|
|
$ |
5,464 |
|
Gross profit |
|
|
4,477 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
7,719 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
Pretax income (loss) |
|
|
(2,961 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(10,514 |
) |
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of |
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
$ |
8,456 |
|
|
$ |
159 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
|
464 |
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
|
900 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
|
3,421 |
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
|
768 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other noncurrent assets |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
$ |
14,017 |
|
|
$ |
258 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
|
$ |
3,411 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
|
1,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
|
4,825 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets |
|
|
$ |
9,192 |
|
|
$ |
207 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill Impairment Associated with Discontinued Operations
During the three and six months ending March 31, 2005, we recorded a goodwill impairment
charge of $3.4 million and $8.6 million, respectively, related to the identification of certain
subsidiaries for disposal by sale. This impairment charge is included in the net loss from
discontinued operations caption in the statement of operations. The impairment charge was
calculated based on the assessed fair value ascribed to the subsidiaries identified for disposal
less the net book value of the assets related to those subsidiaries. The fair value utilized in
this calculation was the same as that discussed in the following paragraph addressing the
impairment of discontinued operations. Where the fair value did not exceed the net book value of a
subsidiary including goodwill, the goodwill balance was impaired as appropriate. This impairment of
goodwill was determined prior to the disclosed calculation of any additional impairment of the
identified subsidiary disposal group as required pursuant to SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. There was no goodwill impairment during the quarter
ending March 31, 2006 related to discontinued operations.
47
Impairment Associated with Discontinued Operations
In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived
Assets, during the three and six months ending March 31, 2005, we recorded an impairment charge of
$0.3 million and $1.0 million related to the identification of certain subsidiaries for disposal by
sale prior to the end of the fiscal 2005. The impairment was calculated as the difference between
the fair values, less costs to sell, assessed at the date the companies individually were selected
for sale and their respective net book values after all other adjustments had been recorded. In
determining the fair value for the disposed assets and liabilities, we evaluated past performance,
expected future performance, management issues, bonding requirements, market forecasts and the
carrying value of such assets and liabilities and received a fairness opinion from an independent
consulting and investment banking firm in support of this determination for certain of the
subsidiaries included in the assessment. The impairment charge was related to subsidiaries included
in the commercial and industrial segment of our. There was no impairment charge for long-lived
assets during the quarter ending March 31, 2006 related to discontinued operations.
WORKING CAPITAL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
CURRENT ASSETS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
28,349 |
|
|
$ |
18,134 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
9,596 |
|
|
|
20,060 |
|
Accounts receivable: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade, net of allowance of $3,912 and $4,483 respectively |
|
|
180,305 |
|
|
|
164,032 |
|
Retainage |
|
|
48,246 |
|
|
|
41,286 |
|
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
24,678 |
|
|
|
22,447 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
22,563 |
|
|
|
23,579 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
24,814 |
|
|
|
26,837 |
|
Assets held for sale associated with discontinued operations |
|
|
14,017 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
$ |
352,568 |
|
|
$ |
316,633 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current maturities of long-term debt |
|
$ |
223,857 |
|
|
$ |
222,910 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
120,812 |
|
|
|
117,260 |
|
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts |
|
|
35,761 |
|
|
|
26,398 |
|
Liabilities related to assets held for sale associated with discontinued operations |
|
|
4,825 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
$ |
385,255 |
|
|
$ |
366,619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working capital |
|
$ |
(32,687 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,986 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working capital decreased $17.3 million, or 52.9%. The decrease in working capital is a result
of total current assets decreased $35.9 million, or 10.2%, from $352.6 million as of September 30,
2005 to $316.6 million as of March 31, 2006. This is the result of a $16.3 million decrease in
trade accounts receivable, net, due to a company-wide focus on collections and the timing of
billings on projects in progress, $13.8 million decrease in assets held for sale associated with
discontinued operations due to the sale of one business unit during the six months ending March 31,
2006, $7.0 million decrease in retainage due to collections; partially offset by an increase in
inventory of $1.0 million related to growth in the residential business and prepaid expenses and
other current assets of $2.0 million.
As of March 31, 2006, the status of our costs in excess of billings versus our billings in
excess of costs decreased over that at September 30, 2005; and days sales outstanding decreased by
two days from 75 days at September 30, 2005 to 73 days at March 31, 2006. Our receivables and costs
and earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts as compared to quarterly revenues
decreased from 93.4% at September 30, 2005 to 90.6% at March 31, 2006, when adjusted for a balance
of $5.2 million as of September 30, 2005 in long-standing receivables not outstanding at March 31,
2006. As is common in the construction industry, some
48
of these receivables are in litigation or
require us to exercise our contractual lien rights and are expected to be collected. These
receivables are primarily associated with a few operating companies within our commercial and
industrial segments. Some of our receivables are slow pay in nature or require us to exercise our
contractual or lien rights. We believe that our allowance for doubtful accounts is sufficient to
cover any uncollectible accounts as of March 31, 2006.
The decrease in total current assets was partially offset by total current liabilities, which
decreased $18.6 million, or 4.8%, from $385.3 million as of September 30, 2005 to $366.6 million as
of March 31, 2006. This decrease is primarily the result of a $3.6 million decrease in accounts
payable and accrued expenses due to the timing of payments made and reduced operating activity
resulting from the seasonality of our business during the six months ending March 31, 2006, a $4.8
million decrease related to the sale of a business unit during the six months ending March 31, 2006
pursuant to a divestiture plan previously disclosed and a $9.4 million decrease in billings in
excess of costs. See Liquidity and Capital Resources below for further information.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
As of March 31, 2006, we had cash and cash equivalents of $18.1 million, restricted cash of
$20.1 million, negative working capital of $50.0 million, no outstanding borrowings under our DIP
Credit Facility, $59.1 million of letters of credit outstanding, and available capacity under our
DIP Credit Facility of $20.0 million. The principal amounts outstanding under our Senior
Subordinated Notes and Senior Convertible Notes were
$172.9 million and $50.0 million, respectively.
During the six months ending March 31, 2006, we used $3.6 million of
net cash from operating
activities. This net cash provided by operating activities comprised
of a net loss of $29.2 million, decreased by $16.3 million of non-cash charges related primarily to $4.0 million of
reorganization items associated with the bankruptcy, $5.2 million of amortization of deferred
financing costs and $3.5 million of other depreciation and
amortization expense, and $2.4 million
bad debt expense; and offset by changes in working capital of $14.1 million. Working capital
changes consisted of a $1.9 million increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses, $2.0 million
decrease in prepaid expenses and other current assets and a $1.0 million increase in inventories;
offset by a $22.1 million decrease in accounts receivable due to the timing of and increased focus
on collections. Additionally, billings in excess of costs decreased $9.4 million. Net cash used in
investing activities was $6.4 million related to the purchase of property and equipment of $1.5
million and additional cash collateral of $10.5 million held by BofA as security for our
obligations under the credit
facility, recorded as restricted cash on the balance sheet (see Note 4). Net cash used in
financing activities was $7.4 million consisting of $1.4 million related to debt issuance costs
associated with the DIP Facility and $6.0 million in debt restructure costs.
Pre Petition Chapter 11
As
further described in Part I, Item 2. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Update on Financial Restructuring and Subsequent
Events, on February 14, 2006 we filed the Chapter 11 Cases. As of the Commencement Date, our indebtedness consisted of the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, Senior Convertible Notes, and Senior Subordinated Notes.
Credit Facility
On August 1, 2005, we entered into a three-year $80 million asset-based revolving credit
facility (the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) with Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent
(BofA). The Pre-Petition Credit Facility replaced our existing revolving credit facility with
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., which was scheduled to mature on August 31, 2005. IES and each of our
operating subsidiaries are co-borrowers and are jointly and severally liable for all obligations
under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. Our other subsidiaries have guaranteed all of the
obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The obligations of the borrowers and the
guarantors are secured by a pledge of substantially all our assets
and our subsidiaries assets,
excluding any assets pledged to secure surety bonds procured by us and our subsidiaries in
connection with their operations.
The Pre-Petition Credit Facility allowed us and the other borrowers to obtain revolving credit
loans and provided for the issuance of letters of credit. The amount available at any time under
the Pre-Petition Credit Facility for revolving credit loans or the issuance of letters of credit
was determined by a borrowing base calculated as a percentage of accounts receivable, inventory and
equipment. The borrowings were limited to $80 million.
We amended the Pre-Petition Credit Facility to provide relief for the fixed charge coverage
test for the months of August and September 2005, and eliminated the requirement for a fixed charge
covenant test to be performed in September and October 2005. The second amendment obtained limited
availability under the facility by requiring us to have at least $12.0 million in excess funds
availability at all times.
On January 3, 2006, we entered into a further amendment, effective December 30, 2005, to the
Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The amendment eliminated the fixed charge coverage test for the
period ending November 30, 2005 and provided that the test for the period ending December 31, 2005
would not be made until the delivery on or before January 16, 2006 of financial statements covering
such period. The amendment further provided a limited waiver of any
event of default that would
otherwise exist with respect to the audited annual financial statements for the period ending
September 30, 2005. Subsequent amendments further extended the delivery date for financial
statements covering the periods ending December 31, 2005 to January 26, 2006. These amendments
required the
49
payments of fees upon their execution. These fees are capitalized as deferred
financing costs to be amortized over the life of the facility.
As of January 26, 2006, we failed to meet the fixed charge coverage test for the period ending
December 31, 2005, constituting an Event of Default under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility.
Additionally, we were in default with respect to the pledge of its ownership interest in EnerTech
Capital Partners II L.P. to BofA as collateral under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. By reason of
the existence of these defaults, BofA did not have any obligation to make additional extensions of
credit under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility and had full legal right to exercise its rights and
remedies under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility and related agreements.
On
January 27, 2006, we entered into a forbearance agreement (the Forbearance Agreement) with
BofA in connection with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The Forbearance Agreement provided for
BofAs forbearance from exercising its rights and remedies under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility
and related agreements from January 27, 2006 through the earliest to occur of (i) 5:00 p.m.
CST on February 28, 2006 or (ii) the date that any Forbearance Default (as defined
in the Forbearance Agreement) occurred. Notwithstanding the forbearance, on January 26, 2006, BofA
sent a blockage notice to the senior subordinated notes indenture trustee preventing any payments
from being made on such notes. Lastly, under the Forbearance Agreement, BofA had no obligation to
make any loans or otherwise extend any credit to us under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. Any
agreement by BofA to make any loans or otherwise extend any further credit was in the sole
discretion of BofA.
Capitalized terms used but not defined under this heading have the meaning set forth in the
Loan and Security Agreement dated as of August 1, 2005, and filed as exhibit 10.1 to the Form 8-K
dated August 4, 2005.
Senior Convertible Notes (subject to compromise)
On November 24, 2004, (the Issue Date), we entered into a purchase agreement for a private
placement of $36.0 million aggregate principal amount of Senior Convertible Notes. Investors in the
notes agreed to a purchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes. The notes
require payment of interest semi-annually in arrears at an annual rate of 6.5%, have a stated
maturity of November 1, 2014, constitute senior unsecured obligations, are guaranteed on a senior
unsecured basis by our significant domestic subsidiaries, and are convertible at the option of the
holder under certain circumstances into shares of our common stock at an initial conversion price of $3.25 per share, subject to adjustment. On November 1, 2008, we have the
option to redeem the Senior Convertible Notes, subject to certain conditions.
We were required to file a registration statement (the Shelf Registration Statement) with the SEC
within 180 days of the issue date. In addition, we have to ensure that the Shelf Registration
Statement be declared effective within 360 days of the Issue Date. Failure to do either of these
would result in liquidated damages to be paid to the noteholders in the amount of 0.25% per annum
for the first 90 days and 0.50% per annum thereafter. In addition, if any of the notes are ever
surrendered for repurchase and not so paid, the notes would accrue default interest of 1.0% per
annum until they have been paid or duly provided for. We did not cause the Shelf Registration
Statement to become effective by November 23, 2005 and, therefore, began incurring liquidated
damages.
The
net proceeds from the sale of the notes were used to prepay a portion of our senior secured
credit facility and for general corporate purposes. The notes, the guarantees and the shares of
common stock issuable upon conversion of the notes to be offered have not been registered under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any state securities laws and, unless so registered, the
securities may not be offered or sold in the United States except pursuant to an exemption from, or
in a transaction not subject to, the registration requirements of the Securities Act and applicable
state securities laws.
