e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended April 3, 2009
or
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission File Number: 001-32869
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
01-0824791 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
3190 Fairview Park Drive, Suite 700, Falls Church, Virginia 22042
(571) 722-0210
(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrants principal executive offices)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class |
|
Name of Exchange on Which Registered |
Class A common stock, par value $0.01 per share
|
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule
405 of the Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section
13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation
S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of
registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer o |
Accelerated filer þ |
Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Act). Yes o No þ
As of October 3, 2008, the last business day of the registrants most recently completed
second fiscal quarter, 57,000,000 shares of Class A common stock were outstanding and the aggregate
market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on that date was
approximately $403 million (based upon the closing price on the New York Stock Exchange on October
3, 2008 of $16.11 per share). Aggregate market value is estimated solely for the purposes of this
report.
As of June 1, 2009, the registrant had 56,251,900 shares of its Class A common stock
outstanding.
Documents Incorporated by Reference
Portions of the registrants Definitive Proxy Statement to be filed subsequent to the date
hereof with the Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with the registrants 2009
Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Report. Such
Definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than
120 days after the conclusion of the registrants fiscal year ended April 3, 2009.
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
Forward-Looking Statements
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains various forward-looking statements within the meaning
of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), and Section 21E of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Forward-looking statements,
written, oral or otherwise made, represent our expectation or belief concerning future events.
Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. Without limiting the foregoing, the
words believes, thinks, anticipates, plans, expects and similar expressions are intended
to identify forward-looking statements. Statements regarding the amounts of our backlog, estimated
remaining contract values and estimated total contract values are other examples of forward-looking
statements. We caution that these statements are further qualified by important economic,
competitive, governmental and technological factors that could cause our business, strategy or
actual results or events to differ materially, or otherwise, from those in the forward-looking
statements, including, without limitation, our substantial level of indebtedness; policy and/or
spending changes implemented by the new Presidential administration; termination of key United
States (U.S.) government contracts; changes in the demand for services that we provide; pursuit
of new commercial business and foreign government opportunities; activities of competitors; bid
protests; changes in significant operating expenses; changes in availability of or cost of capital;
general political, economic and business conditions in the U.S.; acts of war or terrorist
activities; variations in performance of financial markets; the inherent difficulties of estimating
future contract revenue; anticipated revenue from indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ)
contracts; expected percentages of future revenue represented by fixed-price and time-and-materials
contracts; and statements covering our business strategy, those described in Item 1A Risk
Factors. Accordingly, such forward-looking statements do not purport to be predictions of future
events or circumstances; therefore, there can be no assurance that any forward-looking statement
contained herein will prove to be accurate. We assume no obligation to update the forward-looking
statements.
PART I
ITEM 1. BUSINESS.
Unless the context otherwise indicates, references herein to we, our, us or DynCorp
International refer to DynCorp International Inc. and our consolidated subsidiaries. We refer to
our subsidiary, DynCorp International LLC and our subsidiaries, as our operating company. We
report results on a 52/53-week fiscal year with the fiscal year ending on the Friday closest to
March 31 of such year. Our fiscal year 2009 included 53 weeks while fiscal year 2008, and 2007 each
included 52 weeks.
Overview
We are a leading provider of specialized, mission-critical professional and support services
outsourced by the U.S. military, non-military U.S. governmental agencies and foreign governments.
Our specific global expertise is in law enforcement training and support, security services, base
and logistics operations, construction management, aviation services and operations, and linguist
services. We also provide logistics support for all our services. Through our predecessor
companies, we have provided essential services to numerous U.S. government departments and agencies
since 1951. We are incorporated in the state of Delaware.
Our customers include the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), the U.S. Department of State
(DoS), foreign governments, commercial customers and certain other U.S. federal, state and local
government departments and agencies. Revenue from the U.S. government accounted for approximately
96%, 95%, and 97% of total revenue in fiscal years 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.
During fiscal years 2006 through 2008, we conducted our operations through two reportable
segments: Government Services (GS) and Maintenance and Technical Support Services (MTSS). On
March 29, 2008, we divided our GS operating segment into two new segments, International Security
Services (ISS) and Logistics and Construction Management (LCM), to enable us to better
capitalize on business development opportunities and enhance our ongoing service. Our ISS operating
segment consists of our Law Enforcement and Security strategic business unit, our Specialty
Aviation and Counter-Drug Operations strategic business unit and Global Linguist Solutions (GLS),
our joint venture for the Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) contract described below.
Our LCM operating segment consists of our Contingency and Logistics Operations strategic business
unit and our Operations Maintenance and Construction Management strategic business unit and
includes any work awarded under the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP IV). Our third
segment is MTSS, which consists of its original components and DynMarine services, which previously
reported under the former GS segment.
On April 6, 2009, we announced a further reorganization of our business structure to better
align with strategic markets and to streamline our infrastructure. Under the new alignment, our
three reportable segments were realigned into three new segments, two of which, Global
Stabilization and Development Solutions (GSDS) and Global Platform Support Solutions (GPSS),
are wholly-
3
owned, and a third segment, GLS, which is a 51% owned joint venture. The new structure became
effective April 4, 2009, the start of our 2010 fiscal year, and is more fully described in Note 17
to our consolidated financial statements.
In addition to the information presented below, Note 13 to our consolidated financial
statements contains additional information about our operating segments and geographic areas in
which we have conducted business for fiscal years 2009, 2008, and 2007. We have restated the
corresponding items of segment information for fiscal years 2008 and 2007 to conform to our fiscal
year 2009 segment presentation.
International Security Services
ISS provides outsourced services primarily to government agencies worldwide. ISS consists of
the following strategic business units:
Law Enforcement and Security. This strategic business unit provides international policing
and police training, judicial support, immigration support and base operations. In addition, it
provides security and personal protection for diplomats and designs, installs and operates security
systems for use by government agencies.
Specialty Aviation and Counter-drug Operations. This strategic business unit provides
services including drug eradication and host nation pilot and crew training.
Global Linguist Solutions. This joint venture between DynCorp International and McNeil
Technologies, in which we have a 51% ownership interest, provides rapid recruitment, deployment and
on-site management of interpreters and translators in-theatre for a wide range of foreign
languages.
Key ISS Contracts
Intelligence and Security Command. In December 2006, GLS was awarded the INSCOM contract by
the U.S. Army for the management of linguist and translation services in support of the military
mission known as Operation Iraqi Freedom, or OIF. After a series of protests, on March 13, 2008,
the U.S. Army authorized GLS to resume performance on a contract for management of translation and
interpretation services in support of OIF after a February 2008 protest of the contract award was
withdrawn. This five year contract has a maximum value of $4.6 billion and a current awarded value
of $3.5 billion. Under the contract, GLS provides rapid recruitment, deployment, and on-site
management of interpreters and translators in-theater for a wide range of foreign languages in
support of the U.S. Army, unified commands, attached forces, combined forces, and joint elements
executing the OIF mission, and other U.S. government agencies supporting the OIF mission.
Civilian Police. The Civilian Police contract was awarded to us by the DoS in February 2004.
Our Civilian Police contract has an estimated total contract value of $3.8 billion over the five
and one-half year term of this program through August 2009. Through the Civilian Police program, we
have deployed civilian police officers from the United States to 12 countries to train and offer
logistics support to the local police and assist them with infrastructure reconstruction. Our first
significant deployment of civilian police personnel began in the Balkans in 1996, where we helped
train local police and provided support during the conflict. We remained in the region through
2004. In addition, we have been awarded multiple task orders under the Civilian Police program,
including assignments in Iraq and Afghanistan.
International Narcotics Eradication and Law Enforcement. In May 2005, the DoS awarded us a
contract in support of the International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Air-Wing, or INL, program
to aid in the eradication of illegal drug operations. We are the sole awardee of this contract,
which has an estimated contract value of $1.3 billion for the first four years of the nine-year
term. The contract expires in October 2014. This program has been ongoing since 1991, in
cooperation with multiple Latin American countries. A similar program in Afghanistan began in 2006.
California Department of Forestry. We have been helping to fight fires in California since
December 2001. We maintain approximately 55 aircraft, providing nearly all types and levels of
maintenance: scheduled, annual, emergency repairs, and even structural depot level repair.
McClelland Field in Sacramento is home base for approximately 80 DynCorp International mechanics,
data entry staff, and quality control inspectors. In addition, we have approximately 55 pilots who
operate these aircraft.
The following table sets forth certain information for our principal ISS contracts, including
estimated total contract values of the current contracts as of April 3, 2009:
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
Initial/Current |
|
Contract End |
|
Contract |
Contract |
|
Principal Customer |
|
Award Date |
|
Date |
|
Value(1) |
INSCOM/GLS |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Mar 2008 |
|
Apr 2013 |
|
$3.8 billion(2)(3) |
Civilian Police Program |
|
DoS |
|
Feb 1994/Feb 2004 |
|
Aug 2009 |
|
$3.8 billion(3) |
INL |
|
DoS |
|
Jan 1991/May 2005 |
|
Oct 2014 |
|
$1.3 billion(3) |
California Department of Forestry |
|
State of California |
|
Jan 2002/Jul 2008 |
|
Dec 2014 |
|
$138 million |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Estimated total contract value has the meaning indicated in Estimated Total Contract Value. |
|
(2) |
|
Awarded to GLS, a joint venture of DynCorp International (which owns a 51% majority interest)
and McNeil Technologies (which owns the remaining interest). |
|
(3) |
|
This contract is an IDIQ contract. For more information about IDIQ contracts see Contract
Types. Also, for a discussion of how we define estimated remaining contract value for IDIQ
contracts, see Estimated Remaining Contract Value. |
Logistics & Construction Management
LCM provides technical support services to government agencies and commercial customers
worldwide. LCM consists of the following strategic business units:
Contingency and Logistics Operations. This strategic business unit provides peace-keeping
support, humanitarian relief, de-mining, worldwide contingency planning and other rapid response
services. In addition, it offers inventory procurement and tracking services, equipment
maintenance, property control, data entry and mobile repair services.
Operations Maintenance and Construction Management. This strategic business unit provides
facility and equipment maintenance and control and custodial and administrative services. In
addition, it provides civil, electrical, infrastructure, environmental and mechanical engineering
and construction management services.
Key LCM Contracts
Logistics Civil Augmentation Program. On April 17, 2008, we were selected as one of three
prime contractors to provide logistics support under the LOGCAP IV contract. LOGCAP IV is the Army
component of the DoDs initiative to award contracts to U.S. companies with a broad range of
logistics capabilities to support U.S. and allied forces during combat, peacekeeping, humanitarian
and training operations. The contract has a term of up to ten years, a ceiling value of $50 billion
and an annual ceiling value to us and our subcontractors of approximately $5 billion, depending on
the number of individual task orders that are awarded under the contract. The LOGCAP IV objective
is to use civilian contractors to perform selected services in a theater of operations to augment
U.S. Army forces and release military units for other missions or to fill U.S. Army resource
shortfalls.
War Reserve Materiel. Through our War Reserve Materiel program, we provide management of the
U.S. Air Force Southwest Asia War Reserve Materiel Pre-positioning program, which includes
operations in Oman, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and two locations in the United States (Albany, Georgia
and Shaw Air Force base, South Carolina). We store, maintain and deploy assets such as tents,
generators, vehicles, kitchens and medical supplies to deployed forces in the global war on terror.
During Operation Enduring Freedom and OIF, we sent teams into the field to assist in the setup of
tent cities prior to the arrival of the deployed forces. The War Reserve Materiel program continues
to partner with the U.S. Central Command Air Force in the development of new and innovative
approaches to asset management.
Africa Peacekeeping. We have assumed increasing responsibilities in Africa through our Africa
Peacekeeping contract operations, supporting the DoS in Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria, Senegal,
Somalia, and Sudan. Our experience in logistics and contingency operations is a valuable asset to
many efforts such as peacekeeping, humanitarian aid, and national reconstruction. We arrange
transportation, manage construction and provide security and equipment training. We also provide
advisors and serve as a liaison with the DoS.
The following table sets forth certain information for our principal LCM contracts, including
estimated total contract values of the current contracts as of April 3, 2009:
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
Initial/Current |
|
Contract End |
|
Contract |
Contract |
|
Principal Customer |
|
Award Date |
|
Date |
|
Value(1) |
LOGCAP IV |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Apr 2008 |
|
Apr 2018 |
|
$50 billion(2)(3) |
War Reserve Materiel II |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Oct 2008 |
|
Sep 2016 |
|
$382 million |
Africa Peacekeeping |
|
DoS |
|
May 2003 |
|
Dec 2009 |
|
$340 million(2) |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Estimated total contract value has the meaning indicated in Estimated Total Contract Value. |
|
(2) |
|
This contract is an IDIQ contract. For more information about IDIQ contracts see Contract
Types. Also, for a discussion of how we define estimated remaining contract value for IDIQ
contracts, see Estimated Remaining Contract Value. |
|
(3) |
|
The $50 billion dollar value is a ceiling value and not necessarily representative of the
amount of work we will be awarded under the contract. |
Maintenance & Technical Support Services
MTSS offers the following services:
Aviation Services and Operations. Our aviation services and operations include aircraft fleet
maintenance, depot augmentation, aftermarket logistics support, aircrew services and training,
ground equipment maintenance and modifications, quality control, Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) certification, facilities and operations support, aircraft scheduling and flight planning
and the provisioning of pilots, test pilots and flight crews. Services are provided from both the
main base locations and forward operating locations.
Aviation Engineering. Our aviation engineering technicians manufacture and install aircraft
modification programs for a broad range of weapons systems and aircraft engines. In addition, we
provide services such as engineering design, kit manufacturing and installation, field
installations, configuration management, avionics upgrades, cockpit and fuselage redesign and
technical data, drawings and manual revisions.
Aviation Ground Equipment Support. Our aviation ground equipment support services include
ground equipment support, maintenance and overhaul, modifications and upgrades, corrosion control,
engine rebuilding, hydraulic and load testing and serviceability inspections. We provide these
services worldwide and offer both short- and long-duration field teams. As of April 3, 2009, we
employed over 850 mechanics, technicians and support personnel who perform depot level overhaul of
ground support equipment for U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard programs and provide depot level ground
support equipment at approximately 20 worldwide locations.
Ground Vehicle Maintenance. Our ground vehicle maintenance services include vehicle
maintenance, overhaul and corrosion control and scheduling and work flow management. We perform
maintenance and overhaul on wheeled and tracked vehicles for the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps,
in support of their pre-positioning programs and for the United Arab Emirates (UAE) military,
working in conjunction with a UAE government agency. We also provide overall program management,
logistics support, tear down and inspection of equipment cycled off of pre-positioned ships.
In addition to looking at our MTSS business by service offering, much of our internal
management is performed viewing our business by Strategic Business Area (SBA). The nature of our
MTSS business is dynamic, and our service offerings typically cross all of our SBAs. From a
management perspective, an SBA does not represent a distinct business within MTSS but is rather an
accumulation of contracts and services into a management group for accountability and reporting.
For the year ended April 3, 2009, our SBAs were as follows:
Contract Logistics Support Provides worldwide support of U.S. Army, Air Force and Navy fixed
wing assets. Aircraft are deployed throughout the U.S., Europe, Asia, South America and the Middle
East. Contract Logistics Support (CLS) provides flight line through depot level maintenance
consisting of scheduled and unscheduled events. Specific functions include repair, overhaul and
procurement of components, procurement of consumable materials and transportation of materials to
and from the operating sites. In addition, the team is responsible for obsolescence engineering,
quality control, inventory management, avionics upgrades and recovery of downed aircraft.
Field Service Operations. Provides worldwide maintenance, modification, repair, and logistics
support on aircraft, weapons systems, and related support equipment to the DoD and other U.S.
government agencies. Contract Field Teams is the most significant program in our Field Service
Operations (FSO) SBA. Our Company and its predecessors have provided this service for over 57
6
consecutive years. This program deploys highly mobile, quick-response field teams to customer
locations to supplement a customers workforce. FSO employs over 3,800 personnel worldwide.
Aviation & Maintenance Services. Provides aircraft fleet maintenance and modification
services, ground vehicle maintenance and modification services, marine services, pilot and
maintenance training, logistics support, air traffic control services, base and depot operations,
program management and engineering services. These services are offered on a domestic and
international basis. With programs in seven international locations, as well as the U.S., Aviation
and Maintenance Services employs over 2,400 personnel worldwide.
Key MTSS Contracts
Contract Field Teams
Contract Field Teams (CFT) is the most significant program in our MTSS segment. We have
provided this service for over 57 consecutive years. This program deploys highly mobile,
quick-response field teams to customer locations to supplement a customers workforce. The services
we provide under the Contract Field Teams program generally include mission support to aircraft and
weapons systems and depot-level repair. The principal customer for our Contract Field Teams program
is the DoD. This contract has a $10.1 billion estimated total contract value for multiple awardees
over a seven-year term through September 2015.
Life Cycle Contractor Support
This MTSS program consists of contracts with the U.S. Army and the U.S. Navy. Under the Life
Cycle Contractor Support-Army contracts, we provide aircraft maintenance and logistics for 165
C-12/RC-12 and 27 UC-35 aircraft, as well as services for a major avionics suite upgrade of 39
aircraft for Global Air Traffic Management compliance. Under our Life Cycle Contractor Support-Navy
contracts, we provide aircraft maintenance and logistics for the U.S. Navys 6 UC-35 aircraft. We
entered into the Life Cycle Contractor Support-Army and Life Cycle Contractor Support-Navy
contracts in August 2000 and the Global Air Traffic Management portion of our Army contract in
March 2003. The Life Cycle Contractor Support-Army and Life Cycle Contractor Support-Navy contracts
are up for re-competition in January 2010. These contracts have estimated total contract values of
$1,150 million and $65 million for Life Cycle Contractor Support-Army and Life Cycle Contractor
Support-Navy, respectively.
Andrews Air Force Base
Under the Andrews Air Force Base contract, we perform aircraft maintenance and base supply
functions, including full back shop support, organizational level maintenance, fleet fuel services
and supply, launch and recovery and FAA repair services. Our principal customer under this contract
is the U.S. Air Force. We entered into this contract in January 2001, and it is up for
re-competition in December 2011. This contract has a $371 million estimated total contract value.
Columbus Air Force Base
We provide aircraft and equipment maintenance functions for T-37, T-38, T-1 and T-6 training
aircraft in support of the Columbus AFB Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training Program in
Columbus, Mississippi. Our customer under this program is the U.S. Air Force Air Education and
Training Command and specifically the 14th Flying Training Wing. This contract provides for a firm
fixed-price incentive fee with an incentive award fee. Estimated total contract value is $291 million. The performance period started October 2005 and
runs through September 2012. We have completed a transition from the old T-37 primary trainer to
the new T-6 turbo prop. Additionally, this 14th Flying Training Wing has one additional squadron of
T-38s dedicated to fighter lead-in-training.
Army Prepositions Stocks Afloat
We perform organizational and intermediate level maintenance and support services on U.S. Army
equipment at Army Field Support Battalion Afloat, also known as AFSB-A, located in Charleston,
South Carolina and aboard ships. The customer is the Army Sustainment Command; Army Field Support
Afloat. The contract terms provide for a cost-plus/fixed-fee and include an award fee. The
contract has an estimated total contract value of $269 million. The re-compete process for this
contract has commenced, as it expires in fiscal year 2010. There are approximately 450 of our
employees on this contract.
C-21 Contractor Logistics Support
Under the C-21A CLS Program, we perform organizational, intermediate and depot level
maintenance, together with supply
7
chain management for approximately 56 C-21A (Lear 35A) aircraft operated by the U.S. Air Force
at seven main operating bases and one deployed location.
UAE General Maintenance Corporation
In December 2007, the UAE Ministry of Defense selected us to provide maintenance, training,
supply chain management, and facilities management for its fleet of 17,000 military and commercial
ground vehicles. This is a seven-year contract with an estimated total contract value of $164
million, with an option to renew for an additional five years. The contract is under the authority
of the UAE Land Forces General Maintenance Corporation.
The following table sets forth certain information for our principal MTSS contracts, including
estimated total contract values of the current contracts as of April 3, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
Initial/Current |
|
Contract End |
|
Contract |
Contract |
|
Principal Customer |
|
Award Date |
|
Date |
|
Value(1) |
Contract Field Teams |
|
DoD |
|
Oct 1951/Jul 2008 |
|
Sept 2015 |
|
$2.6 billion(2)(3) |
Life Cycle Contractor Support |
|
U.S. Army and U.S. Navy |
|
Aug 2000 |
|
Jan 2010 |
|
$1.2 billion |
Andrews Air Force Base |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Jan 2001 |
|
Mar 2011 |
|
$371 million |
Columbus Air Force Base |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Oct 1998/Jul 2005 |
|
Sep 2012 |
|
$291 million |
Army Prepositions Stocks Afloat |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Feb 1999 |
|
Jul 2009 |
|
$269 million |
C-21 Contractor Logistics Support |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Sept 2006 |
|
Sept 2011 |
|
$212 million |
UAE General Maintenance Corps |
|
UAE Armed Forces |
|
Dec 2006 |
|
Mar 2014 |
|
$164 million |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Estimated total contract value has the meaning indicated in Estimated Total Contract Value. |
|
(2) |
|
This contract is an IDIQ contract. For more information about IDIQ contracts see Contract
Types. Also, for a discussion of how we define estimated remaining contract value for IDIQ
contracts, see Estimated Remaining Contract Value. |
|
(3) |
|
The $2.6 billion dollar value represents the estimate from the awarded contract and not
necessarily representative of the amount of work we will actually be awarded under the
contract. |
Contract Types
Our contracts typically have a term of three to ten years consisting of a base period of one
year with multiple one-year options. Our contracts typically are awarded for an estimated dollar
value based on the forecast of the work to be performed under the contract over its maximum life.
In addition, we have historically received additional revenue through increases in program scope
beyond that of the original contract. These contract modifications typically consist of over and
above requests derived from changing customer requirements and are reviewed by us for appropriate
revenue recognition. The U.S. government is not obligated to exercise options under a contract
after the base period. At the time of completion of the contract term of a government contract, the
contract is re-competed to the extent that the service is still required.
Our contracts with the U.S. government or the governments prime contractor (to the extent
that we are a subcontractor) generally contain standard, unilateral provisions under which the
customer may terminate for convenience or default. U.S. government contracts generally also contain
provisions that allow the U.S. government to unilaterally suspend us from obtaining new contracts
pending resolution of alleged violations of procurement laws or regulations, reduce the value of
existing contracts, issue modifications to a contract and control and potentially prohibit the
export of our services and associated materials.
Our business generally is performed under fixed-price, time-and-materials or
cost-reimbursement contracts. Each of these is described below.
|
|
|
Fixed-Price Type Contracts: In a fixed-price contract, the price is not subject to
adjustment based on costs incurred, which can favorably or adversely impact our
profitability depending upon our execution in performing the contracted service. Our
fixed-price contracts include firm fixed-price, fixed-price with economic adjustment, and
fixed-price incentive. |
|
|
|
|
Time-and-Materials Type Contracts: Time-and-materials type contracts provide for
acquiring supplies or services on the basis of direct labor hours at fixed hourly/daily
rates plus materials at cost. |
|
|
|
|
Cost-Reimbursement Type Contracts: Cost-reimbursement type contracts provide for payment
of allowable incurred costs, to the extent prescribed in the contract, plus a fixed-fee,
award-fee or incentive-fee. Award-fees or incentive-fees are generally |
8
|
|
|
based upon various objective and subjective criteria, such as aircraft mission capability
rates and meeting cost targets. |
Any of these three types of contracts discussed above may be executed under an IDIQ contract,
which are often awarded to multiple contractors. An IDIQ contract does not represent a firm order
for services. Our Civilian Police and Contract Field Teams programs are two examples of IDIQ
contracts. In fiscal years 2009, 2008, and 2007, 73%, 70%, and 72% of our revenue, respectively,
were attributable to IDIQ contracts. When a customer wishes to order services under an IDIQ
contract, the customer issues a task order request for proposal to the contractor awardees. The
contract awardees then submit proposals to the customer and task orders are typically awarded under
a best-value approach. However, many IDIQ contracts permit the customer to direct work to a
particular contractor. In some instances, the contractor may identify specific projects and propose
to perform the service for a customer within the scope of the IDIQ contract, although the customer
is not obligated to order the services.