We were required to file a registration statement (the Shelf Registration Statement)
with the SEC within 180 days of the issue date of the Issue Date. In addition, we have to
ensure that the Shelf Registration Statement be declared effective within 360 days of the Issue
Date. Failure to do either of these would result in liquidated damages to be paid to the
noteholders in the amount of 0.25% per annum for the first 90 days and 0.50% per annum thereafter.
In addition, if any of the notes are ever surrendered for repurchase and not so paid, the notes
will accrue default interest of 1.0% per annum until they are paid or duly provided for. We did not cause the Shelf Registration Statement to become effective by November 23, 2005 and
therefore began incurring liquidated damages.
On February 24, 2004 and following shareholder approval, we sold $14 million in principal of our
Series B 6.5% Senior Convertible Notes due 2014, pursuant to separate option exercises by the
holders of the $36 million aggregate principal amount of Senior Convertible Notes issued by us in
an initial private placement on November 24, 2004.
A default under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, the DIP Facility or the
Senior Subordinated Notes resulting in acceleration that is not cured within 30 days is also a
cross default under the Senior Convertible Notes. In addition, other events of default under the
Senior Convertible Notes indenture include, but are not limited to, a change of control, the
delisting of our stock from a national exchange or the commencement of a bankruptcy proceeding.
The Senior Convertible Notes are a hybrid instrument comprised of two components: (1) a debt
instrument and (2) certain embedded derivatives. The embedded derivatives include a redemption
premium and a make-whole provision. In accordance with the guidance that Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 133, as amended, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, (SFAS 133) and Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 00-19, Accounting for
Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock
(EITF 00-19) provide, the embedded derivatives must be removed from the debt host and accounted
for separately as a derivative instrument. These derivative instruments will be marked-to-market
each reporting period.
During the three months ending December 31, 2004, we were required to also value the portion of the
Senior Convertible Notes that would settle in cash because shareholder approval of the Senior
Convertible Notes had not yet been obtained. The calculation of the fair value of the conversion
option was performed utilizing the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following
assumptions effective at the three months ending December 31, 2004: expected dividend yield of
0.00%, expected stock price volatility of 40.00%, weighted average risk free interest rate ranging
from 3.67% to 4.15% for four to ten years, respectively, and an expected term of four to ten years.
The valuation of the other embedded derivatives was derived by other valuation methods, including
present value measures and binomial models. The initial value of this derivative was $1.4 million
and the value at December 31, 2004 was $4.0 million, and consequently, a $2.6 million mark to
market loss was recorded. The value of this derivative immediately prior to the affirmation
shareholder vote was $2.0 million an accordingly, we recorded a mark to market gain of $2.0 million
during the three months ended March 31, 2005 for a net mark to market loss of $0.6 million during
the six months ended March 31, 2005. There have been no mark to market gain or losses during the
six months ended March 31, 2006. For the periods ending March 31, 2005 and March 31, 2006, the fair
value of the two remaining derivatives was $1.6 million and $1.5 million respectively.
Additionally, at March 31, 2005 we recorded a net discount of $0.8 million, which was being
amortized over the remaining term of the Senior Convertible Notes.
In accordance with SOP 90-7, Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the
Bankruptcy Code, when debt becomes an allowed claim by the Bankruptcy Court and the allowed claim
differs from the net carrying amount of the debt, the recorded amount should be adjusted to the
amount of the allowed claim. The Senior Convertible Notes were an allowable claim per the Court
Order dated March 17, 2006. As a result, we wrote off unamortized deferred financing fees of $2.7
million, derivative liabilities of $1.5 million and net discount of $0.7 million to reorganization
items on the Consolidated Statements of Operations for a net pre-tax impact of $1.9 million.
Senior Subordinated Notes (subject to compromise)
We have outstanding two different series of senior subordinated notes with similar terms. The notes
bear interest at 9 3/8% and will mature on February 1, 2009. Interest is paid on the
notes on February 1 and August 1 of each year. The notes are unsecured senior subordinated
obligations and are subordinated to all other existing and future senior indebtedness. The notes
are guaranteed on a senior subordinated basis by all of our subsidiaries. Under the terms of the
notes, we are required to comply with various affirmative and negative covenants including (1)
restrictions on additional indebtedness, and (2) restrictions on liens, guarantees and dividends.
At March 31, 2006, we had $172.9 million in outstanding senior subordinated notes. An interest
payment of approximately $8.1 million on the Senior Subordinated Notes was due on February 1, 2006.
We did not make this interest payment. Under the indenture for the Senior Subordinated Notes, this
non-payment did not become an Event of Default until 30 days after the due date for such payment.
We filed for Chapter 11 reorganization on February 14, 2006 in order to be able to exchange the
entire amount of our Senior Subordinated Notes into equity.
In accordance with SOP 90-7, Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the
Bankruptcy Code, when debt becomes an allowed claim by the Bankruptcy Court and the allowed claim
differs from the net carrying amount of the debt, the recorded amount should be adjusted to the
amount of the allowed claim. The Senior Subordinated Notes were an allowable claim per the Court
Order dated March 17, 2006. As a result, we wrote off unamortized deferred financing fees of $2.2
million, net debt discounts of $1.5 million, and the unamortized gain on terminated interest rate
swaps, previously disclosed, of $1.7 million to reorganization items on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations for a net pre-tax impact of $2.0 million.
In
accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) 86-30,
Classifications of Obligations When a Violation is Waived by
the Creditor, we have classified the long-term portion of our
senior convertible notes and senior subordinated notes as current
liabilities on the balance sheet due to certain defaults thereunder.
Even if we emerge from bankruptcy, which we expect to do in mid-May,
we will still have substantial indebtedness under our revolving and
term exit credit facilities.
Amendment to Surety Pledge Agreement
On January 17, 2006, we entered into an amendment to the surety agreements with Chubb,
including (i) the Restated Pledge Agreement, dated January 14, 2005, and (ii) the Underwriting,
Continuing Indemnity and Security Agreement, dated January 14, 2005. The amendment provides for
Chubbs issuance of surety bonds to support the projects in an aggregate amount of up to $20
million between the date of the amendment and February 14, 2006, the date we filed a voluntary
petition for relief under the Bankruptcy Code. We are currently in negotiations with the existing
surety bond providers regarding post-emergence surety bonding.
50
Post-Petition
Chapter 11
As
a result of the Companys commencement of the Chapter 11
Cases, the Company was required to obtain debtor-in-possession
financing. During the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases, the
Company obtained a DIP credit facility and DIP surety agreements.
Debtor-in-Possession Financing
In connection with the restructuring through a Chapter 11 plan of reorganization, we accepted
a financing commitment letter, dated February 1, 2006 (the Commitment Letter), with BofA. The
Commitment Letter states that BofA and any other lenders that choose to participate (collectively,
the DIP Lenders) would provide a credit facility
(the DIP Credit Facility) to us, as a
debtor-in-possession, upon the satisfaction of certain conditions described below.
The
DIP Credit Facility provides for aggregate financing of $80 million during the Chapter 11 case,
consisting of a revolving credit facility of up to $80 million, with a $72 million sub-limit for
letters of credit. On February 14, 2006, we entered into the DIP Credit Facility whereby all letters of
credit and other obligations outstanding under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are obligations and
liabilities under the DIP Credit Facility. Accordingly, we wrote off approximately $3.8 million in
unamortized deferred financing costs during the quarter ended March 31, 2006 related to the
Pre-Petition Credit Facility.
We have utilized the DIP Credit Facility to issue letters of credit for
(i) our insurance programs; (ii) our surety programs; and (iii) certain jobs. The remainder of the
proceeds of the DIP Credit Facility will be used for general corporate purposes.
Loans under the DIP Credit Facility bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5% or the base rate plus 1.5% on
the terms stated in the Commitment Letter. The DIP Credit Facility matures on the earliest to occur of (i)
the expiration of a period of 12 months from the closing date of the DIP Credit Facility, (ii) 45 days
after the commencement of the Chapter 11 cases if a final order approving the DIP Credit Facility has not
been entered by the Bankruptcy Court, (iii) the effective date of an approved plan of
reorganization or (iv) termination of the DIP Credit Facility.
The DIP Credit Facility is entitled to super-priority administrative expense status in accordance
with Section 364(c)(1) of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the Bankruptcy Code) and
is secured by a first priority security interest, subject to certain liens, in the collateral. The
DIP Credit Facility contemplates customary affirmative, negative and financial covenants that impose
substantial restrictions on our financial and business operations, including the ability to, among
other things, incur or secure other debt, make loans, make investments, sell assets, pay dividends
or repurchase stock.
The financial covenants require us to:
|
|
|
Maintain a Days Payable Outstanding not to exceed 25 days; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a Days Sales Outstanding of no more than 85 days; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a minimum cumulative earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation,
amortization and restructuring expenses beginning with the period ended March 2006; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain a minimum rolling four-week total cash receipts, based on a percentage of a
pre-determined budget; |
|
|
|
|
Ensure that cash disbursements do not exceed a pre-determined budget by more than the
allowed percentages on both an aggregate basis and on a line item basis unless otherwise
allowed by BofA; |
|
|
|
|
Maintain cash collateral in a cash collateral account in at least the amounts
specified in the credit agreement. |
The DIP Credit Facility contains events of default customary for debtor-in-possession financings,
including cross defaults and certain change of control events. Upon the occurrence of an event of
default, the outstanding obligations under the DIP Credit Facility may be accelerated and become due and
payable immediately.
At
March 31, 2006, we had no outstanding borrowings under the
DIP Credit Facility, $59.1 million of letters of credit
outstanding, and available capacity under the DIP Credit Facility of
$20.0 million.
We were in compliance with all the covenants under the DIP Credit Facility at March 31, 2006. On May
10, 2006, we delivered our compliance certificate to BofA and we were out of compliance with the
minimum cumulative EBITDA covenant. We expect to re-finance the DIP Credit Facility upon emerging from
bankruptcy in mid-May. See further discussion below under the caption Exit Credit Facility.
We capitalized $1.4 million in debt issuance costs during the quarter related to the DIP Credit
Facility, which are being amortized to interest expense over the expected life of the facility.
Amortization during the quarter ended March 31, 2006 was approximately $0.5 million.
51
The Chubb Surety Agreement
We are party to an Underwriting, Continuing Indemnity, and Security Agreement, dated January
14, 2005 (the Surety Agreement), with Chubb, which provides the provision of surety bonds to
support our contracts with certain customers.
In connection with our restructuring (See Part I, Item 2. Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Update on Financial Restructuring and
Subsequent Events), the Bankruptcy Court approved an interim order on February 15, 2006 granting
authority to enter into a postpetition financing agreement with Federal Insurance Company (the
Chubb DIP Agreement). The Chubb DIP Agreement provides Chubb, during our Chapter 11 case, (i) in
its sole and absolute discretion to issue up to an aggregate of $48 million in new surety bonds,
with no more than $12 million in new surety bonds to be issued in any given month, and (ii) to give
permission for use of cash collateral in the form of proceeds of all contracts which Chubb had
issued surety bonds. We are being charged a bond premium of $25 per $1,000 of the contract price
related to any new surety bond. We provided $6 million in additional collateral in the form of cash
or letters of credit in installments of $1.5 million per month, to support the new surety bonds.
Pursuant to the Chubb DIP Agreement, we paid due diligence and facility fees of $500,000 each which
are included in reorganization items on the consolidated statement of operations.
Upon emergence from Chapter 11, we expect to close into an exit bonding facility with the Chubb.
The exit bonding agreement provides Chubb in its sole and absolute discretion to issue up to an
aggregate of $70 million in new surety bonds, with no more than $10 million in new surety bonds to
be issued in any given month. We will pay a $1 million facility fee upon the closing into the
facility.
The SureTec DIP Bonding Facility
We are party to a general agreement of indemnity dated September 21, 2005 and related
documents, with SureTec Insurance Company, which provides for the provision of surety bonds to
support our contracts with certain our customers.