Our historical contract mix by type for the last three fiscal years, as a percentage of
revenue, is indicated in the table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year |
Contract Type |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Fixed-Price |
|
|
27 |
% |
|
|
37 |
% |
|
|
41 |
% |
Time-and-Materials |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
36 |
% |
Cost-Reimbursement |
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The INSCOM contract is a cost-reimbursement type contract, and we expect that the majority of
the task orders issued under the LOGCAP IV contract will be cost-reimbursement type task orders. We
therefore anticipate that cost-reimbursement type contracts will represent a greater percentage of
our revenue in the foreseeable future. With this shift to cost-reimbursement type contracts, our
consolidated operating margin percentage could be lower, as cost-reimbursement type contracts
typically carry lower margins than other contract types, but also carry lower risk of loss.
Under many of our contracts, we rely on subcontractors to perform all or a portion of the
services we are obligated to provide to our customers. We often enter into subcontract arrangements
in order to meet government requirements that certain categories of services be awarded to small
businesses. We use subcontractors primarily for specialized, technical labor and certain functions
such as construction and catering.
Competition
We compete with various entities across geographic and business lines based on a number of
factors, including services offered, experience, price, geographic reach and mobility. Most
activities in which we engage are highly competitive and require that we have highly skilled and
experienced technical personnel to compete. Some of our competitors possess greater financial and
other resources or are better positioned to compete for certain contract opportunities. Our
competitors include Civilian Police International, Science Applications International Corporation,
ITT Corporation, KBR, Inc., IAP Worldwide Services, Inc., Xe Inc., Triple Canopy Inc., Fluor
Corporation, Lockheed Martin Corporation, United Technologies Corporation, L-3 Holdings, Aerospace
Industrial Development Corporation, Al Salam Aircraft Company Ltd. and Serco Group Plc. We believe
that the primary competitive factors for our services include reputation, technical skills, past
contract performance, experience in the industry, cost competitiveness and customer relationships.
Backlog
We track backlog in order to assess our current business development effectiveness and to
assist us in forecasting our future business needs and financial performance. Our backlog consists
of funded and unfunded amounts under contracts. Funded backlog is equal to the amounts actually
appropriated by a customer for payment of goods and services less actual revenue recognized as of
the measurement date under that appropriation. Unfunded backlog is the actual dollar value of
unexercised, priced contract options and the unfunded portion of exercised contract options. Most
of our U.S. government contracts allow the customer the option to extend the period of performance
of a contract for a period of one or more years. These priced options may or may not be exercised
at the sole discretion of the customer. Historically, it has been our experience that the customer
has typically exercised contract options.
Firm funding for our contracts is usually made for one year at a time, with the remainder of
the contract period consisting of a series of one-year options. As is the case with the base period
of our U.S. government contracts, option periods are subject to the availability of funding for
contract performance. The U.S. government is legally prohibited from ordering work under a contract
in the absence of funding. Our historical experience has been that the government has typically
funded the option periods of our contracts.
9
The following table sets forth our approximate backlog as of the dates indicated (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
ISS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded backlog |
|
$ |
683 |
|
|
$ |
464 |
|
|
$ |
727 |
|
Unfunded backlog |
|
|
3,678 |
|
|
|
4,030 |
|
|
|
3,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total ISS backlog |
|
$ |
4,361 |
|
|
$ |
4,494 |
|
|
$ |
4,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LCM: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded backlog |
|
$ |
184 |
|
|
$ |
140 |
|
|
$ |
149 |
|
Unfunded backlog |
|
|
578 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total LCM backlog |
|
$ |
762 |
|
|
$ |
199 |
|
|
$ |
240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MTSS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded backlog |
|
$ |
563 |
|
|
$ |
560 |
|
|
$ |
526 |
|
Unfunded backlog |
|
|
612 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
881 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total MTSS backlog |
|
$ |
1,175 |
|
|
$ |
1,268 |
|
|
$ |
1,407 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded backlog |
|
$ |
1,431 |
|
|
$ |
1,164 |
|
|
$ |
1,402 |
|
Unfunded backlog |
|
|
4,867 |
|
|
|
4,797 |
|
|
|
4,730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated backlog |
|
$ |
6,298 |
|
|
$ |
5,961 |
|
|
$ |
6,132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Remaining Contract Value
Our estimated remaining contract value represents total backlog plus managements estimate of
future revenue under IDIQ contracts for task or delivery orders that have not been awarded. Future
revenue represents managements estimate of revenue that will be recognized from the end of current
task orders until the end of the IDIQ contract term and is based on our experience and performance
under our existing contracts and management judgments and estimates with respect to future task or
delivery order awards. Although we believe our estimates are reasonable, there can be no assurance
that our existing contracts will result in actual revenue in any particular period or at all. Our
estimated remaining contract value could vary or even change significantly depending upon various
factors including government policies, government budgets and appropriations, the accuracy of our
estimates of work to be performed under time and material contracts and whether we successfully
compete with any multiple bidders in IDIQ contracts.
The following table sets forth our estimated remaining contract value as of the dates
indicated (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
ISS estimated remaining contract value |
|
$ |
5,302 |
|
|
$ |
5,976 |
|
|
$ |
7,249 |
|
LCM estimated remaining contract value |
|
|
786 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
MTSS estimated remaining contract value |
|
|
2,327 |
|
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
1,407 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Estimated Remaining Contract Value (1) |
|
$ |
8,415 |
|
|
$ |
7,485 |
|
|
$ |
8,991 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
See Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations for further details concerning contract value. |
Estimated Total Contract Value
The estimated total contract value represents amounts expected to be realized from the current
award date to the current contract end date (i.e., revenue recognized to date plus backlog). For
the reasons stated above and under the Item 1.A. Risk Factors, the estimated contract value or
ceiling value specified under a government contract or task order is not necessarily indicative of
the revenue that we will realize under that contract.
Regulatory Matters
Contracts with the U.S. government are subject to certain regulatory requirements. Under U.S.
government regulations, certain costs, including certain financing costs, portions of research and
development costs, lobbying expenses, certain types of legal
10
expenses and certain marketing expenses related to the preparation of bids and proposals, are not
allowed for pricing purposes and calculation of contract reimbursement rates under
cost-reimbursement contracts. The U.S. government also regulates the methods by which allowable
costs may be allocated under U.S. government contracts.
Our government contracts are subject to audits at various points in the contracting process.
Pre-award audits are performed at the time a proposal is submitted to the U.S. government for
cost-reimbursement contracts. The purpose of a pre-award audit is to determine the basis of the bid
and provide the information required for the U.S. government to negotiate the contract effectively.
In addition, the U.S. government may perform a pre-award audit to determine our capability to
perform under a contract. During the performance of a contract, the U.S. government may have the
right to examine our costs incurred in the contract, including any labor charges, material
purchases and overhead charges. Upon a contracts completion, the U.S. government performs an
incurred cost audit of all aspects of contract performance for cost-reimbursement contracts to
ensure that we have performed the contract in a manner consistent with our proposal. The government
also may perform a post-award audit for proposals that are subject to the Truth in Negotiations
Act, which are proposals in excess of $650,000, to determine if the cost proposed and negotiated
was accurate, current and complete as of the time of negotiations.
The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) performs these audits on behalf of the U.S.
government. The DCAA also reviews the adequacy of, and our compliance with, our internal control
systems and policies, including our labor, billing, accounting, purchasing, property, estimating, compensation and management
information systems. The DCAA has the right to perform audits on our incurred costs on all
contracts on a yearly basis. We have DCAA auditors on-site to monitor our billing and back-office
operations. An adverse finding under a DCAA audit could result in the disallowance of our costs
under a U.S. government contract, termination of U.S. government contracts, forfeiture of profits,
suspension of payments, fines and suspension and prohibition from doing business with the U.S.
government. In the event that an audit by the DCAA recommends disallowance of our costs under a
contract, we have the right to appeal the findings of the audit under applicable dispute resolution
provisions. Approval of submitted yearly contract incurred costs can take from one to three years
from the date of submission of the contract costs. All of our contract incurred costs for U.S.
government contracts completed through fiscal year 2004 have been audited by the DCAA and approved
by the Defense Contract Management Agency. The audits for such costs during subsequent periods are
continuing. See Item 1.A. Risk Factors A negative audit or other actions by the U.S. government
could adversely affect our operating performance.
At any given time, many of our contracts are under review by the DCAA and other government
agencies. We cannot predict the outcome of such ongoing audits and what, if any, impact such audits
may have on our future operating performance.
Over the last several months, U.S. Government contractors, including our Company, have seen a trend of increased scrutiny by the DCAA and other U.S.
Government agencies. If any of our internal control systems or policies are found non-compliant or inadequate, payments may be suspended under our
contracts or we may be subjected to increased government scrutiny and approval that could delay or adversely affect our ability to invoice and receive
timely payment on our contracts, perform contracts or compete for contracts with the U.S. Government.
These adverse outcomes could also occur if the DCAA cannot timely complete periodic reviews of our control systems which could then
render the status of these systems as not reviewed.
Sales and Marketing
We market our services to U.S. and foreign governments, including their military branches. We
also market our services to commercial entities in the U.S. and abroad. We position our sales and
marketing personnel to cover key accounts such as the Department of State and the Department of
Defense, as well as market segments which hold the most promise for aggressive growth.
We participate in national and international tradeshows, particularly as they apply to
aviation services, logistics, contingency support, and defense. We are also an active member in
several organizations related to services contracting, such as the Professional Services Council.
We are leveraging our experience and capability in providing value added and complementary
services to companies that require support in remote and hazardous regions of the globe.
Our sales and marketing personnel are positioned globally to establish a local presence in
select market segments that hold the most promise for aggressive growth, whether it is global
platform support services or global stability and development solutions. These activities support
our objective to be the leading global government services provider in support of U.S. national
security and foreign policy objectives.
Intellectual Property
We hold an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free and fully paid license
to use the Dyn International and DynCorp International names in connection with aviation
services, security services, technical services and marine services. We do not own any trademarks
or patents and do not believe our business is dependent on trademarks or patents.
Environmental Matters
Our operations include the use, generation and disposal of petroleum products and other
hazardous materials. We are subject
11
to various U.S. federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations relating to the
protection of the environment, including those governing the management and disposal of hazardous
substances and wastes, the cleanup of contaminated sites and the maintenance of a safe workplace.
We believe we have been and are in substantial compliance with environmental laws and regulations,
and we have no liabilities under environmental requirements that would have a material adverse
effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition. We have not incurred, nor do
we expect to incur, material costs relating to environmental compliance.
Employees
As of April 3, 2009, we had approximately 22,500 employees in 33 countries, of which
approximately 2,550 are represented by labor unions.
Availability of Forms Filed With the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission
Our shareholders may obtain, free of charge, copies of the following documents (and any
amendments thereto) as filed with, or furnished to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) as soon as reasonably practical after such material is filed with or furnished to the SEC:
|
|
|
annual reports on Form 10-K; |
|
|
|
|
quarterly reports on Form 10-Q; |
|
|
|
|
current reports on Form 8-K; |
|
|
|
|
statement of changes in beneficial ownership of securities for insiders; |
|
|
|
|
proxy statements; and |
|
|
|
|
any amendments thereto. |
A copy of these filings may be obtained by going to our Internet website at www.dyn-intl.com
and selecting Investor Relations and selecting Financial Information. Copies may also be
obtained by providing a written request for such copies or additional information regarding our
operating or financial performance to Cindy Green, Director of Investor Relations, DynCorp
International, 13601 North Freeway, Fort Worth, Texas 76177. Except as otherwise stated in these
reports, the information contained on our website or available by hyperlink from our website is not
incorporated into this Annual Report or other documents we file with, or furnish to, the SEC.
Certifications
As required by New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) Corporate Governance Standards Section
303A.12(a), in 2008, our Chief Executive Officer submitted to the NYSE a certification that he was
not aware of any violation by us of NYSE corporate governance listing standards. Additionally, we
filed with this Annual Report, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
certifications required under Sections 302 and 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.
You should carefully consider the risks described below, together with all of the other
information contained in this Form 10-K. Any of the following risks could materially and adversely
affect our financial condition or results of operations.
We rely on sales to U.S. government entities. A loss of contracts, a failure to obtain new
contracts or a reduction of sales under existing contracts with the U.S. government could adversely
affect our operating performance and our ability to generate cash flow to fund our operations.
We derive substantially all of our revenue from contracts and subcontracts with the U.S.
government and its agencies, primarily the DoD and the DoS. The remainder of our revenue is derived
from commercial contracts and contracts with foreign governments. We expect that U.S. government
contracts, particularly with the DoD and the DoS, will continue to be our primary source of revenue
for the foreseeable future. The continuation and renewal of our existing government contracts and
new government contracts are, among other things, contingent upon the availability of adequate
funding for various U.S. government agencies,
12
including the DoD and the DoS. Changes in U.S. government spending could directly affect our
operating performance and lead to an unexpected loss of revenue. The loss or significant reduction
in government funding of a large program in which we participate could also result in a material
decrease to our future sales, earnings and cash flows. U.S. government contracts are also
conditioned upon the continuing approval by Congress of the amount of necessary spending. Congress
usually appropriates funds for a given program on a September 30 fiscal year basis, even though
contract periods of performance may extend over many years. Consequently, at the beginning of a
major program, the contract is usually partially funded, and additional monies are normally
committed to the contract by the procuring agency only as appropriations are made by Congress for
future fiscal years. Among the factors that could impact U.S. government spending and reduce our
federal government contracting business include:
|
|
|
policy and/or spending changes implemented by the Obama administration; |
|
|
|
|
a significant decline in, or reapportioning of, spending by the U.S. government, in
general, or by the DoD or the DoS, in particular; |
|
|
|
|
changes, delays or cancellations of U.S. government programs, requirements or policies; |
|
|
|
|
the adoption of new laws or regulations that affect companies that provide services to
the U.S. government; |
|
|
|
|
U.S. government shutdowns or other delays in the government appropriations process; |
|
|
|
|
curtailment of the U.S. governments outsourcing of services to private contractors; |
|
|
|
|
changes in the political climate, including with regard to the funding or operation of
the services we provide; and |
|
|
|
|
general economic conditions, including a slowdown in the economy or unstable economic
conditions in the United States or in the countries in which we operate. |
These or other factors could cause U.S. government agencies to reduce their purchases under
our contracts, to exercise their right to terminate our contracts in whole or in part, to issue
temporary stop-work orders, or decline to exercise options to renew our contracts. The loss or
significant curtailment of our material government contracts, or our failure to renew existing
contracts or enter into new contracts could adversely affect our operating performance and lead to
an unexpected loss of revenue.
Our U.S. government contracts may be terminated by the U.S. government at any time prior to their
completion and contain other unfavorable provisions, which could lead to an unexpected loss of
revenue and a reduction in backlog.
Under the terms of our contracts, the U.S. government may unilaterally:
|
|
|
terminate or modify existing contracts; |
|
|
|
|
reduce the value of existing contracts through partial termination; |
|
|
|
|
delay the payment of our invoices by government payment offices; |
|
|
|
|
audit our contract-related costs and fees; and |
|
|
|
|
suspend us from receiving new contracts, pending the resolution of alleged violations of
procurement laws or regulations. |
The U.S. government can terminate or modify any of its contracts with us either for its
convenience or if we default by failing to perform under the terms of the applicable contract. A
termination arising out of our default could expose us to liability and adversely affect our
operating performance and lead to an unexpected loss of revenue.
Our U.S. government contracts typically have an initial term of one year with multiple option
periods, exercisable at the discretion of the government at previously negotiated prices. The
government is not obligated to exercise any option under a contract. Furthermore, the government is
typically required to compete all programs and, therefore, may not automatically renew a contract.
In addition, at the time of completion of any of our government contracts, the contract is
frequently required to be re-competed if the government still requires the services covered by the
contract.
13
If the U.S. government terminates and/or materially modifies any of our contracts or if option
periods are not exercised, our failure to replace revenue generated from such contracts would result in lower revenue and
would likely adversely affect our earnings, which would have a material adverse effect on our
financial condition and results of operations.
Our U.S. government contracts are subject to competitive bidding, both upon initial issuance and
re-competition. If we are unable to successfully compete in the bidding process or if we fail to
win re-competitions, it could adversely affect our operating performance and lead to an unexpected
loss of revenue.
Substantially all of our U.S. government contracts are awarded through a competitive bidding
process upon initial award and renewal, and we expect that this will continue to be the case. There
is often significant competition and pricing pressure as a result of this process. The competitive
bidding process presents a number of risks, including the following:
|
|
|
we may expend substantial funds and time to prepare bids and proposals for contracts that
may ultimately be awarded to one of our competitors; |
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to accurately estimate the resources and costs that will be required to
perform any contract we are awarded, which could result in substantial cost overruns; and |
|
|
|
|
we may encounter expense and delay if our competitors protest or challenge awards of
contracts to us, and any such protest or challenge could result in a requirement to resubmit
bids on modified specifications or in the termination, reduction or modification of the
awarded contract. Additionally, the protest of contracts awarded to us may result in the
delay of program performance and the generation of revenue while the protest is pending. |
The government contracts for which we compete typically have multiple option periods, and if
we fail to win a contract or a task order, we generally will be unable to compete again for that
contract for several years. If we fail to win new contracts or to receive renewal contracts upon
re-competition, it may result in additional costs and expenses and possible loss of revenue, and we
will not have an opportunity to compete for these contract opportunities again until such contracts
expire.
Because of the nature of our business, it is not unusual for us to lose contracts to
competitors or to gain contracts once held by competitors during recompete periods. Additionally,
some contracts simply end as projects are completed or funding is terminated. We have included our
most significant contracts by reportable segment in our contract tables in Item 1. Business
above. Contract end dates are included within the tables to better inform investors regarding the
potential impact for our most significant contracts for this risk.
Current or worsening economic conditions could impact our business.
Over the last year, there has been a significant deterioration in the U.S. and global economy.
In addition, liquidity has contracted significantly and borrowing rates have increased. We believe
that our industry and customer base are less likely to be affected by many of the factors affecting
business and consumer spending generally. Accordingly, we believe that we continue to be well
positioned in the current economic environment as a result of historic demand factors affecting our
industry, the nature of our contracts and our sources of liquidity. However, we cannot assure you
that the economic environment or other factors will not adversely impact our business, financial
condition or results of operations in the future. In particular, if the Federal government, due to
budgetary considerations, accelerates the expected reduction in combat troops from Iraq, fails to
implement expected troop increases in Afghanistan, otherwise reduces the DoD Operations and
Maintenance budget or reduces funding for DoS initiatives in which we participate, our business,
financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.
Furthermore, although we believe that our current sources of liquidity will enable us to
continue to perform under our existing contracts and further grow our business, we cannot assure
you that will be the case. A longer term credit crisis could adversely affect our ability to obtain
additional liquidity or refinance existing indebtedness on acceptable terms or at all, which could
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our operations involve considerable risks and hazards. An accident or incident involving our
employees or third parties could harm our reputation, affect our ability to compete for business,
and if not adequately insured or indemnified, could adversely affect our results of operations and
financial condition.
We are exposed to liabilities that arise from the services we provide. Such liabilities may
relate to an accident or incident involving our employees or third parties, particularly where we
are deployed on-site at active military installations or in locations experiencing political or
civil unrest, or they may relate to an accident or incident involving aircraft or other equipment
we have
14
serviced or used in the course of our business. Any of these types of accidents or incidents
could involve significant potential claims of injured employees and other third parties and claims
relating to loss of or damage to government or third-party property.
We maintain insurance policies that mitigate risk and potential liabilities related to our
operations. Our insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover those claims or liabilities, and we
may be forced to bear substantial costs from an accident or incident. Substantial claims in excess
of our related insurance coverage could adversely affect our operating performance and may result
in additional expenses and possible loss of revenue.
Furthermore, any accident or incident for which we are liable, even if fully insured, may
result in negative publicity which could adversely affect our reputation among our customers,
including our government customers, and the public, which could result in us losing existing and
future contracts or make it more difficult to compete effectively for future contracts. This could
adversely affect our operating performance and may result in additional expenses and possible loss
of revenue.
Political destabilization or insurgency in the regions in which we operate may have a material
adverse effect on our operating performance.
Certain regions in which we operate are highly unstable. Insurgent activities in the areas in
which we operate may cause further destabilization in these regions. There can be no assurance that
the regions in which we operate will continue to be stable enough to allow us to operate profitably
or at all. For fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, revenue generated from our operations in the
Middle East contributed 64%, 52%, and 46% of our revenue, respectively. Insurgents in Iraq and
Afghanistan have targeted installations where we have personnel and such insurgents have
contributed to instability in these countries. This could impair our ability to attract and deploy
personnel to perform services in either or both locations. In addition, we have been required to
increase compensation to our personnel as an incentive to deploy them to these regions. To date, we
have been able to recover this added cost under the contracts, but there is no guarantee that
future increases, if required, will be able to be transferred to our customers through our
contracts. To the extent that we are unable to transfer such increased compensation costs to our
customers, our operating margins would be adversely impacted, which could adversely affect our
operating performance. In addition, increased insurgent activities or destabilization, including
civil unrest or a civil war in Iraq or Afghanistan, may lead to a determination by the U.S.
government to halt our operations in a particular location, country or region and to perform the
services using military personnel. Furthermore, in extreme circumstances, the U.S. government may
decide to terminate all U.S. government activities, including our operations under U.S. government
contracts in a particular location, country or region and to withdraw all military personnel. The
recent change of U.S. presidential administrations may lead to policy changes with respect to U.S.
government activities in Iraq or Afghanistan. Congressional pressure to reduce, if not eliminate,
the number of U.S. troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, may also lead to U.S. government procurement
actions that reduce or terminate the services and support we provide in that theater of conflict.
Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our operating performance and may result in additional
costs and expenses and loss of revenue.
We are exposed to risks associated with operating internationally.
A large portion of our business is conducted internationally. Consequently, we are subject to
a variety of risks that are specific to international operations, including the following:
|
|
|
export regulations that could erode profit margins or restrict exports; |
|
|
|
|
compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act; |
|
|
|
|
the burden and cost of compliance with foreign laws, treaties and technical standards and
changes in those regulations; |
|
|
|
|
contract award and funding delays; |
|
|
|
|
potential restrictions on transfers of funds; |
|
|
|
|
foreign currency fluctuations; |
|
|
|
|
import and export duties and value added taxes; |
|
|
|
|
transportation delays and interruptions; |
|
|
|
|
uncertainties arising from foreign local business practices and cultural considerations; |
15
|
|
|
requirements by foreign governments that we locally invest a minimum level as part of our
contracts with them, which may not yield any return; and |
|
|
|
|
potential military conflicts, civil strife and political risks. |
While we have and will continue to adopt measures to reduce the potential impact of losses
resulting from the risks of our foreign business, we cannot ensure that such measures will be
adequate.
Our IDIQ contracts are not firm orders for services, and we may never receive revenue from these
contracts, which could adversely affect our operating performance.
Many of our government contracts are IDIQ contracts, which are often awarded to multiple
contractors. The award of an IDIQ contract does not represent a firm order for services. Generally,
under an IDIQ contract, the government is not obligated to order a minimum of services or supplies
from its contractor, irrespective of the total estimated contract value. Furthermore, under an IDIQ
contract, the customer develops requirements for task orders that are competitively bid against all
of the contract awardees, usually under a best-value approach. However, many contracts also permit
the government customer to direct work to a specific contractor. Our Civilian Police, Contract
Field Team and LOGCAP IV programs are three of our contracts performed under IDIQ contracts. We may
not win new task orders under these contracts for various reasons, such as failing to rapidly
deploy personnel or high prices, which would have an adverse effect on our operating performance
and may result in additional expenses and loss of revenue. There can be no assurance that our
existing IDIQ contracts will result in actual revenue during any particular period or at all. In
fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, 73%, 70% and 72% of our revenue, respectively, was attributable
to IDIQ contracts.
Our cost of performing under time-and-materials and fixed-price contracts may exceed our revenue
which would result in a recorded loss on the contracts.
Our government contract services have three distinct pricing structures: cost-reimbursement,
time-and-materials and fixed-price. With cost-reimbursement contracts, so long as actual costs
incurred are within the contract funding and allowable under the terms of the contract, we are
entitled to reimbursement of the costs plus a stipulated fixed-fee and, in some cases, an
incentive-based award fee. We assume additional financial risk on time-and-materials and
fixed-price contracts, however because we assume the risk of performing those contracts at the
stipulated prices or negotiated hourly/daily rates. If we do not accurately estimate ultimate costs
and control costs during performance of the work, we could lose money on a particular contract or
have lower than anticipated margins. Also, we assume the risk of damage or loss to government
property, and we are responsible for third-party claims under fixed-price contracts. The failure to
meet contractually defined performance standards may result in a loss of a particular contract or
lower-than-anticipated margins. This could adversely affect our operating performance and may
result in additional costs and expenses and possible loss of revenue.