The Bankruptcy Court approved an interim order on February 15, 2006 approving the assumption of
certain contracts with SureTec Insurance Company (the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility). The SureTec
DIP Bonding Facility provides SureTec, during our Chapter 11 case, (i) in its sole and absolute
discretion and (ii) upon our filing of a voluntary petition for bankruptcy, to issue up to an
aggregate of $10 million in surety bonds. Bonding in excess of $5 million is subject to SureTecs
receipt of additional collateral in the form of an additional irrevocable letter of credit from
BofA in the amount of $1.5 million. Pursuant to the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility, we paid a fee of
$25,000. The SureTec DIP Bonding Facility is expected to remain in place with the same terms
subsequent to the Effective Date.
The Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility
We are party to a general agreement of indemnity dated March 21, 2006 and related documents,
with Edmund C. Scarborough, Individual Surety, to supplement the bonding capacity under the Chubb
DIP Bonding Facility and the SureTec DIP Bonding Facility.
The Bankruptcy Court approved an order on March 10, 2006 approving debtor in possession surety
bonding facility with Edmund C. Scarborough, Individual Surety (the Scarborough DIP Bonding
Facility). Under the Scarborough DIP Bonding Facility, Scarborough has agreed to extend aggregate
bonding capacity not to exceed $100 million in additional bonding capacity with a limitation on
individual bonds of $15 million. Scarborough is an individual surety (as opposed to a corporate
surety, like Chubb or SureTec), and these bonds are not rated. However, the issuance of
Scarboroughs bonds to an oblige/contractor is backed by an instrument referred to as an
irrevocable trust receipt issued by First Mountain Bancorp as trustee for investors who pledge
assets to support the receipt and thus the bond. The bonds are also reinsured.
Scarboroughs obligation to issue new bonds is discretionary and the aggregate bonding is
subject to Scarboroughs receipt of an irrevocable letter of credit from SunTrust Bank in the
amount of $2.0 million to secure all of our obligations to Scarborough; provided, however, upon
delivery of the letter of credit and payment of applicable bond premiums (estimated at 3.5% of the
face amount of each bond), Scarborough will issue bonds in the approximate amount of $23.8 million
covering our backlog of existing and pending contracts/projects. Within 120 days of the letter of
credit issuance, the letter of credit will be cancelled in exchange for the sum of $2 million by
wire transfer to a trust account selected by Scarborough. BofA, as our debtor-in-possession working
capital lender, has a lien in the proceeds generated from the bonded contracts (the Proceeds).
BofA and Scarborough have entered into an intercreditor agreement. The Scarborough DIP Bonding
Facility is expected to remain in place with the same terms subsequent to the Effective Date.
Anticipated
Post-Chapter 11
As
further described in Part I, Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations, on April 26, 2006, the Bankruptcy
Court entered the Confirmation Order approving the Plan.
As
a result, the Company anticipates that, following consummation of the
transactions contemplated by the Plan, the Companys long-term
debt will be approximately $61.3 million, comprised of
approximately $53 million borrowed and outstanding under the
Term Exit Credit Facility and approximately $8.3 million
borrowed and outstanding under the Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Revolving Exit Credit Facility
52
On February 10, 2006, we accepted a financing commitment letter (the Exit Credit Commitment
Letter) from BofA for a senior secured post-confirmation exit
credit facility (the Revolving Credit
Facility). The Exit Credit Commitment Letter states that BofA and any other lenders that choose to
participate (collectively, the Exit Credit Lenders) will
provide a Revolving Exit Credit Facility in the
aggregate amount of up to $80 million, with a $72 million sub-limit for letters of credit, for the
purpose of refinancing the DIP Credit Facility and to provide letters of credit and financing subsequent
to confirmation of a plan of reorganization. BofA has committed to lend up to $40 million of the
Revolving Exit Credit Facility and will seek to syndicate the remaining amount.
Loans
under the Revolving Exit Credit Facility will bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5% or the base rate
plus 1.5% on the terms set in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter. In addition, we will be charged
monthly in arrears (i) an unused line fee of either 0.5% or 0.375% depending on the utilization of
the credit line, (ii) a letter of credit fee equal to the applicable per annum LIBOR margin times
the amount of all outstanding letters of credit and (iii) certain other fees and charges as
specified in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter.
The
Revolving Exit Credit Facility will mature two years after the
closing date. The Revolving Exit Credit
Facility will be secured by first priority liens on substantially all of our existing and future
acquired assets, exclusive of collateral provided to sureties, on the terms set in the Exit Credit
Commitment Letter. The Revolving Exit Credit Facility states customary affirmative, negative and financial
covenants binding us as described in the Exit Credit Commitment Letter.
The
Exit Credit Commitment Letter provides that the Exit Credit Lenders are obligated to
provide the Revolving Exit Credit Facility only upon satisfaction of certain conditions, including, without
limitation (i) the completion of definitive documentation and other documents as may be requested
by BofA, (ii) the absence of a material adverse change in our business, assets, liabilities,
financial condition, business prospects or results of operation, other than the Chapter 11 Cases,
since the date of the Exit Credit Commitment Letter, (iii) BofAs receipt of satisfactory financial
projections and financial statements, (iv) BofAs satisfaction with the relative rights of BofA and
our sureties, including agreements with our sureties for the issuance of up to $75 million in
bonds, and (v) BofAs satisfaction with the plan of reorganization, including the treatment of
certain creditors, and the order confirming the plan.
The Exit Credit Commitment Letter is filed as Exhibit 10.3 on Form 8-K dated February 15, 2006
and the summary of certain terms and conditions of the Revolving Exit Credit Facility is qualified in its
entirety by reference to this exhibit.
The Term Exit Credit Facility
On February 10, 2006, we accepted a commitment letter (the Term Exit Commitment Letter) from
Eton Park Fund, L.P. and an affiliate and Flagg Street Partners LP and affiliates (collectively,
the Term Exit Lenders) for a senior secured term loan in the amount of $53 million (the Term
Exit Credit Facility). The purpose of the Term Exit Credit Facility is to refinance our 6.5% senior convertible
notes due 2014 (the Senior Convertible Notes).
The loan under the Term Exit Credit Facility will bear interest at 10.75% per annum, subject to
adjustment as set in the Term Exit Commitment Letter. Interest will be payable in cash, in arrears,
quarterly, provided that, in the sole discretion of us, until the third anniversary of the closing
date, we will have the option to direct that interest be paid by capitalizing the interest as
additional loans under the Term Exit Credit Facility. Absent the Term Exit Lenders right to demand
repayment in full on or after the fourth anniversary of the closing date, the Term Exit Credit Facility
will mature on the seventh anniversary of the closing date, at which
time all principal will become due. The Term Exit Credit Facility contemplates
customary affirmative, negative and financial covenants binding on us, including, without
limitation, a limitation on indebtedness of $90 million under
the Revolving Exit Credit Facility with a
sublimit on funded outstanding indebtedness of $25 million, as more fully described in the Term
Exit Commitment Letter. Additionally, the Term Exit Credit Facility includes provisions for optional
and mandatory prepayments on the conditions set in the Term Exit Commitment Letter. The Term Exit
Credit Facility will be secured by substantially the same collateral
as the Revolving Exit Credit Facility and will
be second in priority to the liens securing the Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Term Exit Commitment Letter provides that the Term Exit Lenders are obligated to provide
the Term Exit Credit Facility only upon the satisfaction of certain conditions, including, without
limitation, (i) completion of definitive documentation and other documents as may be requested by
the Term Exit Lenders, (ii) the Term Exit Lenders satisfaction with the final confirmation order
confirming the Debtors plan of reorganization and the occurrence of the effective date of the
plan, (iii) the repayment of the DIP Credit Facility or its
conversion into the Revolving Exit Credit
Facility, (iv) delivery of interim financial statements as well as any financial documentation
delivered to BofA, and (v) the Term Exit Lenders satisfaction with the terms and conditions of the
Revolving Exit Credit Facility.
The Term Exit Commitment Letter is filed as Exhibit 10.4 on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
February 15, 2006 and the summary of certain terms and conditions of the Term Exit Credit Facility is
qualified in its entirety by reference to this exhibit.
53
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
As is common in our industry, we have entered into certain off balance sheet arrangements that
expose us to increased risk. Our significant off balance sheet transactions include commitments
associated with noncancelable operating leases, letter of credit obligations and surety guarantees.
We enter into noncancelable operating leases for many of our vehicle and equipment needs.
These leases allow us to retain our cash when we do not own the vehicles or equipment and we pay a
monthly lease rental fee. At the end of the lease, we have no further obligation to the lessor. We
may determine to cancel or terminate a lease before the end of its term. Typically, we are liable
to the lessor for various lease cancellation or termination costs and the difference between the
then fair market value of the leased asset and the implied book value of the leased asset as
calculated in accordance with the lease agreement.
Some of our customers and vendors require us to post letters of credit as a means of
guaranteeing performance under our contracts and ensuring payment by us to subcontractors and
vendors. If our customer has reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter of credit, we would
be required to reimburse our creditor for the letter of credit. Depending on the circumstances
surrounding a reimbursement to our creditor, we may have a charge to earnings in that period. To
date we have not had a situation where a customer or vendor has had reasonable cause to effect
payment under a letter of credit. At March 31, 2006, $4.0 million of our outstanding letters of
credit were to collateralize our customers and vendors.
Some of the underwriters of our casualty insurance program require us to post letters of
credit as collateral. This is common in the insurance industry. To date we have not had a situation
where an underwriter has had reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter of credit. At March
31, 2006, $33.5 million of our outstanding letters of credit were to collateralize our insurance
program.
Many of our customers require us to post performance and payment bonds issued by a surety.
Those bonds guarantee the customer that we will perform under the terms of a contract and that we
will pay subcontractors and vendors. In the event that we fail to perform under a contract or pay
subcontractors and vendors, the customer may demand the surety to pay or perform under our bond.
Our relationship with our sureties is such that we will indemnify the sureties for any expenses
they incur in connection with any of the bonds they issues on our behalf. To date, we have not
incurred significant costs to indemnify our sureties for expenses they incurred on our behalf. As
of March 31, 2006, our cost to complete projects covered by surety bonds was approximately $69.0
million and we utilized a combination of cash, accumulated interest thereon and letters of credit totaling $40.3 million to
collateralize our bonding programs.
In April 2000, we committed to invest up to $5.0 million in EnerTech. EnerTech is a private
equity firm specializing in investment opportunities emerging from the deregulation and resulting
convergence of the energy, utility and telecommunications industries. Through March 31, 2006, we
had invested $4.3 million under our commitment to EnerTech. The carrying value of this EnerTech
investment at September 30, 2005 and March 31, 2006 was $3.1 million and $3.3 million,
respectively. This investment is accounted for on the cost basis of accounting and accordingly, we
do not record unrealized losses for the EnerTech investment that we believe are temporary in
nature. As of March 31, 2006, the unrealized losses related to our share of the EnerTech fund
amounted to approximately $0.4 million, which we believe are temporary in nature. If facts arise
that lead us to determine that such unrealized losses are not temporary, we would write down our
investment in EnerTech through a charge to other expense during the period of such determination.
As of March 31, 2006, our future contractual obligations due by September 30 of each of the
following fiscal years include (in thousands) (1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2008 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
Thereafter |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt obligations |
|
$ |
222,902 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
222,910 |
|
Operating lease obligations |
|
$ |
5,276 |
|
|
$ |
6,062 |
|
|
$ |
4,234 |
|
|
$ |
2,234 |
|
|
$ |
1,153 |
|
|
$ |
503 |
|
|
$ |
19,462 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
774 |
|
|
$ |
112 |
|
|
$ |
320 |
|
|
$ |
205 |
|
|
$ |
82 |
|
|
$ |
1,493 |
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
$ |
34 |
|
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
142 |
|
(1) The tabular amounts exclude the interest obligations that will be created if the debt and
capital lease obligations are outstanding for the
periods presented.
Our other commercial commitments expire by September 30 of each of the following fiscal years
(in thousands):
54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2008 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
Thereafter |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standby letters of credit |
|
$ |
59,064 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
59,064 |
|
Other commercial
commitments |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
650 |
(2) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
650 |
|
(2) Balance of investment commitment in EnerTech. On October 3, 2005, we invested $450,000 in
EnerTech reducing our remaining
commitment to $650,000.
OUTLOOK
On April 26, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order approving and confirming the Plan. The
Effective Date of the Plan is expected to be in the first half of May 2006. See Part I, Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Update on
Financial Restructuring and Subsequent Events for a summary of the anticipated effects of the
Plan.