A negative audit or other actions by the U.S. government could adversely affect our operating
performance.
At any given time, many of our contracts are under review by the DCAA and other government
agencies. These agencies review our contract performance, cost structure and compliance with
applicable laws, regulations and standards. Such DCAA audits may include contracts under which we
have performed services in Iraq and Afghanistan under especially demanding circumstances.
The DCAA also reviews the adequacy of, and our compliance with, our internal control systems
and policies, including our labor, billing, accounting, purchasing, property, estimating, billing, compensation and management
information systems. Any costs found to be improperly allocated to a specific contract will not be
reimbursed. In addition, government contract payments received by us for allowable direct and
indirect costs are subject to adjustment after audit by government auditors and repayment to the
government if the payments exceed allowable costs as defined in the government contracts.
Audits have been completed on our incurred contract costs through fiscal year 2005 and the
Defense Contract Management Agency has approved these costs through fiscal year 2004. Audits and
approvals are continuing for subsequent periods. We cannot predict the outcome of such audits and
what, if any, impact such audits may have on our future operating performance. For further
discussion, see Item 3. Legal Proceedings below.
We are subject to investigation by the U.S. government, which could result in our inability to
receive government contracts and could adversely affect our future operating performance.
As a U.S. government contractor, we must comply with laws and regulations relating to U.S.
government contracts that do not apply to a commercial company. From time to time, we are
investigated by government agencies with respect to our compliance
16
with these laws and regulations. If we are found to be in violation of the law, we may be
subject to civil or criminal penalties or administrative sanctions, including contract termination,
the assessment of penalties and suspension or prohibition from doing business with U.S. government
agencies. For example, many of the contracts we perform in the U.S. are subject to the Service
Contract Act, which requires hourly employees to be paid certain specified wages and benefits. If
the U.S. Department of Labor determines that we violated the Service Contract Act or its
implementing regulations, we could be suspended from being awarded new government contracts or
renewals of existing contracts for a period of time, which could adversely affect our future
operating performance. We are subject to a greater risk of investigations, criminal prosecution,
civil fraud, whistleblower lawsuits and other legal actions and liabilities than companies with
solely commercial customers. In addition, if an audit uncovers improper or illegal activities, we
may be subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination
of contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines and suspension or prohibition
from doing business with the U.S. government.
Furthermore, our reputation could suffer serious harm if allegations of impropriety were made
against us. If we were suspended or prohibited from contracting with the U.S. government, or any
significant U.S. government agency, if our reputation or relationship with U.S. government agencies
was impaired or if the U.S. government otherwise ceased doing business with us or significantly
decreased the amount of business it does with us, it could adversely affect our operating
performance and may result in additional expenses and possible loss of revenue.
U.S. government contractors like us that provide support services in theaters of conflict such
as Iraq have come under increasing scrutiny by agency inspector generals, government auditors and
congressional committees. Investigations pursued by any or all of these groups may result in
adverse publicity for us and consequent reputational harm, regardless of the underlying merit of
the allegations being investigated. As a matter of general policy, we have cooperated and expect to
continue to cooperate with government inquiries of this nature.
The expiration of our collective bargaining agreements could result in increased operating costs or
work disruptions, which could potentially affect our operating performance.
As of April 3, 2009, we had approximately 22,500 employees located in 33 countries around the
world. Of these employees, approximately 2,550 are represented by labor unions. As of April 3,
2009, we had approximately 75 collective bargaining agreements with these unions. The length of
these agreements varies, with the longest expiring in September 2012. There can be no assurance
that we will not experience labor disruptions associated with the expiration or renegotiation of
collective bargaining agreements or otherwise. We could experience a significant disruption of
operations and increased operating costs as a result of higher wages or benefits paid to union
members, which could adversely affect our operating performance and may result in additional
expenses and possible loss of revenue.
Proceedings against us in domestic and foreign courts could result in legal costs and adverse
monetary judgments, adversely affect our operating performance and cause harm to our reputation.
We are involved in various claims and lawsuits from time to time. For example, we are a
defendant in two consolidated lawsuits seeking unspecified damages brought by citizens and certain
provinces of Ecuador. The basis for the actions, both pending in U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia, arises from our performance of a U.S. Department of State contract for the
eradication of narcotic plant crops in Colombia. The lawsuits allege personal injury, property
damage and wrongful death as a consequence of the spraying of narcotic crops along the Colombian
border adjacent to Ecuador. In the event that a court decides against us in these lawsuits, and we
are unable to obtain indemnification from the government, Computer Sciences Corporation in one of
the cases, or contributions from the other defendants, we may incur substantial costs, which could
have a material adverse effect on our results. An adverse ruling in these cases could also
adversely affect our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our ability to win future
government contracts.
Other litigation in which we are involved includes wrongful termination and other adverse
employment actions, breach of contract, personal injury and property damage actions filed by third
parties. Actions involving third-party liability claims generally are covered by insurance;
however, in the event our insurance coverage is inadequate to cover such claims, we will be forced
to bear the costs arising from a judgment. We do not have insurance coverage for adverse employment
and breach of contract actions, and we bear all costs associated with such litigation and claims.
We are subject to certain U.S. laws and regulations, which are the subject of rigorous enforcement
by the U.S. government; our noncompliance with such laws and regulations could adversely affect our
future operating performance.
We may be subject to qui tam litigation brought by private individuals on behalf of the
government under the Federal Civil False Claims Act, which could include claims for treble damages.
Government contract violations could result in the imposition of
17
civil and criminal penalties or sanctions, contract termination, forfeiture of profit, and/or
suspension of payment, any of which could make us lose our status as an eligible government
contractor. We could also suffer serious harm to our reputation. Any interruption or termination of
our government contractor status could significantly reduce our future revenues and profits.
To the extent that we export products, technical data and services outside the United States,
we are subject to U.S. laws and regulations governing international trade and exports, including
but not limited to, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, the Export Administration
Regulations and trade sanctions against embargoed countries, which are administered by the Office
of Foreign Assets Control within the Department of the Treasury. Failure to comply with these laws
and regulations could result in civil and/or criminal sanctions, including the imposition of fines
upon us as well as the denial of export privileges and debarment from participation in U.S.
government contracts.
We do business in certain parts of the world that have experienced, or may be susceptible to,
governmental corruption. Our corporate policy requires strict compliance with the U.S. Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act and with local laws prohibiting payments to government officials for the
purpose of obtaining or keeping business or otherwise obtaining favorable treatment. Improper
actions by our employees or agents could subject us to civil or criminal penalties, including
substantial monetary fines, as well as disgorgement, and could damage our reputation and,
therefore, our ability to do business.
Competition in our industry could limit our ability to attract and retain customers or employees,
which could result in a loss of revenue and/or a reduction in margins, which could adversely affect
our operating performance.
We compete with various entities across geographic and business lines. Competitors of our ISS
and LCM operating segments are various solution providers that compete in any one of the service
areas provided by those business units. Competitors of our MTSS operating segment are typically
large defense services contractors that offer services associated with maintenance, training and
other activities. We compete on a number of factors, including our broad range of services,
geographic reach, mobility and response time. Foreign competitors may obtain an advantage over us
in competing for U.S. government contracts and attracting employees to the extent we are required
by U.S. laws and regulations to remit to the U.S. government statutory payroll withholding amounts
for U.S. nationals working on U.S. government contracts while employed by our majority-owned
foreign subsidiaries, since foreign competitors may not be similarly obligated by their
governments.
Some of our competitors have greater resources or are otherwise better positioned to compete
for contract opportunities. For example, original equipment manufacturers that also provide
aftermarket support services have a distinct advantage in obtaining service contracts for aircraft
they have manufactured, as they frequently have better access to replacement and service parts, as
well as an existing technical understanding of the platform they have manufactured. In addition, we
are at a disadvantage when bidding for contracts up for re-competition for which we are not the
incumbent provider, because incumbent providers are frequently able to capitalize on customer
relationships, technical knowledge and pricing experience gained from their prior service.
In addition to the competition we face in bidding for contracts and task orders, we must also
compete to attract the skilled and experienced personnel integral to our continued operations. We
hire from a limited pool of potential employees, as military and law enforcement experience,
specialized technical skill sets and security clearances are prerequisites for many positions. Our
failure to compete effectively for employees, or excessive attrition among our skilled personnel,
could reduce our ability to satisfy our customers needs and increase the costs and time required
to perform our contractual obligations. This could adversely affect our operating performance and
may result in additional expenses and possible loss of revenue.
Loss of our skilled personnel, including members of senior management, may have an adverse effect
on our operations and/or our operating performance.
Our continued success depends in large part on our ability to recruit and retain the skilled
personnel necessary to serve our customers effectively, including personnel with extensive military
and law enforcement training and backgrounds. The proper execution of our contract objectives
depends upon the availability of quality resources, especially qualified personnel. Given the
nature of our business, we have substantial need for personnel who are willing to work overseas,
frequently in locations experiencing political or civil unrest, for extended periods of time and
often on short notice. We may not be able to meet the need for qualified personnel as such need
arises.
In addition, we must comply with provisions in U.S. government contracts that require
employment of persons with specified work experience and security clearances. An inability to
maintain employees with the required security clearances could have a material adverse effect on
our ability to win new business and satisfy our existing contractual obligations, and could
adversely affect our operating performance and may result in additional expenses and possible loss
of revenue.
18
The loss of services of any of the members of our senior management could adversely affect our
business until a suitable replacement can be found. There may be a limited number of personnel with
the requisite skills to serve in these positions, and we may be unable to locate or employ such
qualified personnel on acceptable terms.
If our subcontractors or joint venture partners fail to perform their contractual obligations, then
our performance as the prime contractor and our ability to obtain future business could be
materially and adversely impacted.
Many of our contracts involve subcontracts with other companies upon which we rely to perform
a portion of the services we must provide to our customers. These subcontractors generally perform
niche or specialty services for which they have more direct experience, such as construction,
catering services or specialized technical services, or they have local knowledge of the region in
which we will be performing and the ability to communicate with local nationals and assist in
making arrangements for commencement of performance. Often, we enter into subcontract arrangements
in order to meet government requirements to award certain categories of services to small
businesses. A failure by one or more of our subcontractors to satisfactorily provide on a timely
basis the agreed-upon supplies or perform the agreed-upon services may materially and adversely
impact our ability to perform our obligations as the prime contractor. Such subcontractor
performance deficiencies could result in a customer terminating our contract for default. A default
termination could expose us to liability and adversely affect our operating performance and may
result in additional expenses and possible loss of revenue.
We often enter into joint ventures so that we can jointly bid and perform on a particular
project. The success of these and other joint ventures depends, in large part, on the satisfactory
performance of the contractual obligations by our joint venture partners. If our partners do not
meet their obligations, the joint ventures may be unable to adequately perform and deliver their
contracted services. Under these circumstances, we may be required to make additional investments
and provide additional services to ensure the adequate performance and delivery of the contracted
services. These additional obligations could result in reduced profits or, in some cases,
significant losses for us with respect to the joint venture, which could also affect our reputation
in the industries we serve.
Environmental laws and regulations may subject us to significant costs and liabilities that could
adversely affect our operating performance.
We are subject to numerous environmental, legal and regulatory requirements related to our
operations worldwide. In the U.S., these laws and regulations include those governing the
management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes and the maintenance of a safe workplace,
primarily associated with our aviation services activities, including painting aircraft and
handling substances that may qualify as hazardous waste, such as used batteries and petroleum
products. In addition to U.S. federal laws and regulations, states and other countries where we do
business have numerous environmental, legal and regulatory requirements by which we must abide. We
could incur substantial costs, including clean-up costs, as a result of violations of, or
liabilities under, environmental laws. This could adversely affect our operating performance and
may result in additional expenses and possible loss of revenue.
Our substantial level of indebtedness may make it difficult for us to satisfy our debt obligations
and may adversely affect our ability to obtain financing for working capital, capitalize on
business opportunities or respond to adverse changes in our industry.
As of April 3, 2009, we had $599.9 million of total indebtedness and $171.5 million of
additional borrowing capacity under our senior secured credit facility (which gives effect to $28.5
million of outstanding letters of credit). Based on our indebtedness and other obligations as of
April 3, 2009, we estimate our remaining contractual commitments, including interest associated
with our indebtedness and other obligations, will be $859.5 million in the aggregate for the
remaining period from April 3, 2009 through the end of fiscal year 2013. Such indebtedness could
have material consequences for our business, operations and liquidity position, including the
following:
|
|
|
it may be more difficult for us to satisfy our debt obligations; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, debt service
requirements, general corporate or other purposes may be impaired; |
|
|
|
|
we must use a substantial portion of our cash flow to pay interest and principal on our
indebtedness, which will reduce the funds available for other purposes; |
|
|
|
|
we are more vulnerable to economic downturns and adverse industry conditions; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to capitalize on business opportunities and to react to competitive
pressures and adverse changes in our industry as compared to our competitors may be
compromised due to the high level of indebtedness; and |
19
|
|
|
our ability to refinance indebtedness may be limited. |
The indenture governing our senior subordinated notes and our senior secured credit facility
contain various covenants limiting the discretion of our management in operating our business.
Our indenture governing our senior subordinated notes (the Notes) and the agreements
governing our senior secured credit facility contain various restrictive covenants that limit our
managements discretion in operating our business. These instruments limit our ability to engage
in, among other things, the following activities, except as permitted by those instruments:
|
|
|
incur additional indebtedness or guarantee obligations; |
|
|
|
|
repay indebtedness prior to stated maturities; |
|
|
|
|
make interest payments on the Notes and other indebtedness that is subordinate to our
indebtedness under the senior secured credit facility; |
|
|
|
|
pay dividends or make certain other restricted payments; |
|
|
|
|
make investments or acquisitions; |
|
|
|
|
create liens or other encumbrances; and |
|
|
|
|
transfer or sell certain assets or merge or consolidate with another entity. |
In addition, our senior secured credit facility also requires us to maintain certain financial
ratios and limits our ability to make capital expenditures. These financial ratios include a
minimum interest coverage ratio and a leverage ratio. The interest coverage ratio is the ratio of
consolidated EBITDA (as defined in our senior secured credit facility) to cash interest expense for
the preceding four quarters. The leverage ratio is a ratio of our debt to our consolidated EBITDA
for the preceding four quarters. The senior secured credit facility also restricts the maximum
amount of our capital expenditures during each year of the term of the senior secured credit
facility. Subject to certain exceptions, our capital expenditures may not exceed, in any fiscal
year, the greater of $15 million or 5% of our consolidated EBITDA for the preceding fiscal year
during the term of our senior secured credit facility. Capital expenditures are expenditures that
are required by generally accepted accounting principles to be classified as capital expenditures
in a statement of cash flows.
If we fail to comply with the restrictions in the indenture or our senior secured credit
facility or any other subsequent financing agreements, a default may allow the creditors under the
relevant instruments, in certain circumstances, to accelerate the related debt and to exercise
their remedies thereunder, which will typically include the right to declare the principal amount
of such debt, together with accrued and unpaid interest and other related amounts immediately due
and payable, to exercise any remedies such creditors may have to foreclose on any of our assets
that are subject to liens securing such debt and to terminate any commitments they had made to
supply us with further funds. Moreover, any of our other debt that has a cross-default or
cross-acceleration provision that would be triggered by such default or acceleration would also be
subject to acceleration upon the occurrence of such default or acceleration.
Our ability to comply with these covenants may be affected by events beyond our control, and
an adverse development affecting our business could require us to seek waivers or amendments of
covenants, alternative or additional sources of financing or reductions in expenditures. We cannot
assure you that such waivers, amendments or alternative or additional financings could be obtained,
or if obtained, would be on terms acceptable to us. In addition, the holders of Notes have no
control over any waivers or amendments with respect to any debt outstanding other than the debt
outstanding under the indenture.
Servicing our indebtedness requires a significant amount of cash. Our ability to generate
sufficient cash depends on numerous factors beyond our control, and we may be unable to generate
sufficient cash flow to service our debt obligations, which could adversely affect our financial
condition.
Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our indebtedness depends on our ability to
generate cash. This, to a certain
extent, is subject to general economic, political, financial, competitive, legislative,
regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.
20
We cannot assure you, however, that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from
operations, or that future borrowings will be available to us under our senior secured credit
facility in an amount sufficient to pay our indebtedness or to fund our other liquidity needs. We
may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness. We cannot assure you that we will be
able to refinance any of our indebtedness, including our senior secured credit facility, on
commercially reasonable terms or at all. In addition, the terms of existing or future debt
agreements, including our senior secured credit facility and the indenture governing our Notes may
restrict us from carrying out any of these alternatives. If we are unable to generate sufficient
cash flow or refinance our debt on favorable terms, it could significantly, adversely affect our
financial condition.
Despite our current indebtedness level, our company, including our subsidiaries, may incur
substantially more debt, which could exacerbate the risks associated with our substantial leverage.
As of April 3, 2009, we had up to $171.5 million of additional availability under our senior
secured credit facility (which gives effect to $28.5 million of outstanding letters of credit). The
terms of the senior secured credit facility and the Notes do not fully prohibit us or our
subsidiaries from incurring additional indebtedness. It is not possible to quantify the specific
dollar amount of indebtedness we may incur because our senior secured credit facility does not
provide for a specific dollar amount of indebtedness we may incur. Our senior secured credit
facility and the Notes allow us to incur only certain indebtedness that is expressly enumerated in
our senior secured credit facility and the indenture governing the Notes. If either we or our
subsidiaries were to incur additional indebtedness, the related risks that we now face could
increase.
We are subject to the Internal Control Evaluation and Attestation Requirements of Section 404 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we are required to include in our
annual report our assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
and our audited financial statements as of the end of each fiscal year. Furthermore, our
independent registered public accounting firm (the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm)
is required to report on whether it believes we maintained, in all material respects, effective
internal control over financial reporting as of the end of each fiscal year. In future years, if we
fail to timely complete this assessment, or if our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
cannot timely attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, we
could be subject to regulatory sanctions and a loss of public confidence in our internal controls.
In addition, any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties
encountered in their implementation, could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to timely
meet our regulatory reporting obligations.
We are controlled by Veritas Capital, whose interests may not be aligned with yours.
As of June 1, 2009, Veritas Capital owned a majority of the outstanding membership interest in
our controlling stockholder, DIV Holding LLC (DIV). Veritas Capital indirectly controls
approximately 56.5% of our Class A common stock. So long as Veritas Capital continues to
beneficially own a significant amount of the outstanding shares of our Class A common stock, it
will continue to be able to strongly influence or effectively control our decisions, including the
election of our directors, determine our corporate and management policies and determine, without
the consent of our other stockholders, the outcome of any corporate transaction or other matter
submitted to our stockholders for approval, including potential mergers or acquisitions, asset
sales and other significant corporate transactions. Two of our thirteen directors are employees of
Veritas Capital. Veritas Capital has sufficient voting power to amend our organizational
documents. The interests of Veritas Capital may not coincide with the interests of other holders of
our Class A common stock. Additionally, Veritas Capital is in the business of making investments in
companies and may, from time to time, acquire and hold interests in businesses that compete
directly or indirectly with us. Veritas Capital may also pursue, for its own account, acquisition
opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and as a result, those acquisition
opportunities may not be available to us. In addition, our Bylaws provide that so long as Veritas
Capital beneficially owns a majority of our outstanding Class A common stock, the advance notice
procedures applicable to stockholder proposals will not apply to Veritas Capital. Amendment of the
provisions described in our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation generally will
require an affirmative vote of our directors, as well as the affirmative vote of at least a
majority of our then outstanding voting stock, if Veritas Capital beneficially owns a majority of
our outstanding Class A common stock, or the affirmative vote of at least 80% of our then
outstanding voting stock, if Veritas Capital beneficially owns less than a majority of our then
outstanding Class A common stock. Amendments to any other provisions of our Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation generally will require the affirmative vote of a majority of our
outstanding voting stock. In addition, because we are a controlled company within the meaning of
the NYSE rules, we are exempt from the NYSE requirements that our board be composed of a majority
of independent directors, and that our compensation and corporate governance committees be composed
entirely of independent directors.
21
DIV is a party to a registration rights agreement, which grants it rights to require us to
effect the registration of its shares of common stock. In addition, if we propose to register any
of our common stock under the Securities Act whether for our own account or otherwise, DIV is
entitled to include its shares of common stock in that registration.
Even if Veritas Capital no longer controls us in the future, certain provisions of our charter
documents and agreements, as well as Delaware law, could discourage, delay or prevent a merger or
acquisition at a premium price.
Our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws contain provisions that:
|
|
|
permit us to issue, without any further vote or action by our shareholders, 50 million
shares of preferred stock in one or more series and, with respect to each series, to fix the
number of shares constituting the series and the designation of the series, the voting
powers (if any) of the shares of such series, and the preferences and other special rights,
if any, and any qualifications, limitations or restrictions, of the shares of the series; |
|
|
|
|
provide for a classified board of directors serving staggered three-year terms; and |
|
|
|
|
limit our shareholders ability to call special meetings. |
In addition, we have a rights plan that grants shareholders the right to purchase from us
additional shares at preferential prices in the event of a hostile attempt to acquire control of
us.
All of the foregoing provisions may impose various impediments to the ability of a third party
to acquire control of us, even if a change in control would be beneficial to our existing
shareholders.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
None.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.
We are headquartered in Falls Church, Virginia with major administrative offices in Fort
Worth, Texas. As of April 3, 2009, we leased 204 commercial facilities in 23 countries used in
connection with the various services rendered to our customers. Lease expirations range from
month-to-month to ten years. Upon expiration of our leases, we do not anticipate any difficulty in
obtaining renewals or alternative space. Many of our current leases are non-cancelable. We do not
own any real property.
The following locations represent our major facilities as of April 3, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location |
|
Description |
|
Business Segment |
|
Size (sq ft) |
|
Fort Worth, TX |
|
Executive offices finance and administration |
|
Corporate |
|
|
194,335 |
|
Salalah Port, Oman |
|
Warehouse and storage WRM contract |
|
LCM |
|
|
125,000 |
|
Falls Church, VA |
|
Executive offices headquarters |
|
Corporate |
|
|
113,366 |
|
Kabul, Afghanistan |
|
Offices and residence |
|
ISS & LCM |
|
|
47,000 |
|
McClellan, CA |
|
Warehouse California Fire Program |
|
ISS |
|
|
18,800 |
|
Dubai, UAE |
|
Executive offices finance and administration |
|
Corporate |
|
|
12,344 |
|
Juba, Sudan |
|
Offices and residence supports APK contract |
|
LCM |
|
|
22,915 |
|
Herndon, VA |
|
Offices GLS recruiting center |
|
ISS |
|
|
11,400 |
|
San Diego, CA |
|
Offices GLS recruiting center |
|
ISS |
|
|
9,400 |
|
We believe that substantially all of our property and equipment is in good condition, subject
to normal use and that our facilities have sufficient capacity to meet the current and projected
needs of our business.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
Information required with respect to this item is set forth in Note 8 to the consolidated
financial statements, in Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Form 10-K
and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of the
fiscal year ended April 3, 2009.
22
PART II
|
|
|
ITEM 5. |
|
MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES
OF EQUITY SECURITIES.
|
Market Information
Our Class A common is traded on the NYSE under the symbol DCP. The table below sets forth
the high and low sales prices of our common stock for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2009 |
|
High |
|
Low |
Fiscal quarter ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
$ |
16.26 |
|
|
$ |
10.61 |
|
January 2, 2009 |
|
$ |
16.07 |
|
|
$ |
9.95 |
|
October 3, 2008 |
|
$ |
18.75 |
|
|
$ |
14.05 |
|
July 4, 2008 |
|
$ |
18.28 |
|
|
$ |
14.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2008 |
|
High |
|
Low |
Fiscal quarter ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
$ |
27.58 |
|
|
$ |
15.02 |
|
December 28, 2007 |
|
$ |
27.27 |
|
|
$ |
20.00 |
|
September 28, 2007 |
|
$ |
23.78 |
|
|
$ |
18.43 |
|
June 29, 2007 |
|
$ |
23.74 |
|
|
$ |
14.78 |
|
At June 1, 2009, the closing price of our common stock was $14.87 per share, there were
56,251,900 shares of our common stock outstanding and there were approximately 64 holders of record
of our common stock.
Dividends
We are a holding company that does not conduct any business operations of our own. As a
result, we are dependent upon cash dividends, distributions and other transfers from our
subsidiaries to make dividend payments on our Class A common stock. However, we have never paid,
and do not intend to pay in the foreseeable future, cash dividends on our Class A common stock. The
amounts available to us to pay cash dividends are restricted by our subsidiaries debt agreements.