Now positioned to emerge from Chapter 11, we have determined we will need to adopt fresh-start
accounting in which there will be a revaluation of our balance sheet in accordance with SOP 90-7
Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the Bankruptcy Code (SOP 90-7). We
expect to adopt fresh start accounting in May 2006. According to SOP 90-7, fresh-start accounting
is required when the existing voting shareholders immediately before filing and confirmation of the
plan receive less than 50% of the voting shares of the emerging entity and the entitys
reorganization value is less than its post-petition liabilities and allowed claims. We will have
met both criteria upon emerging from Chapter 11.
Following disappointing operating results,
the Board of Directors directed senior management to develop
alternatives with respect to certain underperforming subsidiaries. On March 28, 2006, senior
management committed to an Exit Plan with respect to those underperforming subsidiaries. The Exit
Plan commits to a shut-down or consolidation of the operations of the subsidiaries or the sale or
other disposition of the subsidiaries, whichever comes earlier. The Exit Plan is expected to be
substantially completed by September 30, 2006. We expect to
incur total incremental expenditures in the
estimated range of $5.9 million to $11.1 million under the
Exit Plan. Furthermore, as a result of inherent uncertainty in the
Exit Plan and in monetizing approximately $30.6 million in net working
capital related to these subsidiaries, we could experience potential
losses to our working capital in an estimated range of
$8.1 million to $10.0 million. During the execution of the
Exit Plan, we expect to continue to pay our vendors and suppliers in the ordinary course of
business and to complete all projects that are currently in progress. See Part I, Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Costs
Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities for a summary of the Exit Plan.
We do not expect to generate sufficient cash flow from operations for the remainder of this fiscal
year. As a result, we expect to have borrowings under our credit facility. We expect to incur
significant additional costs related to our debt restructuring which will adversely impact our cash
flows. Our cash flows from operations tend to track with the seasonality of our business. We
anticipate that the combination of cash flows and available capacity under our credit facility will
provide sufficient cash to enable us to meet our working capital needs, debt service requirements
and capital expenditures for property and equipment through the next twelve months.
We continue to manage capital
expenditures. We expect capital expenditures to be approximately $4.0 million for the remainder of this fiscal year.
Our ability to generate cash flow is dependent on our
successful completion of the proposed Restructuring and many other factors, including demand for
our products and services, the availability of projects at margins acceptable to us, the ultimate
collectibility of our receivables, the ability to consummate transactions to dispose of businesses
and our ability to borrow on our credit facility. See Disclosure Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements.
SEASONALITY AND QUARTERLY FLUCTUATIONS
Our results of operations from residential construction are seasonal, depending on weather
trends, with typically higher revenues generated during spring and summer and lower revenues during
fall and winter. The commercial and industrial aspect of our business is less subject to seasonal
trends, as this work generally is performed inside structures protected from the weather. Our
service and maintenance business is generally not affected by seasonality. In addition, the
construction industry has historically been highly cyclical. Our volume of business may be adversely affected by declines in construction
projects resulting from adverse regional or national economic conditions. Quarterly results may
also be materially affected by the timing of new construction
projects.
55
acquisitions and the timing and magnitude of acquisition assimilation costs. Accordingly, operating results for any fiscal
period are not necessarily indicative of results that may be achieved for any subsequent fiscal
period.
INFLATION
Due to the relatively low levels of inflation experienced in fiscal 2002 and 2003, inflation
did not have a significant effect on our results in those fiscal years or on any of the acquired
businesses during similar periods. During fiscal 2004 and 2005, however, we experienced significant
increases in the commodity prices of copper products, steel products and fuel. We expect to
experience continued fluctuations in commodity prices in fiscal 2006. Over the long-term, we expect
to be able to pass these increased costs to our customers.
RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, which is a
revision of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes APB
Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends SFAS No. 95, Statement of
Cash Flows. SFAS No. 123(R) requires companies to account for stock-based compensation awards
based on the fair value of the awards at the date they are granted. The resulting compensation cost
is shown as an expense in the consolidated statements of operations. This statement was effective
for beginning on October 1, 2005. SFAS No. 123(R) permits adoption using one of two methods: 1) a
modified prospective method, in which compensation cost is recognized beginning on the effective
date (a) based on the requirements of SFAS No. 123(R) for all share-based payments granted after
the effective date and (b) based on the requirements of SFAS No. 123 for all awards granted to
employees prior to the effective date of SFAS No. 123(R) that remain unvested on the effective date
and 2) a modified retrospective method that includes the requirements above, but also permits
entities to restate based on the amounts previously recognized under SFAS No. 123 for purposes of
pro forma disclosures of all prior periods presented. We adopted SFAS No. 123(R) using the
modified prospective method. As discussed above, prior to October 1, 2005, we accounted for
share-based payments to employees using the intrinsic value method and, as such, generally
recognized no compensation cost for stock option awards and stock issued pursuant to its Employee
Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Accordingly, the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) will have a significant
impact on our reported results of operations and cash flows; however, the ultimate impact of the
adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) cannot be predicted at this time because it will depend on the levels
of share-based payments granted in the future. However, had we adopted SFAS No. 123(R) in the
periods presented, the impact on results of operations would have approximated the impact of SFAS
No. 123 as presented in Note 2. SFAS No. 123(R) also requires the benefits of tax deductions in
excess of recognized compensation cost to be reported as a financing cash flow, rather than as an
operating cash flow as required under current literature. This requirement will reduce net
operating cash flows and increase net financing cash flows in periods after adoption. See further
discussion in Note 1 to the financial statements.
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Management is actively involved in monitoring exposure to market risk and continues to develop
and utilize appropriate risk management techniques. Our exposure to significant market risks
includes outstanding borrowings under our floating rate credit facility and fluctuations in
commodity prices for copper products, steel products and fuel.
As
of March 31, 2006, there were no borrowings outstanding under
our DIP Credit Facility and $50.0
million was outstanding under our senior convertible notes. The senior convertible notes are a
hybrid instrument comprised of two components: (1) a debt instrument and (2) certain embedded
derivatives. The embedded derivatives include a redemption premium and a make-whole provision. In
accordance with the guidance that Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, as amended,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, (SFAS 133) and Emerging Issues
Task Force Issue No. 00-19, Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and
Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock (EITF 00-19) provide, the embedded derivatives
must be removed from the debt host and accounted for separately as a derivative instrument. These
derivative instruments will be marked-to-market each reporting period.
During the three months ending December 31, 2004, we were required to value the portion of the
senior convertible notes that would settle in cash because of shareholder approval of the senior
convertible notes had not yet been obtained. The calculation of the fair value of the conversion
option was performed utilizing the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following
assumptions effective at the three months ending March 31, 2005: expected dividend yield of 0.00%,
expected stock price volatility of 40.00%, weighted average risk free interest rate ranging from
3.67% to 4.15% for four to ten years, respectively, and an expected term of four to ten years. The valuation of the other embedded derivatives was derived by other
valuation methods, including present value measures and binomial models. The initial value of this
derivative was $1.4 million. At March 31, 2006, the fair value of the two
56
remaining derivatives was $1.5 million. There has been no mark to market gain or losses during the six months ending March
31, 2006. Additionally, at March 31, 2005 we recorded a net discount of $0.8 million, which is
being amortized over the remaining term of the senior convertible notes. We did not cause a
registration statement to become effective on or before November 19, 2005, to register the
underlying shares for the notes and liquidated damages began to accrue at the rate of 0.25% through
February 16, 2006 and 0.50% thereafter.
In accordance with SOP 90-7, Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the
Bankruptcy Code", when debt becomes an allowed claim by the Bankruptcy Court and the allowed claim
differs from the net carrying amount of the debt, the recorded amount should be adjusted to the
amount of the allowed claim. The Senior Convertible Notes were an allowable claim per the Court
Order dated March 17, 2006. As a result, we wrote off the derivative liabilities of $1.5 million to
reorganization items on the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
As a result, our exposure to changes in interest rates results from our short-term and
long-term debt with both fixed and floating interest rates. The following table presents principal
or notional amounts (stated in thousands) and related interest rates by fiscal year of maturity for
our debt obligations and their indicated fair market value at March 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2008 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
Thereafter |
|
Total |
|
|
|
LiabilitiesDebt: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Rate (senior
subordinated notes) |
|
$ |
172,885 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
172,885 |
|
Fixed Interest Rate |
|
|
9.375 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.375 |
% |
Fixed Rate (senior
convertible notes) |
|
$ |
50,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
50,000 |
|
Fixed Interest Rate |
|
|
6.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5 |
% |
Fair Value of Debt: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Rate (senior
subordinated notes) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
216,971 |
|
Fixed Rate (senior
convertible notes) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
49,251 |
|
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a) Disclosure controls and procedures.
Disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be
disclosed by us in reports filed or submitted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange
Act) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
SECs rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and
procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed under the Exchange Act is
accumulated and communicated to management, including the principal executive and financial
officers, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. There are
inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any system of disclosure controls and procedures,
including the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of the controls and
procedures. Accordingly, even effective disclosure controls and procedures can only provide
reasonable assurance of achieving their control objectives.
An evaluation was performed under the supervision and with the participation of the Companys
management, under the supervision of our principal executive officer (CEO) and principal financial
officer (CFO), of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Companys disclosure
controls and procedures as of March 31, 2006. Based on that evaluation and the material weakness
identified below, the Companys management, including the CEO and the CFO, concluded that the
Companys disclosure controls and procedures were not effective, as of March 31, 2006.
The conclusion that the Companys disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of
March 31, 2006, was based on the identification of a material weakness in internal controls as
of September 30, 2005, for which remediation is still ongoing.
(b) Update on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as
of September 30, 2005. In making this assessment, it used the framework entitled Internal Control
Integrated Framework set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring
57
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on its evaluation of the COSO framework applied to Integrated Electrical
Services, Inc.s internal control over financial reporting, and the identification of a material
weakness related to the Companys year-end financial statement close process with respect to
controls over certain non-routine financial reporting procedures, management concluded that the
Company did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of September 30,
2005.
This material weakness resulted, at least in part, from high turnover in an already limited
corporate finance and accounting staff and the significant demands placed on that accounting staff.
While the accounting staff was increased, many of the new staff members were not
added until late in the year, with several being added subsequent to September 30, 2005 and having
not been through even a month-end close prior to the year end close. Much of the learning required
to complete the close was done while working on the year-end close. This led to time pressures in
delivering support to our auditors and resulted in many post closing entries. We have also had
several vacancies in Regional Controller positions during fiscal 2005. These vacancies were filled
subsequent to September 30, 2005.
To remediate this material weakness, we expect to execute the following plan:
|
|
|
Provide additional training and education for the recent additions in the finance department. |
|
|
|
|
Fill the vacant Regional Controller positions. These vacancies have been filled. |
|
|
|
|
Provide more detailed structure and evaluation of the Regional Controller function. |
|
|
|
|
Continue the review and monitoring of the accounting department structure and
organization, both in terms of size and expertise. |
|
|
|
|
Continue review, testing and monitoring of the internal controls with respect to the
operation of the Companys financial reporting and close processes. |
At March 31, 2006 the Company believes that the additional steps identified above will serve
to remediate the identified material weakness. This remediation is ongoing at March 31, 2006 and
this represents the only changes to the Companys internal controls over financial reporting that
were identified in connection with the evaluation required by Rules 13a-15(d) or 15d-15(d) under
the Exchange Act during the quarter ended March 31, 2006 that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, Integrated Electrical Services, Inc.s internal control
over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In re Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 4:04-CV-3342; in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division:
Between August 20 and October 4, 2004, five putative securities fraud class actions were filed
against IES and certain of its officers and directors in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas. The five lawsuits were consolidated under the caption In re Integrated
Electrical Services, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 4:04-CV-3342. On March 23, 2005, the Court
appointed Central Laborer Pension Fund as lead plaintiff and appointed lead counsel. Pursuant to
the parties agreed scheduling order, lead plaintiff filed its amended complaint on June 6, 2005.
The amended complaint alleges that defendants violated Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements during the proposed class
period of November 10, 2003 to August 13, 2004. Specifically, the amended complaint alleges that
defendants misrepresented the Companys financial condition in 2003 and 2004 as evidenced by the
restatement, violated generally accepted accounting principles, and misrepresented the sufficiency
of the Companys internal controls so that they could engage in insider trading at
artificially-inflated prices, retain their positions at the Company, and obtain a credit facility
for the Company.