The declaration and payment of dividends also are subject to the discretion of our board of
directors and depend on various factors, including our net income, financial condition, cash
requirements, future prospects and other factors deemed relevant by our board of directors.
Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities
Our board of directors has authorized us to repurchase up to $25.0 million per fiscal year of
our outstanding common stock and/or senior subordinated notes during fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
The securities may be repurchased from time to time in the open market or through privately
negotiated transactions at our discretion, subject to market conditions, and in accordance with
applicable federal and state securities laws and regulations. Shares of common stock repurchased
under this plan will be held as treasury shares. A total of 693,200 shares were repurchased as of
April 3, 2009.
The following table presents information with respect to those purchases of our common stock
made during fiscal year 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Total Number of Shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Purchased Pursuant to |
|
|
Approx. Dollar Value of |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Paid Per |
|
|
Publically Announced |
|
|
Shares that May Yet Be |
|
Period |
|
Repurchased |
|
|
Share |
|
|
Plans |
|
|
Purchased Under the Plan(2) |
|
Feb. 27, 2009 Apr. 3, 2009(1) |
|
|
693,200 |
|
|
$ |
12.49 |
|
|
|
693,200 |
|
|
$ |
25,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
693,200 |
|
|
$ |
12.49 |
|
|
|
693,200 |
|
|
$ |
25,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The period between February 27, 2009 and April 3, 2009 represents the twelfth fiscal month of fiscal year 2009. |
|
(2) |
|
The current approval by our board of directors in fiscal year 2009 allows for $25 million in repurchases for a combination of common stock and/or
senior subordinated notes during fiscal year 2009 and another $25 million for such repurchases in fiscal year 2010. Unused amounts in fiscal year 2009 are
not available for use in fiscal year 2010. During fiscal year 2009, we purchased 693,200 shares and $15.4 million of senior subordinated notes, including
applicable fees, which utilized $24.0 million of our
availability under the fiscal year 2009 portion of the authorization. A combination of $25 million of shares
and/or senior subordinated notes is available for repurchase under
this authorization during fiscal year 2010. The current authorization effectively ends at the end of fiscal year
2010. |
23
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides information as of April 3, 2009 with respect to Class A shares of
our common stock that may be issued under the DynCorp International 2007 Omnibus Incentive Plan
(OIP) approved by our stockholders on August 8, 2007. See further information regarding our
equity stock plans in Note 11 to our consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities |
|
|
Number of Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining Available |
|
|
to be Issued |
|
Weighted-Average |
|
for Future Issuance |
|
|
Upon Exercise of |
|
Exercise Price of |
|
Under Equity |
|
|
Outstanding Options, |
|
Outstanding Options, |
|
Compensation |
Plan Category |
|
Warrants and Rights |
|
Warrants and Rights |
|
Plan(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders |
|
|
345,895 |
|
|
|
N/A |
(2) |
|
|
1,904,105 |
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders |
|
None |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
None |
Total |
|
|
345,895 |
|
|
|
N/A |
(2) |
|
|
1,904,105 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excluding securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights. |
|
(2) |
|
Currently, we have only issued restricted stock units (RSUs) within our OIP, which do not
have an exercise price. The weighted-average grant price of our RSUs issued is $17.59. |
Stock Performance Graph
The chart below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common shares from our
initial public offering on May 4, 2006 to the end of the 2009 fiscal year with the cumulative total
return on the Russell 1000 Growth Index and our peer group, as indicated below the table, for the
same period. The comparison assumes the investment of $100.00 on May 4, 2006, and reinvestment of
all dividends. The shareholder return is not necessarily indicative of future performance.
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our peer group is composed of the following U.S. Federal Government
service providers with whom we compete and/or have common business
characteristics: AECOM Technology Corp. (ACM), CACI International Inc.
(CAI), ITT Corporation (ITT), KBR Inc. (KBR), L-3 Communications
Holdings Inc. (LLL), ManTech International Corp. (MANT), SAIC Inc.
(SAI), SRA International Inc. (SRX), and Stanley, Inc. (SXE). |
24
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.
Prior to February 11, 2005, DynCorp and its subsidiaries, including our operating company,
were owned by Computer Sciences Corporation. We refer to this period ended on February 11, 2005 as
the immediate predecessor period. The selected historical consolidated financial data for the
period from April 3, 2004 through February 11, 2005 are derived from our consolidated financial
statements.
On February 11, 2005, our operating company was sold by Computer Sciences Corporation to an
entity controlled by Veritas Capital. We refer to the period beginning on February 12, 2005 as the
successor period. The selected historical consolidated financial data as of and for the period
from February 12, 2005 through April 1, 2005 and as of and for the fiscal years ended March 31,
2006, March 30, 2007, March 28, 2008 and April 3, 2009 are derived from our consolidated financial
statements.
We report the results of our operations using a 52-53 week basis. In congruence with this
reporting schedule, each quarter of the fiscal year will contain 13 weeks, except for the
infrequent fiscal years with 53 weeks, in which case one quarter will contain 14 weeks. The fiscal
year ended April 2, 2004 was a 53-week year. The fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, March 30, 2007,
and March 28, 2008 were 52-week years. The fiscal year ended April 3, 2009 was a 53-week year.
This information should be read in conjunction with Item 7. Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the consolidated financial
statements and related notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual
Report.
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
49 Days |
|
|
April 3, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
to |
|
|
April 3, |
|
March 28, |
|
March 30, |
|
March 31, |
|
April 1, |
|
|
Feb 11, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
Results of operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
3,101,093 |
|
|
$ |
2,139,761 |
|
|
$ |
2,082,274 |
|
|
$ |
1,966,993 |
|
|
$ |
266,604 |
|
|
|
$ |
1,654,305 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
(2,768,962 |
) |
|
|
(1,859,666 |
) |
|
|
(1,817,707 |
) |
|
|
(1,722,089 |
) |
|
|
(245,406 |
) |
|
|
|
(1,496,109 |
) |
Selling, general and administrative
expenses |
|
|
(103,583 |
) |
|
|
(117,919 |
) |
|
|
(107,681 |
) |
|
|
(97,520 |
) |
|
|
(8,408 |
) |
|
|
|
(57,755 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(40,557 |
) |
|
|
(42,173 |
) |
|
|
(43,401 |
) |
|
|
(46,147 |
) |
|
|
(5,605 |
) |
|
|
|
(5,922 |
) |
Operating income |
|
|
187,991 |
|
|
|
120,003 |
|
|
|
113,485 |
|
|
|
101,237 |
|
|
|
7,185 |
|
|
|
|
94,519 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(58,782 |
) |
|
|
(55,374 |
) |
|
|
(58,412 |
) |
|
|
(56,686 |
) |
|
|
(8,054 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on mandatory redeemable
shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,002 |
) |
|
|
(21,142 |
) |
|
|
(2,182 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on early extinguishment of
debt, net |
|
|
(4,131 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,484 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of
preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,717 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings from affiliates |
|
|
5,223 |
|
|
|
4,758 |
|
|
|
2,913 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
3,062 |
|
|
|
1,789 |
|
|
|
461 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
170 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
(41,995 |
) |
|
|
(27,999 |
) |
|
|
(20,549 |
) |
|
|
(16,627 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
|
(34,956 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
(20,876 |
) |
|
|
3,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
69,770 |
|
|
|
47,955 |
|
|
|
27,023 |
|
|
|
7,243 |
|
|
|
(3,104 |
) |
|
|
|
59,733 |
|
Basic and diluted income per
share |
|
|
1.22 |
|
|
|
0.84 |
|
|
|
0.49 |
|
|
|
0.23 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Cash flows provided (used) by
operating activities |
|
|
140,871 |
|
|
|
42,361 |
|
|
|
86,836 |
|
|
|
55,111 |
|
|
|
(31,240 |
) |
|
|
|
(2,092 |
) |
Cash flows used by investing
activities |
|
|
(9,148 |
) |
|
|
(11,306 |
) |
|
|
(7,595 |
) |
|
|
(6,231 |
) |
|
|
(869,394 |
) |
|
|
|
(10,707 |
) |
Cash flows (used) provided by
financing activities |
|
|
(16,880 |
) |
|
|
(48,131 |
) |
|
|
2,641 |
|
|
|
(41,781 |
) |
|
|
906,072 |
|
|
|
|
14,325 |
|
Balance sheet data (end of period): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
200,222 |
|
|
|
85,379 |
|
|
|
102,455 |
|
|
|
20,573 |
|
|
|
13,474 |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Working capital(1) |
|
|
439,997 |
|
|
|
361,813 |
|
|
|
282,929 |
|
|
|
251,329 |
|
|
|
200,367 |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Total assets |
|
|
1,539,214 |
|
|
|
1,402,709 |
|
|
|
1,362,901 |
|
|
|
1,239,089 |
|
|
|
1,148,193 |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Total debt (including Series A
Preferred Stock) |
|
|
599,912 |
|
|
|
593,162 |
|
|
|
630,994 |
|
|
|
881,372 |
|
|
|
826,990 |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
497,521 |
|
|
|
424,285 |
|
|
|
379,674 |
|
|
|
106,338 |
|
|
|
96,918 |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Other financial data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA(2) |
|
|
217,557 |
|
|
|
174,820 |
|
|
|
163,438 |
|
|
|
148,718 |
|
|
|
12,896 |
|
|
|
|
101,326 |
|
Backlog(3) |
|
|
6,297,903 |
|
|
|
5,961,000 |
|
|
|
6,132,011 |
|
|
|
2,641,000 |
|
|
|
2,040,000 |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Purchases of PP&E and software |
|
|
7,280 |
|
|
|
7,738 |
|
|
|
9,317 |
|
|
|
6,180 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
|
8,473 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Working capital is defined as current assets, net of current liabilities. |
|
(2) |
|
We define EBITDA as GAAP net income adjusted for interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, loss on
extinguishment of debt, and a portion of other expense related to interest rate swap losses. We use EBITDA as a
supplemental measure in the evaluation of our business and believe that EBITDA provides a meaningful measure of
operational performance on a consolidated basis, because it eliminates the effects of period to period changes in
taxes, costs associated with capital investments and interest expense and is consistent with one of the measures we
use to evaluate managements performance for incentive compensation. EBITDA is not a financial measure calculated in
accordance with GAAP. Accordingly, it should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for net income or
other financial measures prepared in accordance with GAAP. When evaluating EBITDA, investors should consider, among
other factors, (i) increasing or decreasing trends in EBITDA, (ii) whether EBITDA has remained at positive levels
historically, and (iii) how EBITDA compares to our debt outstanding. The non-GAAP measure of EBITDA does have certain
limitations. It does not include interest expense, which is a necessary and ongoing part of our cost structure
resulting from debt incurred to expand operations. EBITDA also excludes tax, depreciation and amortization expenses.
Because these are material and recurring items, any measure, including EBITDA, that excludes them has a material |
26
|
|
|
|
|
limitation. To mitigate these limitations, we have policies and procedures in place to identify expenses that qualify
as interest, taxes, loss on debt extinguishments, a portion of other expense related to interest rate swap losses,
and depreciation and amortization and to approve and segregate these expenses from other expenses to ensure that
EBITDA is consistently reflected from period to period. However, the calculation of EBITDA may vary among companies.
Therefore, our EBITDA presented may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. EBITDA does
not give effect to the cash we must use to service our debt or pay income taxes and thus does not reflect the funds
generated from operations or actually available for capital investments |
|
(3) |
|
Backlog data is as of the end of the applicable period. See Item 1. Business for further details concerning backlog. |
The following table presents a reconciliation of net income (loss) to EBITDA for the periods
included below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
49 Days |
|
|
|
April 3, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
to |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
April 1, |
|
|
|
Feb 11, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
RECONCILIATION OF NET INCOME
(LOSS) TO EBITDA: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
$ |
27,023 |
|
|
$ |
7,243 |
|
|
$ |
(3,104 |
) |
|
|
$ |
59,733 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
41,995 |
|
|
|
27,999 |
|
|
|
20,549 |
|
|
|
16,627 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
|
34,956 |
|
Interest expense, loss on
early extinguishment of debt
& preferred stock, and
interest rate swap losses
recorded in other
income/expense
(1)(2) |
|
|
64,158 |
|
|
|
55,374 |
|
|
|
70,615 |
|
|
|
77,828 |
|
|
|
10,236 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
41,634 |
|
|
|
43,492 |
|
|
|
45,251 |
|
|
|
47,020 |
|
|
|
5,704 |
|
|
|
|
6,637 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA |
|
$ |
217,557 |
|
|
$ |
174,820 |
|
|
$ |
163,438 |
|
|
$ |
148,718 |
|
|
$ |
12,896 |
|
|
|
$ |
101,326 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Fiscal year 2009 includes the costs associated with replacing our
senior secured credit facility, as defined and further discussed in
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions
and Results of Operations, including the write-off of deferred
financing fees. Also included is the premium on the redemption of a
portion of the senior subordinated notes and write-off of deferred
financing costs associated with the early retirement of a portion of
the senior subordinated notes. These premiums and write-off represent
additional costs of financing. In addition, we added back amounts
associated with hedge accounting recorded in other income/expense, as
further discussed in Note 10. |
|
(2) |
|
Fiscal year 2007 includes the premium associated with the redemption
of all of the previously outstanding preferred stock, premium on the
redemption of a portion of the senior subordinated notes and write-off
of deferred financing costs associated with the early retirement of a
portion of the senior subordinated notes. These premiums and write-off
represent additional costs of financing and our capital structure. |
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.