On August 5, 2005, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state
a claim. The defendants argued, among other things, that the amended complaint fails to allege
fraud with particularity as required by Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and fails
to satisfy the heightened pleading requirements for securities fraud class actions under the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Specifically, defendants argue that the amended complaint
does not allege fraud with particularity as to numerous GAAP violations and opinion statements
about internal controls, fails to raise a strong inference that
58
defendants acted knowingly or with severe recklessness, and includes vague and conclusory allegations from confidential witnesses
without a proper factual basis. Lead plaintiff filed its opposition to the motion to dismiss on
September 28, 2005, and defendants filed their reply in support of the motion to dismiss on
November 14, 2005.
On December 21, 2005, the Court held a telephonic hearing relating to the motion to dismiss.
On January 10, the Court issued a memorandum and order dismissing with prejudice all claims filed
against the Defendants. Plaintiff in the securities class action filed its notice of appeal on
February 2, 2006. On February 28, 2006 IESs filed a suggestion of bankruptcy informing the Court
that the action was automatically stayed because IES had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. On March
20, 2006 Plaintiffs filed a partial opposition to IESs suggestion of bankruptcy arguing that the
action against non-bankrupt co-defendants was not stayed. No dates for briefing the appeal have
yet been set or determined.
Radek v. Allen, et al., No. 2004-48577; in the 113th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas:
On September 3, 2004, Chris Radek filed a shareholder derivative action in the District Court
of Harris County, Texas naming Herbert R. Allen, Richard L. China, William W. Reynolds, Britt Rice,
David A. Miller, Ronald P. Badie, Donald P. Hodel, Alan R. Sielbeck, C. Byron Snyder, Donald C.
Trauscht, and James D. Woods as individual defendants and IES as nominal defendant. On July 15,
2005, plaintiff filed an amended shareholder derivative petition alleging substantially similar
factual claims to those made in the putative class action, and making common law claims against the
individual defendants for breach of fiduciary duties, misappropriation of information, abuse of
control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment. On September 16,
2005, defendants filed special exceptions or, alternatively, a motion to stay the derivative
action. On November 11, 2005, Plaintiff filed a response to defendants special exceptions and
motion to stay. . A hearing on defendants special exceptions and motion to stay took place on
January 9, 2006. Following that hearing, the parties submitted supplemental briefing relating to
the standard for finding director self-interest in a derivative case.
On February 10, 2006 the Court granted Defendants Special Exceptions and dismissed the suit
with prejudice. On March 10, 2006 Plaintiff filed a motion asking the court to reconsider its
ruling. Also on March 10, 2006 IES filed a suggestion of bankruptcy with the Court suggesting that
this case had been automatically stayed pursuant to the bankruptcy laws. On April 4, 2006
Plaintiff filed a response to IESs suggestion of bankruptcy opposing the application of the
automatic stay. The Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration on April 24,
2006 but deferred any ruling until the bankruptcy proceedings are completed.
SEC Investigation:
On August 31, 2004, the Fort Worth Regional Office of the SEC sent a request for information
concerning IESs inability to file its 10-Q in a timely fashion, the internal investigation
conducted by counsel to the Audit Committee of the companys Board of Directors, and the material
weaknesses identified by IESs auditors in August 2004. In December 2004, the Commission issued a
formal order authorizing the staff to conduct a private investigation into these and related
matters.
On April 20, 2006, the Company received a Wells Notice from the staff of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (Staff). In addition, the Company has been informed that Wells Notices have
been issued to its current chief financial officer and certain former executives of the Company.
The Staff has indicated that the Wells Notices relate to the accounting treatment and disclosure of
two receivables that were written down in 2004, the Companys contingent liabilities disclosures in
various prior periods, and the Companys failure to disclose a change in its policy for bad debt
reserves and resulting write-down of such reserves that occurred in 2003 and 2004. The possible
violations referenced in the Wells Notices to the Company and its chief financial officer include
violations of the books and records, internal controls and antifraud provisions of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The Company first disclosed the existence of the SEC inquiry into this matter
in November 2004.
A Wells Notice indicates that the Staff intends to recommend that the agency bring an
enforcement action against the recipients for possible violations of federal securities laws.
Recipients of Wells Notices have the opportunity to submit a statement setting forth their
interests and position with respect to any proposed enforcement action. In the event the Staff
makes a recommendation to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the statement will be forwarded
to the Commission for consideration. An adverse outcome in this matter could have a material
adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash
flows.
Sanford Airport Authority vs. Craggs Construction et al (Florida Industrial Electric):
This is a property damage suit for which the company believes will be covered by insurance but
at this time coverage has
59
been denied. In January 2003, the Sanford Airport Authority (Sanford) hired Craggs Construction Company (Craggs) to manage construction of an airport taxiway and related
improvements. Craggs entered into a subcontract with Florida Industrial Electric (FIE) to perform
certain of the electrical and lighting work. During the construction of the project, Sanford terminated Craggs contract. Sanford retained a new
general contractor to complete the project and asked that FIE remain on the project to complete its
electrical work. Sanford then filed its lawsuit against Craggs for breach of contract, claiming
Craggs failure to properly manage the project resulted in interference, delays, and deficient
work. Sanfords allegations include damage caused by the allegedly improper installation of the
runway lighting system. Craggs filed a third party complaint against FIE, alleging breach of
contract, contractual indemnity, and common law indemnity based on allegations that FIE failed to
perform its work properly.
Sanford alleges over $2.5 million in total damages; it is unclear how much of this amount
Craggs will claim arises from FIEs work. On April 27, 2006, we received notice that Craggs had
filed suit against our surety, Federal Insurance Company. Craggs claims the surety performance
bond is liable due to FIEs alleged negligence. We will defend the case for the surety and
indemnify them against any losses
Florida Power & Light Company, vs. Qualified Contractors, Davis Electrical Constructors, Inc., et
al.:
This is a property damage suit covered by insurance. Florida Power & Light Company (FPL)
retained Black & Veatch (B&V) to manage FPLs Sanford Repowering Project, including oversight of
the construction of turbine generators. In February 2002, Davis Electrical completed its
electrical and tubing installation for turbine #5C, the turbine at issue. The turbine was fired for
the first time in March 2002, and was scheduled to begin commercial operation in early June 2002.
After operating for 375 hours, the turbine suffered a failure during the first on-line water
washing of its compressor, resulting in damage to the entire turbine. FPL and its insurance
companies covered the cost of repairs, which are claimed to total approximately $9.2 million. FPL
and its insurers then filed suit against Davis, QCI and B&V, asserting that the parties breached
their warranties and contracts in failing to properly install the on-line water wash system for
turbine #5C. B&V, was dismissed on Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs have appealed that dismissal.
Trial before the judge began January 19, 2006, and was completed January 25, 2006. The judge
requested proposed findings of fact and law from both parties, which were due by February 21, 2006
but stayed by the bankruptcy. Upon our exit from bankruptcy proceedings, we anticipate the judge
will issue her ruling within weeks of receipt of the parties briefing.
Cynthia People v. Primo Electric Company, Inc., Robert Wilson, Ray Hopkins, and Darcia Perini; In
the United States District Court for the District of Maryland; C.A. No. 24-C-05-002152:
On March 10, 2005, one of IES wholly-owned subsidiaries was served with a lawsuit filed by an
ex-employee alleging thirteen causes of action including employment, race and sex discrimination as
well as claims for fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence and conversion.
On each claim plaintiff is demanding $5-10 million in compensatory and $10-20 million in punitive
damages; attorneys fees and costs. This action was filed after the local office of the EEOC
terminated their process and issued plaintiff a right-to-sue letter per her request. IES will
vigorously contest any claim of wrongdoing in this matter and does not believe the claimed damages
bear any likelihood of being found in this case. However, if such damages were to be found, it
would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition and cash flows.
Scott Watkins Riviera Electric:
There is a potential personal injury that, if filed, is expected to be covered by our general
liability policy and subject to our deductible. On September 9, 2005, Watkins suffered burn
injuries while working at a job location in Colorado. It is unclear what work he was performing,
but investigation to date indicates he was working on the fire suppression system. After gaining
access to the electrical panel, it appears Watkins used a crescent wrench for his work and during
the work the crescent wrench crossed two live electrical contacts which caused an arc flash,
resulting in burns to Mr. Watkins. It remains unknown how Watkins gained access to the electrical
panel. No litigation has been filed and the investigation is still underway. Watkins counsel
stated at a hearing before the bankruptcy judge that the litigation, although not filed yet, will
seek damages that exceed $26,000,000.
We and our subsidiaries are involved in these and various other legal proceedings that have
and do arise in the ordinary course of business. While it is not possible to predict the outcome of
any of these proceedings or other litigation or claims with
60
certainty, it is possible that the results of those legal proceedings and claims may have a material adverse effect on a subsidiary or
the consolidated entity.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
The factors set forth under the caption Risk Factors in the Companys annual report on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005 (the 10-K) and the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended December 31, 2005 (the First Quarter 10-Q) are hereby modified and supplemented
by the risks described below. In particular, all of the risk factors set forth in the First Quarter
10-Q and the risk factors pertaining to our restructuring, listing on the NYSE and class action
litigation are replaced by the risk factors below. You should carefully consider the risks
described below in addition to those set forth in the 10-K, as well as the other information
included in this document. Our business, results of operations and/or financial condition could be
materially and adversely affected by any of these risks, and the value of your investment may
decrease due to any of these risks.
We filed for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on February 14, 2006 and are
subject to the risks and uncertainties associated with Chapter 11 proceedings.
Although our plan of reorganization was confirmed on April 26, 2006, the plan has not yet
become effective and we remain subject to Chapter 11 proceedings. For the duration of our Chapter
11 proceedings, our operations, including our ability to execute our business plan, are subject to
the risks and uncertainties associated with bankruptcy. Risks and uncertainties associated with our
Chapter 11 proceedings include the following:
|
|
|
the actions and decisions of our creditors and other third parties who have interests in
our Chapter 11 proceedings that may be inconsistent with our plans; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain court approval with respect to motions in the Chapter 11 proceedings prosecuted from time to time; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to consummate our plan of reorganization and the transactions contemplated thereby; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain and maintain normal terms with vendors and service providers; and |
|
|
|
|
our ability to maintain contracts that are critical to our operations. |
These risks and uncertainties could affect our business and operations in various ways. For
example, negative events or publicity associated with our Chapter 11 proceedings could adversely
affect our sales and the relationship with our customers, as well as with vendors and employees,
which in turn could adversely affect our operations and financial condition. Also, transactions
outside the ordinary course of business are subject to the prior approval of the Bankruptcy Court,
which may limit our ability to respond timely to certain events or take advantage of certain
opportunities.
Because of the risks and uncertainties associated with our Chapter 11 proceedings, the
ultimate impact that events that occur during these proceedings will have on our business,
financial condition and results of operations cannot be accurately predicted or quantified, and
there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
There can be no assurance that we will be able to consummate the Plan or the transactions
contemplated thereby.
Although the Plan has been confirmed, the effectiveness of the Plan remains subject to certain
conditions, including, but not limited to, the confirmation order becoming a final order, the
execution and delivery of all documents necessary to effect the issuance of the new securities to
be issued under the Plan, and the closing of the term exit facilities. There can be no assurance
that these conditions will be satisfied, the Plan will become effective and the company will
thereby emerge from bankruptcy protection. Additionally, although the Plan contemplates the
Company entering into exit credit and bonding facilities, there can be no assurance that the
Company will be able to reach agreement with its lenders and sureties on such facilities, or that
such facilities will otherwise be consummated and be available for the Companys use after
emergence from bankruptcy protection.
61
We cannot be certain that our bankruptcy proceedings will not adversely affect our operations
going forward.
Although we expect to emerge from bankruptcy in the first half of May 2006 upon consummation of the
Plan, there is no assurance that we will do so, or that, if we do, having been subject to bankruptcy
protection will not adversely affect our operations going forward, including our ability to
negotiate favorable terms from suppliers and others and to attract and retain customers. The
failure to obtain such favorable terms and retain customers could adversely affect our financial
performance. Additionally, the failure of the Company to be awarded new projects during the
bankruptcy proceedings may negatively affect the Companys financial results following emergence
from bankruptcy protection.
Our
common stock is being delisted from the NYSE and there can be no assurance that the common
stock will be subsequently listed for trading on any market.
On April 11, 2006, the Company received notification from the NYSE that the Companys appeal of the
NYSEs decision to suspend and delist the Companys common stock was denied. The committee of the
Board of Directors of the NYSE directed the NYSE staff to submit an application to the Securities
and Exchange Commission to strike the common stock from listing in accordance with Section 12 of
the Securities Act of 1934. Our common stock currently trades over-the-counter on the
pink sheets under the symbol IESRQ.PK. Under the Plan, our existing common stock will be
cancelled and new common stock will be issued. Although the Company
is in the process of filing an application for listing on NASDAQ,
there can be no assurance that the common stock
will be listed for trading on any market or exchange. The market for our common stock may remain
limited.
The Class Action Litigation
In the 10-K, we included the risk captioned: The Class Action Securities Litigation if
continued or decided against us could have a material adverse effect. Between August 20, 2004 and
October 4, 2004, five putative securities fraud class actions were filed against IES and certain of
its existing and former officers and directors. The five lawsuits were consolidated under the
caption In re Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. Securities Litigation. The plaintiffs allege
that the defendants violated Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
by making materially false and misleading statements during the proposed class period of November
10, 2003 to August 13, 2004. On January 10, 2006, the district court dismissed the lawsuit, with
prejudice. Plaintiff in the securities class action filed its notice of appeal on February 2, 2006.
No dates for briefing the appeal have yet been set or determined. We believe there is no merit to
the claims, which belief is supported by the recent dismissal with prejudice.
We are the subject of an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission whose outcome is
uncertain.
We are subject to an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission concerning the
Companys inability to file its 10-Q in a timely fashion, the internal investigation conducted by
counsel to the Audit Committee of the companys Board of Directors, the material weaknesses
identified by the Companys auditors in August 2004, and related matters. As we disclosed on April
24, 2006, on April 20, 2006 the Company received a Wells Notice from the staff of the Securities
and Exchange Commission (Staff). In addition, the Company has been informed that Wells Notices
have been issued to its current chief financial officer and certain former executives of the
Company. A Wells Notice indicates that the Staff intends to recommend that the agency bring an
enforcement action against the recipients for possible violations of federal securities laws. An
adverse outcome in this matter could have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated
financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We have a substantial amount of debt. Our current debt level could limit our ability to fund
future working capital needs and increase our exposure during adverse economic conditions:
Our indebtedness could have important consequences. For example, it could:
|
|
|
increase our vulnerability to adverse operational performance and economic and industry conditions; |
|
|
|
|
limit our ability to fund future working capital, capital expenditures and other general corporate requirements; |
|
|
|
|
limit our flexibility in planning for , or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate; |
|
|
|
|
limit the amount of surety bonding available for use by subsidiaries; |
62
|
|
|
place us at a disadvantage compared to a competitor that has less debt; and |
|
|
|
|
limit our ability to borrow additional funds. |
We have a substantial amount of indebtedness outstanding under our senior subordinated notes,
senior convertible notes and DIP Credit Facility. In
accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) 86-30,
Classifications of Obligations When a Violation is Waived by the
Creditor, the Company has classified the long-term portion of
their senior convertible notes and senior subordinated notes as
current liabilities on the balance sheet due to certain defaults
thereunder. Even if the Company emerges from bankruptcy, which is
expected in mid-May, the Company will still have substantial
indebtedness under its revolving and term exit credit facilities.
To service our indebtedness, including trade payables, and working capital, we require a
significant amount of cash flow, and we cannot assure you that we will have sufficient cash flow to
meet these liquidity needs and obligations.
Our cash flow fluctuates seasonally and even daily, sometimes significantly. During our efforts to
restructure the company, these fluctuations may increase in amount and may adversely affect our
business and our cash flow. In connection with our efforts to restructure the company, some or all
of our trade creditors may refuse to extend credit to us or do business with us. If we do not
generate sufficient cash flow to pay our trade creditors or if our trade creditors refuse to do
business with us on terms acceptable to us or at all, our business, financial condition and results
of operations could be materially adversely affected.
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
On November 10, 2003, the Company announced that its Board of Directors authorized the repurchase
of up to $13 million of the Companys Common Stock. The share repurchase plan does not have an
expiration date. The table does not include 19,341 shares withheld to satisfy tax withholding
requirements related to restricted stock issued pursuant to the 1999 Plan which vested on December
1, 2005. The average price of these shares was $0.58.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(c) Total Number |
|
|
(d) Maximum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
Approximate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as |
|
|
Dollar Value of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of Publicly |
|
|
Shares that May |
|
|
|
(a) Total Number |
|
|
(b) Average |
|
|
Announced |
|
|
Yet Be |
|
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
Price Paid Per |
|
|
Plans or |
|
|
Purchased |
|
|
|
Purchased |
|
|
Share |
|
|
Programs |
|
|
Under the Plan |
|
Period |
|
(Amounts in thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
January 1,
2006January 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,353 |
|
February 1,
2006February 28, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,353 |
|
March 1,
2006March 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
For a discussion of the Companys indebtedness and defaults thereunder, see Note 3 to our
consolidated financial statements and Part I, Item 2 Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations, particularly the discussion under Liquidity and
Capital Resources.
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
As
further described in Part 1,
Item 2 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Update on Financial Restructuring and
Subsequent Events, the Company and all its direct subsidiaries
filed voluntary petitions for reorganization under Chapter 11 of
the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
Northern District of Texas. As more fully described in the Second
Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization (the Plan), filed
herewith as Exhibit 2.1, and incorporated herein by reference,
holders of Class 5, Class 6 and Class 8 Claims (each
as defined in the Plan, with Class 8 being the holders of our
outstanding Common Stock) were entitled to vote to accept or reject the
Plan. The deadline for such votes was April 19, 2006, and
holders of the Class 5, Class 6 and Class 8 Claims
each voted to accept the Plan by an affirmative vote of 100%, 100%
and 85% of the holders actually voting, respectively.
63
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Second
Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 28, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)).
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
Third
Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement, dated as of
December 30, 2005, by and among Bank of America, N.A.,
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and the Subsidiaries listed on
Annex I and II (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
January 6, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Fourth Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement dated as of
December 30, 2005, by and among Bank of America, N.A.,
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and the Subsidiaries listed on
Annex I and II (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
January 20, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
Fifth Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement dated as of
December 30, 2005, by and among Bank of America, N.A.,
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and the Subsidiaries listed on
Annex I and II (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2
to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
January 20, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
Amendment to Pledge Agreement and Underwriting, Continuing Indemnity
and Security Agreement, dated January 17, 2006, by and among
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc., certain of its Subsidiaries and
Federal Insurance Company (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on January 23, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.5* |
|
Engagement Letter, dated January 26, 2006, effective as
of January 23, 2006, by and between Integrated Electrical Services, Inc.
and Glass & Associates |
|
|
|
10.6 |
|
Commitment Letter, dated February 1, 2006, by and between
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and Bank of America, N.A.
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys
Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 7, 2006 (File
No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
Term
Sheet for Surety Support, by and between Integrated Electrical
Services, Inc. and Federal Insurance Company (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Current Report
on Form 8-K filed February 7, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.8 |
|
Employment and Consulting Agreement, dated February 13, 2006, by
and between Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and C. Bryan
Synder (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 15,
2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.9 |
|
Plan
Support and Lock-Up Agreement Regarding Integrated Electrical
Services, Inc. dated February 13, 2005 (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Current Report
on Form 8-K filed February 15, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.10 |
|
Commitment for Senior Post-Confirmation Exit Credit Facility, dated
February 10, 2006, by and between Integrated Electrical
Services, Inc. and Bank of America, N.A. (Incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.3 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K filed February 15, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.11 |
|
$53 million Term Loan Facility Commitment Letter, dated
February 10, 2006, by and among Integrated Electrical Services,
Inc., Eton Park Fund, L.P. and affiliate and Flagg Street Partners LP
and affiliates (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the
Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
February 15, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.12 |
|
Debtor in
Possession Loan and Security Agreement, dated February 14, 2006,
by and between Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and Bank of
America, N.A. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 7,
2006 (File No. 13783)) |
|
|
|
22.1 |
|
Second Amended Disclosure Statement for the Second Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of
the Company (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K
filed April 28, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
31.1* |
|
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of C. Byron Snyder, Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
31.2* |
|
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of David A. Miller, Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
|
32.1* |
|
Section 1350 Certification of C. Byron Snyder, Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
32.2* |
|
Section 1350 Certification of David A. Miller, Chief Financial Officer |
64
INTEGRATED ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized, who has
signed this report on behalf of the Registrant and as the principal financial officer of the
Registrant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: May 10, 2006
|
|
By:
|
|
/S/ David A. Miller |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David A. Miller |
|
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and |
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
65
Exhibit Index
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Second
Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 28, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)).
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
Third
Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement, dated as of
December 30, 2005, by and among Bank of America, N.A.,
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and the Subsidiaries listed on
Annex I and II (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
January 6, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Fourth Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement dated as of
December 30, 2005, by and among Bank of America, N.A.,
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and the Subsidiaries listed on
Annex I and II (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
January 20, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
Fifth Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement dated as of
December 30, 2005, by and among Bank of America, N.A.,
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and the Subsidiaries listed on
Annex I and II (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2
to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
January 20, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
Amendment to Pledge Agreement and Underwriting, Continuing Indemnity
and Security Agreement, dated January 17, 2006, by and among
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc., certain of its Subsidiaries and
Federal Insurance Company (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on January 23, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.5* |
|
Engagement Letter, dated January 26, 2006, effective as
of January 23, 2006, by and between Integrated Electrical Services, Inc.
and Glass & Associates |
|
|
|
10.6 |
|
Commitment Letter, dated February 1, 2006, by and between
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and Bank of America, N.A.
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys
Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 7, 2006 (File
No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
Term
Sheet for Surety Support, by and between Integrated Electrical
Services, Inc. and Federal Insurance Company (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Current Report
on Form 8-K filed February 7, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.8 |
|
Employment and Consulting Agreement, dated February 13, 2006, by
and between Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and C. Bryan
Synder (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 15,
2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.9 |
|
Plan
Support and Lock-Up Agreement Regarding Integrated Electrical
Services, Inc. dated February 13, 2005 (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Current Report
on Form 8-K filed February 15, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.10 |
|
Commitment for Senior Post-Confirmation Exit Credit Facility, dated
February 10, 2006, by and between Integrated Electrical
Services, Inc. and Bank of America, N.A. (Incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.3 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K filed February 15, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.11 |
|
$53 million Term Loan Facility Commitment Letter, dated
February 10, 2006, by and among Integrated Electrical Services,
Inc., Eton Park Fund, L.P. and affiliate and Flagg Street Partners LP
and affiliates (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the
Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
February 15, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
10.12 |
|
Debtor in
Possession Loan and Security Agreement, dated February 14, 2006,
by and between Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. and Bank of
America, N.A. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 7,
2006 (File No. 13783)) |
|
|
|
22.1 |
|
Second Amended Disclosure Statement for the Second Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of
the Company (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K
filed April 28, 2006 (File No. 1-13783)) |
|
|
|
31.1* |
|
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of C. Byron Snyder, Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
31.2* |
|
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of David A. Miller, Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
|
32.1* |
|
Section 1350 Certification of C. Byron Snyder, Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
32.2* |
|
Section 1350 Certification of David A. Miller, Chief Financial Officer |
66
exv10w5
Exhibit 10.5
January 23, 2006
Board of Directors
Chairman
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc.
1800 West Loop South
Suite 500
Houston, TX 77027
Attn: Special Restructuring Committee
Dear Gentlemen:
We are pleased to set forth the terms of the engagement of Glass & Associates, Inc. (Glass)
by Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. (the Company), effective as of January 18, 2006.
1. Services. The Company engages Glass for the purpose of providing the services described on
attached Schedule 1. Sanford Edlein, as representative of Glass, will serve as Chief Restructuring
Officer to the Company under this Agreement. Glass may provide the services under this Agreement
through other principals, employees or consultants of Glass from time to time as required during
the course of the engagement. Glass will provide oversight of the engagement under this Agreement
from its Regional Office in Dallas, Texas.
2. Independent Contractor; No Fiduciary Relationship. Glass is an independent contractor, and
no employee or agent of Glass is an employee of Company. As an independent contractor, Glass will
have complete and exclusive charge of the management and operation of its business, including
hiring and paying the wages and other compensation of all of its employees and agents, and paying
all bills, expenses and other charges incurred or payable with respect to the operation of its
business, and will be responsible for all employment, withholding and income and other taxes
incurred in connection with the operation and conduct of its business. Glass employees will not be
considered employees of the Company. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create, shall be
construed as creating or be deemed to create a fiduciary relationship between the Company and Glass
(other than Sanford Edlein, in his capacity as Chief Restructuring Officer).
3. Information and Access. Glass shall have full access to all personnel, books, and records
of and advisors to the Company and, if Glass so desires, a working relationship with the entire
internal organization of Company. Company represents and warrants that, except as disclosed to
Glass in writing, all information made available to Glass will, to the best of the Companys
knowledge, at all times during the period of the engagement of Glass under this Agreement be
complete and correct in all material respects and will not contain any untrue
Glass & Associates, Inc. www.glass-consulting.com
New York Canton Charlotte Chicago Dallas Detroit Frankfurt/M. Houston London
statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the
statements therein not misleading in light of the circumstances under which such statements are
made. Company further represents and warrants that any projections or other information provided
by it to Glass will have been prepared in good faith and will be based on assumptions which, in
light of the circumstances under which they are made, are reasonable, although it is recognized
that projections are based on assumptions that may or may not prove to be accurate. Company
acknowledges that, in rendering its services hereunder, Glass will be using and relying on the
information (and information available from public sources and other sources deemed reliable by
Glass) without independent verification thereof by Glass or independent appraisal by Glass of any
of the Companys assets. Glass does not assume responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of
the information or any other information regarding the Company.
4. Oversight of Engagement. Glass, and any employee of Glass serving as an interim officer
under this Agreement, shall report only to, and its engagement shall be subject to the exclusive
supervision of, the Special Restructuring Committee (the Restructuring Committee) of the
Companys Board of Directors (the Board), whose members are all of the independent directors of
the Board. Except for such oversight, the actions and decisions of Glass shall not be subject to
review by any other officer of the Company. Glass shall work collaboratively with the
Restructuring Committee, the Board, Companys senior management team, Companys other professionals
and the ad hoc committee of the senior subordinated noteholders (the Ad Hoc Committee) in
performing its engagement under this Agreement. The Ad Hoc Committee and its representatives and
advisors shall have complete access to Glass.
5. Compensation.
5.1 Glass shall be compensated for its services under this Agreement as set forth on attached
Schedule 2 and shall be reimbursed for its reasonable expenses. Glass reviews and revises its
hourly billing rates effective January 1 of each year.
5.2 Reimbursable expenses include direct out-of-pocket expenses incurred on the engagement
including reasonable costs for meals, travel and travel related expenses, outside printing and
reproduction services, and courier, overnight and other delivery services. Reimbursable expenses
also include an administrative charge of 2% of hourly fee billings for indirect costs including
long-distance phone charges, cell phone charges, facsimiles, normal postage, in-house photocopying
and in-house printing. The reasonable fees and expenses of attorneys consulted or engaged by Glass
to assist it under this Agreement not to exceed $5,000 without prior approval from Company, not to be unreasonably
withheld, shall be reimbursable expenses. Services of other third parties consulted or engaged by
Glass to assist it under this Agreement shall be reimbursable expenses provided that such
consultation or engagement has been approved in advance by the Board.
5.3 Company has paid Glass an initial deposit of $100,000 (the Deposit) (inclusive of the
$50,000 deposit previously paid to Glass pursuant to its December 22, 2005 engagement letter with
Company (the Prior Letter)), which will be held in a separate Glass bank account for client
deposits. If Glass engagement under this Agreement is terminated
2
before Glass fees based on its hourly rates equal the Deposit Glass shall nonetheless be entitled
by Company to retain the full amount of the Deposit as consideration for undertaking the engagement
under this Agreement and for the services provided before termination. Glass may only withdraw
amounts from the Deposit in order to return it to Company or to apply all or any portion of the
Deposit to amounts due to Glass under this Agreement. If Company pays an invoice from Glass after
Glass has applied funds from the Deposit to amounts due under that invoice Glass will deposit to
the account for client deposits the lesser of the amount of the payment made or the amount
withdrawn from the Deposit. Company hereby grants Glass a security interest in and lien upon the
Deposit to secure payment of all amounts due to Glass under this Agreement and any damages
resulting from a breach by the Company of this Agreement, including as a result of a rejection of
this Agreement in a bankruptcy case. Glass fees and reimbursable expenses will be billed as
provided on Schedule 2 and shall be due and payable upon receipt of invoice.
5.4 Glass shall permit Company to inspect Glass time and expense records in Glass offices
during normal business hours on reasonable advance notice to verify Glass invoices. Glass shall
provide the Company with an itemized report of expenses on a monthly basis.
6. Testimony. Except for testimony which is within the scope of services set forth on
Schedule 1 for which Glass will be compensated as provided on Schedule 2, if Glass is required in
any legal proceeding to deliver testimony in connection with the services provided under this
Agreement, Company agrees to pay Glass a fee at Glass then prevailing hourly rates for witness
preparation and court appearances, in addition to the reasonable fees and expenses of outside
counsel retained by Glass to advise in connection with such testimony and other reimbursable
expenses incurred by Glass in connection with the testimony.
7. Non Solicitation of Glass Employees. For one year after termination of Glass engagement
under this Agreement the Company shall not hire, retain or utilize (other than through Glass) the
services of any Glass employee or former employee who has been employed by Glass in the ninety (90) day period
preceding hire by Company. The Company further agrees that any violation shall result in
liquidated damages in the amount of 50% of the hired employees total compensation during their
first year of employment by Company. Payment of liquidated damages for violation of this Agreement
may be billed and shall be payable as an additional reimbursable expense under this Agreement and
shall not be subject to any requirement of advance authorization by Company or any other limitation
that may apply to other fees and expenses payable to Glass under this Agreement.
8. Use of Name and Work Product. The Company acknowledges that all information (written or
oral) generated by Glass in connection with its engagement is intended solely for benefit and use
of the Company (limited to its management, including the Board). The Company agrees that no such
information shall be used for any other purpose or reproduced, disseminated, quoted or referred to
with attribution to Glass at any time, in any manner or for any purpose other than within the
Company or to the Ad Hoc Committee and its advisors, in each case without Glass prior written
consent (which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld), except
3
as required by law, stock exchange rules or valid legal process (and after advance notice to
Glass). Without limiting the foregoing, the Company shall not, and shall not authorize anyone else
to, use Glass name or use or make available to third parties any written materials (including
extracts or excerpts therefrom or abstracts thereof) or other work product prepared by Glass
pursuant to this Agreement in connection with obtaining or extending credit, offering or selling
securities or other assets or in any representations to third parties without Glass prior written
consent, except to the Ad Hoc Committee and its advisors and except for references to Glass
engagement in public filings and in the proposed Disclosure Statement. Glass is authorized, at its
expense, to place a customary tombstone advertisement or similar announcement with respect to its
engagement hereunder in such form and in such media as Glass deems appropriate and reasonably
acceptable to the Company.
9. Standard of Care and Warranty Disclaimer. Glass performs its services in accordance with
standards of skill and care generally observed by turnaround consultants of recognized national
standing in the United States. If Glass fails to meet such standards the sole remedy of Company
shall be to terminate this Agreement and recover any direct damages Company may prove. Neither
Glass nor any of its directors, shareholders, officers, employees, consultants or other agents
(collectively with Glass the Glass Parties) shall be liable for any lost or loss of profits, any
indirect, incidental or consequential damages, or any claim, loss or expense for which
indemnification would be provided under Section 10 of this Agreement. In performing its services
under this Agreement Glass is not assuming any responsibility for the Companys decision to pursue
or not to pursue any business strategy or to effect or not to
effect any restructuring, business combination, refinancing or other transaction, nor shall
Glass be responsible for providing any tax, legal or other specialist advice. Glass makes no
representations or warranties, express or implied, concerning the value of its services or the
results that may be obtained therefrom. Glass engagement shall not constitute an audit, review,
compilation or any other type of financial statement reporting or consulting engagement that is
subject to the rules of the AICPA or other state and national professional bodies.
10. Limitation of Liability and Indemnity; Insurance.
10.1 Glass sole obligation under this Agreement is to the Company, and any advice (written or
oral) given by Glass to the Company in connection with Glass engagement under this Agreement is
solely for the use and benefit of the Company. In no event, regardless of the legal theory
advanced, shall any Glass Party be responsible to the Company or liable to any third party other
than for gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or knowing violation of law or for conduct
Glass did not in good faith believe was in, or at least not opposed to, the best interests of the
Company. The obligations of Glass are solely corporate obligations, and no officer, director,
employee, agent, shareholder or controlling person of Glass shall be subject to any personal
liability whatsoever to any person, nor will any such claim be asserted by the Company, whether on
its own behalf or on behalf of any other person.
10.2 The Company shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Glass Parties against any and
all claims, costs, demands, damages, assessments, actions, suits or other proceedings, liabilities,
judgments, penalties, fines or amounts paid in settlement, expenses, and
4
reasonable attorneys fees (whether incurred at the trial or appellate level, in an arbitration, in
bankruptcy (including, without limitation, any adversary proceeding, contested matter or
application), or otherwise and notwithstanding any limitation set forth in Section 5 above)
(collectively Claims) arising out of, connected with or related to the services performed under
this Agreement, whether or not such Claims are attributable in whole or in part to negligence by
Glass, other than Claims that are finally determined by judgment or in binding arbitration to have
resulted from (a) acts or omissions by Glass that involve gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad
faith or a knowing violation of law or (b) conduct that Glass did not in good faith believe was in,
or at least not opposed to, the best interests of the Company. Glass shall give prompt written
notice to the Company of any Claim for which indemnification may be claimed hereunder, and the
parties shall then cooperate as reasonably required to defend such Claim; provided, that the right
of the Glass Parties to indemnification shall not be affected by any failure or delay by Glass to
give such notice, except to the extent that the rights and remedies of the indemnifying party shall
have been materially prejudiced as a result of such failure or delay. The Company shall pay all
reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys fees, incurred by Glass to enforce its rights under this Agreement.
The Company agrees that, without Glass prior written consent (which will not be unreasonably
withheld), the Company will not settle, compromise or consent to the entry of any judgment in any
pending or threatened claim, action, or proceeding or investigation in respect of which
indemnification or contribution has been sought hereunder (whether or not Glass or any other Glass
Party are an actual or potential party to such claim, action or proceeding or investigation),
unless such settlement, compromise or consent includes an unconditional release of each Glass Party
from all liability arising out of such claim, action or proceeding or investigation.
10.3 If for any reason the foregoing indemnification is determined to be unavailable to any
Glass Party or insufficient to fully indemnify any such person, then the Company will contribute to
the amount paid or payable by such person as a result of any such claims in such proportion as is
appropriate to reflect both the relative benefit and the relative fault of the Company on the one
hand, and the Glass Parties on the other hand, and any other relevant equitable considerations in
connection with the matters as to which such claims relate; provided, however, that in no event
shall the amount to be contributed by all Glass Parties in the aggregate exceed the amount of
compensation actually received by Glass under this Agreement.
10.4 In addition to the indemnification provided by Section 10.2 or 10.3, any Glass employee
serving as an officer or director of the Company or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates shall be
entitled to the benefit of the most favorable indemnities provided by the Company to its officers
and directors, whether under the Companys governing documents, by contract or otherwise.
10.5 Immediately upon execution of this Agreement, and as a condition to the obligations of
Glass hereunder, the Company shall use its best efforts to cause Glass and its agents and employees
to be added as additional named insureds on the Companys comprehensive general liability insurance
policies and Sanford Edlein to be specifically included and covered under the Companys directors
and officers liability insurance policies (D&O
5
Policies). The Company shall give Glass not less than 30 days written notice if for any reason
other than the termination of his services as Chief Restructuring Officer Mr. Edlein will cease to
be covered under the Companys D&O Policies or if the terms of the Companys D&O Policies will be
amended in any respect materially affecting Mr. Edleins coverage thereunder.
11. Confidentiality.
11.1 All information disclosed to Glass by the Company in connection with Glass engagement
under this Agreement, including without limitation information acquired from the Companys
employees or inspection of the Companys property, and confidential information disclosed to Glass by third parties
representing or acting for or on behalf of Company, shall be considered Confidential Information.
Confidential Information shall not include information which (a) is now or subsequently becomes
generally known or available by publication, commercial or otherwise, through no fault of Glass,
(b) is known by Glass at the time of the disclosure provided such information did not come from a
source known by Glass to be bound by confidentiality agreement with the Company or otherwise
prohibited from disclosing information to Glass by a contractual, legal or fiduciary obligation,
(c) is independently developed by Glass without the use of any Confidential Information, (d) is
information that the parties agree in writing may be disclosed by Glass, (e) is or becomes
available to Glass on a non-confidential basis from a source other than Company, provided that, to
Glass knowledge, such source was not prohibited from disclosing such information to Glass by a
legal, contractual or fiduciary obligation owed to Company or (f) is information that must, upon
advice of counsel to Glass, be disclosed pursuant to applicable law or legal, regulatory, or
administrative process after compliance with the provisions hereof.
11.2 Glass shall keep all Confidential Information confidential and shall use the Confidential
Information solely for purpose of providing the services to be furnished pursuant to this
Agreement. Glass may make reasonable disclosures of Confidential Information to third parties in
connection with the performance of its engagement under this Agreement (provided, however, such
disclosure is made pursuant to a confidentiality agreement in form and substance reasonably
satisfactory to the Company) and in connection with any dispute between Glass and the Company under
or concerning this Agreement and Glass will have the right to disclose to others in the normal
course of business its involvement with the Company. Any written information produced by Glass
shall be treated as Confidential Information, shall be delivered solely to the Company and, except
as required by law or legal process, shall not be provided to any third party without the Companys
consent.
11.3 If Glass receives any request (by order, subpoena or other legal process) to produce any
Confidential Information, Glass will, unless prohibited by law or process, use its best efforts to
provide the Company with timely notice of such request and, at the Companys request and expense,
cooperate with the Company in any action the Company deems necessary or appropriate under the
circumstances to protect the confidentiality of the Confidential Information and will disclose only
that Confidential Information that Glass is legally required to disclose.
6
12. Termination. Glass engagement may be terminated at any time by the Company, and Glass
may terminate its engagement at any time, in each case by written notice and without liability or
continuing obligation to the Company or Glass, except that following such termination Glass shall
remain entitled to any compensation accrued pursuant to Section 5 but not yet paid prior
to termination and to reimbursement of expenses incurred prior to termination pursuant to
Section 5; provided however, that Glass shall not be entitled to any compensation or reimbursement
of expenses or any unused portion of the Deposit if Company terminates this Agreement for Glass
conduct described in clause (a) or (b) of Section 10.2. Upon termination Glass may apply the
Deposit to any amounts due under this Agreement, and any unused portion of the Deposit will be
returned to the Company. All provisions of this Agreement, other than Sections 1 and 3, shall
survive termination of Glass engagement under this Agreement.
13. Modification. No modification, amendment or addition to, or waiver of any provisions of
this Agreement shall be valid or enforceable unless in writing and signed by all parties.
14. Legal Construction. The validity, interpretation and enforceability of this Agreement
shall be determined in accordance with the substantive laws of the State of New York, exclusive of
choice of law provisions. If any provisions of this Agreement shall for any reason be held by a
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such
invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this
Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been
contained herein and to give effect as nearly as possible to the intent of the parties. This
Agreement is the product of negotiations between the parties in which each has had the opportunity
to be advised by counsel of its choosing, and therefore the rule of construction that an agreement
is construed against the drafter thereof shall not be applicable to this Agreement. No action or
proceeding, regardless of form, arising out of or related to this Agreement or the services
provided by Glass pursuant to this Agreement may be brought by the Company or Glass more than
twelve (12) months after the claim or cause of action first arose.
15. No Third Party Benefit. This Agreement is made solely for the benefit of the parties
hereto, and no third party shall acquire any claim against Glass as a result of this Agreement.
16. Alternative Dispute Resolution. Any claim or dispute concerning, relating to or arising
out of this Agreement shall be resolved by binding arbitration in accordance with the rules of the
American Arbitration Association or such other rules as may be agreed to by the parties. The
arbitration shall be conducted in a location mutually agreed by the parties. If the parties fail
to agree on the location within 30 days after either party requests arbitration, the arbitration
shall be conducted in New York, New York. The prevailing party in any arbitration under this
Agreement shall be entitled to recover from the other as part of the arbitration award reasonable
costs and fees, including reasonable attorneys fees. Any arbitration award may be enforced by a
court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with New York law. In the event legal action to
enforce the arbitration award is necessary the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover
its costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees (whether incurred at the trial
7
or appellate level, in an arbitration, in bankruptcy (including, without limitation, any adversary
proceeding, contested matter or application), or otherwise) in such action and in any appeals
therefrom or reviews thereof.
17. Notices. All notices under or concerning this Agreement shall be in writing, may be given
by personal delivery, overnight mail or United States mail, shall be effective only upon actual
receipt, and shall be delivered to the party receiving notice at the address set forth in this
Agreement.
18. General Provisions. This Agreement shall be binding on the parties and their respective
successors and assigns, but neither party may assign any benefit or delegate any duty under this
Agreement, voluntarily or by operation of law, without the written consent of the other party.
This Agreement constitutes the parties entire agreement with respect to its subject matter and is
intended to supercede all prior negotiations, discussions and agreements including the Prior
Agreement, and fully to integrate the parties agreement. This Agreement may be executed by
facsimile and in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and all of
which shall constitute one agreement.
If the foregoing correctly sets forth our understanding and agreement please so indicate by
signing and returning the enclosed copy of this letter, immediately sending by wire transfer the
additional portion of the Deposit in the amount of $50,000, and signing and retaining the
duplicate we are enclosing for your records. We look forward to working with you on this
engagement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sincerely, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glass & Associates, Inc. |
|
|
8350 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1150 |
|
|
Dallas, Texas 75206 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED |
|
|
|
, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
Schedules:
Schedule 1: Description of Services
Schedule 2: Compensation
9
Schedule 1: Description of Services
Chief Restructuring Officer
General:
As the Chief Restructuring Officer (CRO), reporting to the Restructuring Committee, Mr. Edlein
and the Glass team will work closely with the Restructuring Committee, the Board, executives and
staff of IES, outside attorneys, investment bankers, other advisors and the Ad Hoc Committee and
its advisors to insure that the strategic direction of the reorganization (operational, financial
and general restructuring) of the Company is carefully constructed, approved and timely
implemented to preserve and maximize enterprise value. As CRO, Mr. Edlein shall have responsibility
and authority to manage all aspects of the Companys financial and operational restructuring and
shall supervise the Companys management and advisors in connection therewith.
Scope of work shall include but limited to:
|
|
|
Oversight of all financial and operating restructuring activities such as: |
|
|
|
Review and implementation of cash management system that would
enhance the visibility of operating unit performance and insure that
cash is controlled on a company wide basis. |
|
|
|
|
Supervision of vendor classification and payment control |
|
|
|
|
Oversight of key vendor negotiations including landlords |
|
|
|
|
Supervision and review of accounts receivable and billing
processes |
|
|
|
|
Design and development (if needed) of forecasting tools (13 weeks
and annual) to integrate the expected business unit performance into
the cash forecast and borrowing base calculations. |
|
|
|
|
Review and analysis of variances from cash forecasts and
supervision of forecast revisions |
|
|
|
|
Liquidity plan and contingency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Review of the claims and risk management systems and procedures |
|
|
|
|
Flash reporting and dashboard of key indicators |
|
|
|
Review and analysis of: |
|
|
|
Business unit forecasts including planned gross margin
improvement, revenue enhancements and expense controls. |
|
|
|
|
Project bidding and performance initiatives |
|
|
|
|
Variation analysis and plan modifications based upon
performance |
10
|
|
|
Flash reporting |
|
|
|
|
Strategy and services including cap ex needs |
|
|
|
|
Review, assessment and implementation of various operating unit
integration and centralization initiatives (operationally and
financially) |
|
|
|
|
Potential economies of scale including cross utilization of
specialty staff, equipment overhead |
|
|
|
|
Strategic improvements including consolidation of activities
either by line of business, region or other appropriate
classification |
|
|
|
|
Review of home office organization, structure and costs |
|
|
|
|
Feasibility analysis of business units to sell or liquidate |
|
|
|
|
Assist in the development of general revenue enhancement and cost
containment strategies |
|
|
|
Evaluation of key management personnel |
|
|
|
|
Lead and control the continuous communication process with all key constituencies. |
|
|
|
|
Lead the development of an interim business plan which captures the strategies and tactics
necessary to preserve the business for the long run and short term needs. |
|
|
|
|
Assessment of management, policy, operations, facilities, equipment and operating
practices. |
|
|
|
|
Oversight of all restructured or new debt, including DIP and Exit financing and surety
bonding. |
|
|
|
|
Active involvement in the operating activities within the company to insure that the
operating plan is consistent with the restructuring process and that interim objectives are
attained. |
|
|
|
|
Participate in the drafting of all public announcements. |
|
|
|
|
Other such duties as approved by the Board. |
|
|
|
|
Assist in Bankruptcy filing and oversee the development of a plan of reorganization, and,
if necessary, preparation of all financial reporting including monthly operating reports. |
11
Schedule 2: Compensation
Glass Hourly Rates
(In effect on the date of this Agreement)
|
|
|
|
|
Principal |
|
$ |
375 to $550 per hour |
|
Case Director |
|
$ |
325 to $450 per hour |
|
Senior Associate |
|
$ |
250 to $380 per hour |
|
Consultant |
|
$ |
200 to $300 per hour |
|
Clerical/Administrative |
|
$75 to $95 per hour |
Out-of-Pocket Expenses |
|
at Cost |
1. |
|
Except as provide below, Glass shall be compensated for its services under this
Agreement on an hourly basis at its standard hourly rates as set forth above. Invoices for
fees and reimbursable expenses will be submitted on a monthly basis and are due and payable
upon receipt. |
|
2. |
|
Specific rates for this project will be: |
|
|
|
|
|
Professional |
|
Role |
|
Hourly Rate |
|
Sanford Edlein |
|
Chief Restructuring Officer |
|
$425 |
Sam Heigle |
|
Case Director |
|
$300 |
Tom Russell |
|
Senior Consultant |
|
$300 |
Ken Ollwerther |
|
Consultant |
|
$250 |
Kris Horner |
|
Consultant |
|
$225 |
Shaun Donnellan |
|
Quality Control |
|
$450 |
3. |
|
The time for other professionals, as required, will be charged per our standard rate
schedule above. |
12
exv31w1
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, C. Byron Snyder, certify that:
1. |
|
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Integrated Electrical Services, Inc.; |
|
2. |
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report; |
3. |
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report; |
4. |
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in the Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: |
|
a) |
|
designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared; |
|
|
b) |
|
designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles; |
|
|
c) |
|
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and |
|
|
d) |
|
disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonable likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and; |
5. |
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions): |
|
a) |
|
all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and |
|
|
b) |
|
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: May 10, 2006
|
|
By: |
|
/S/ C. Byron Snyder |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Byron Snyder |
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
exv31w2
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, David A. Miller, certify that:
1. |
|
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Integrated Electrical Services, Inc.; |
2. |
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report; |
3. |
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report; |
4. |
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in the Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: |
|
a) |
|
designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared; |
|
|
b) |
|
designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles; |
|
|
c) |
|
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and |
|
|
d) |
|
disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonable likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and; |
5. |
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions): |
|
a) |
|
all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and |
|
|
b) |
|
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: May 10, 2006
|
|
By:
|
|
/S/ David A. Miller |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David A. Miller |
|
|
|
|
Senior Vice President |
|
|
|
|
and Chief Financial Officer |
exv32w1
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with this Quarterly Report of Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2005 (the Report), I, C. Byron Synder,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
|
(1) |
|
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|
|
(2) |
|
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: May 10, 2006
|
|
By:
|
|
/S/ C. Byron Snyder |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Byron Snyder |
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
exv32w2
Exhibit 32.2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with this Quarterly Report of Integrated Electrical Services, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2005 (the Report), I, David A. Miller,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
|
(1) |
|
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|
|
(2) |
|
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: May 10, 2006
|
|
By:
|
|
/S/ David A. Miller |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David A. Miller |
|
|
|
|
Senior Vice President |
|
|
|
|
and Chief Financial Officer |