The following discussion and analysis of our consolidated financial condition and results of
operations should be read in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements,
and the notes thereto, and other data contained elsewhere in this Annual Report. Please see Item
1A. Risk Factors and Forward-Looking Statements for a discussion of the risks, uncertainties and
assumptions associated with these statements. Unless otherwise noted, all amounts discussed herein
are consolidated. All references in this Annual Report to fiscal years of the U.S. government
pertain to the fiscal year which ends on September 30th of each year.
Company Overview
We are a leading provider of specialized mission-critical professional and support services
outsourced by the U.S. military, non-military U.S. governmental agencies and foreign governments.
Our specific global expertise is in law enforcement training and support, security services, base
and logistics operations, construction management, aviation services and operations, and linguist
services. We also provide logistics support for all our services. As of April 3, 2009, we had
approximately 22,500 employees, including employees from our consolidated subsidiaries, in 33
countries, approximately 56 active contracts ranging in duration from three to ten years and
approximately 122 active task orders. We have provided essential services to numerous U.S.
government departments and agencies since 1951.
27
During fiscal years 2006 through 2008, we conducted our operations through two reportable
segments: GS and MTSS. On March 29, 2008, we divided our GS operating segment into two new
segments, ISS and LCM, to enable us to better capitalize on business development opportunities and
enhance our ongoing service. Our ISS operating segment consists of our Law Enforcement and Security
strategic business unit, our Specialty Aviation and Counter-Drug Operations strategic business unit
and GLS, our joint venture for the INSCOM contract. Our LCM operating segment consists of our
Contingency and Logistics Operations strategic business unit and our Operations Maintenance and
Construction Management strategic business unit and includes any work awarded under the LOGCAP IV.
Our third segment is MTSS, which did not significantly change.
On April 6, 2009, we announced a further reorganization of our business structure to better
align with strategic markets and streamline our infrastructure. Under the new alignment, our three
reportable segments were realigned into three new segments, two of which, GSDS and GPSS, are
wholly-owned, and a third segment GLS, which is a 51% owned joint venture. The new structure became
effective April 4, 2009, the start of our 2010 fiscal year, and is more fully described in Note 17
to our consolidated financial statements.
In addition to the information presented below, Note 13 to our consolidated financial
statements contains additional information about our operating segments and geographic areas in
which we have conducted business for fiscal years 2009, 2008, and 2007. We have restated the
corresponding items of segment information for fiscal years 2008 and 2007 to conform to our fiscal
year 2009 segment presentation.
Current Operating Environment and Outlook
External Factors
Over most of the last two decades, the U.S. government has increased its reliance on the
private sector for a wide range of professional and support services. This increased use of
outsourcing by the U.S. government has been driven by a variety of factors including:
lean-government initiatives launched in the 1990s; surges in demand during times of national
crisis; the increased complexity of missions conducted by the U.S. military and the DoS; increased
focus of the U.S. military on war-fighting efforts;
and the loss of skills within the government caused by workforce reductions and retirements.
In the current environment of economic uncertainty and market turmoil, developing and
implementing spending, tax, and other initiatives to stimulate the faltering economy is at the
forefront of the U.S. Governments activities. While we expect to see continued support for defense
initiatives under the Obama Administration, we expect that initiatives to address economic stimulus
will compete with other national priorities, such as DoD and DoS initiatives. While these dynamics
will place pressure on defense spending, we believe that, within the defense budget, weapon system
acquisitions will be the most likely initial target for budget reductions, and operations and
maintenance budgets will remain robust, driven by (i) the need to reset equipment coming out of
Iraq, (ii) the logistics and support chain associated with repositioning of forces and eventual
draw down in Iraq and (iii) deployments into Afghanistan.
Although the ultimate size of future defense budgets remains uncertain, current indications
are that overall defense spending will continue to increase over the next few years, albeit at
lower rates of growth relative to those of the last decade. We believe the following industry
trends will result in continued strong demand in our target markets for the types of outsourced
services we provide:
|
|
|
The continued transformation of military forces, leading to increased outsourcing of
non-combat functions, including life-cycle asset management functions ranging from
organizational to depot level maintenance; |
|
|
|
|
An increased level and frequency of overseas deployment and peace-keeping operations for
the DoS and DoD; |
|
|
|
|
Increased maintenance, overhaul and upgrade needs to support aging military platforms; |
|
|
|
|
Increased outsourcing by foreign governments of maintenance, supply support, facilities
management and construction management-related services; and |
|
|
|
|
A shift by the U.S. Government from single award to more multiple award IDIQ contracts,
which may offer us an opportunity to increase revenue under these contracts by competing for
task orders with the other contract awardees. |
Both the U.S. and Iraqi governments have recently communicated the goal and intent for U.S.
troop reductions from Iraq. The exact timing of the initial withdrawal and amount of time to fully
withdraw U.S. troops is uncertain. However, many industry observers believe that the withdrawal
will commence between 2010 and 2011. On the other hand, President Obama has indicated his
28
support for expanded troop levels in Afghanistan. As a result, we expect our level of business
involving Iraq to be relatively stable over the next few years, with demand remaining strong for
logistics, equipment reset, training and mentoring of Iraqi forces and government agencies and
translation services to support security and peacekeeping activities. In Afghanistan, we believe we
are well positioned to capitalize on increased U.S. government focus through many of our service
offerings, including police training and mentoring, aircraft logistics and operations,
infrastructure development, mine resistant and ambush protected or MRAP services, poppy
eradication and logistics services under LOGCAP IV.
Current Economic Conditions
We believe that our industry and customer base are less likely to be affected by many of the
factors generally affecting business and consumer spending. Accordingly, we believe that we
continue to be well positioned in the current economic environment as a result of historic demand
factors affecting our industry, the nature of our contracts and our sources of liquidity. However,
we cannot be certain that the economic environment or other factors will not adversely impact our
business, financial condition or results of operations in the future.
Furthermore, we believe that our current sources of liquidity will enable us to continue to
perform under our existing contracts and further grow our business. However, a longer term credit
crisis could adversely affect our ability to obtain additional liquidity or refinance existing
indebtedness on acceptable terms or at all, which could adversely affect our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
See Item 1A. Risk Factors Current or worsening economic conditions could adversely impact
our business, for a discussion of the risks associated with the current economic condition.
Internal Factors
Our internal focus for success centers around five key principles:
|
|
|
Relentless Performance Through a relentless mindset in meeting our commitments to our
customers every day and in operating with absolute integrity and in accordance with our Code of Ethics and Business
Conduct in all that we do. |
|
|
|
|
Lean Infrastructure In order to further fuel our growth and invest in our people, we
must generate additional investment capacity by ensuring that our infrastructure is as efficient as possible without
jeopardizing our ability to perform. |
|
|
|
|
Clear Strategic Investment We must have clarity in our strategic priorities, and we
must properly focus our investments in people, new program pursuits and efforts to penetrate new segments of the
market. |
|
|
|
|
New Business Growing our business profitably starts with winning new business. This
involves having a winning attitude across our enterprise, particularly in satisfying our current customers and
competing for new business. |
|
|
|
|
People We must be the employer of choice, with strong, trusted leadership, an
employee-focused environment and a culture of mutual respect in which our employees are empowered and rewarded for serving
our customers and ensuring their success. |
We apply these key principles continuously as we assess our operational and administrative
performance.
Fiscal Year 2009 Developments
Logistics Civil Augmentation Program
In April 2008, after extended protest and review, the U.S. Army Sustainment Command selected
us, along with KBR Inc. and Fluor Corporation, as the providers of logistics support to the U.S.
Army under the LOGCAP IV contract. The LOGCAP IV contract has a ceiling value of $50 billion with a
term of up to ten years and an annual ceiling value to us of $5 billion in revenue per year. Task
orders will be competed on with the other two awardees and will vary from year to year, depending
on U.S. Army funding and strategic objectives. Under this contract, we will support U.S. forces
worldwide with immediate focus on those deployed in the Middle East. We started performance on two
task orders based in Kuwait in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009.
29
Change of CEO
On May 13, 2008, we filed a Form 8-K announcing the appointment of William L. Ballhaus as
President and Chief Executive Officer, effective May 19, 2008. He succeeded Herb J. Lanese, who was
terminated without cause from his duties as Chief Executive Officer, but continues to serve on our
board of directors.
DIFZ Sale
On July 31, 2008, we sold 50% of our ownership interest in our previously wholly owned
subsidiary, DynCorp International FZ-LLC (DIFZ), for approximately $8.2 million. We financed the
transaction by accepting three promissory notes provided by the purchaser. As a result, the
financed portion of the sale was accounted for as a capital transaction reflected in additional
paid in capital (APIC). The notes are to be repaid through the purchasers portion of DIFZ
quarterly dividends and a $0.5 million down payment. We have recognized a gain of $0.5 million on
the sale from receipt of the cash payment in fiscal year 2009. As of April 3, 2009, the sales price
was adjusted to $9.7 million, based on the results of a revaluation required by the sales
agreement, contingent on approval by the DIFZ board of directors. The adjustment to the purchase
price was reflected as an increase to the promissory notes. DIFZ remains a consolidated subsidiary
in our financial statements, as it was determined that we remain the primary beneficiary. See
further discussion in Note 1.
Afghan Construction
The results of our operations for fiscal year 2009 exceeded expectations across our core
business areas with the exception of our Afghanistan construction contracts within our LCM segment,
which encountered cost overruns due to significant challenges, including the deteriorating security
situation in Afghanistan. Management has determined that several of our firm fixed price
Afghanistan construction contracts will operate at a loss or at margins approaching zero over their
contract terms.
We do not expect to bid any similar firm fixed price contracts without revised terms and
conditions. See Consolidated Results of Operations for further information regarding the
financial impact of our construction business on our consolidated financial results.
Fiscal Year Ended April 3, 2009 Compared to Fiscal Year Ended March 28, 2008
Consolidated Results of Operations
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, our consolidated results of
operations, both in dollars and as a percentage of revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
3,101,093 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
2,139,761 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of services |
|
|
(2,768,962 |
) |
|
|
(89.3 |
)% |
|
|
(1,859,666 |
) |
|
|
(86.9 |
)% |
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
(103,583 |
) |
|
|
(3.3 |
)% |
|
|
(117,919 |
) |
|
|
(5.5 |
)% |
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
|
(40,557 |
) |
|
|
(1.3 |
)% |
|
|
(42,173 |
) |
|
|
(2.0 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
187,991 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
% |
|
|
120,003 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(58,782 |
) |
|
|
(1.9 |
)% |
|
|
(55,374 |
) |
|
|
(2.6 |
)% |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt, net |
|
|
(4,131 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
Earnings from affiliates |
|
|
5,223 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
4,758 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
Interest income |
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
|
3,062 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
Other income, net |
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes |
|
|
132,641 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
% |
|
|
72,648 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
% |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
(41,995 |
) |
|
|
(1.4 |
)% |
|
|
(27,999 |
) |
|
|
(1.3 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interest |
|
|
90,646 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
% |
|
|
44,649 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
(20,876 |
) |
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
|
|
3,306 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
Revenue Revenue for fiscal year 2009 increased $961.3 million, or 45%, as compared to
fiscal year 2008, reflecting increased revenue in all operating segments. The increase, as more
fully described in the results by segment, is principally due to growth from new contracts, in
particular, the INSCOM contract.
Cost of services Cost of services is comprised of direct labor, direct material,
subcontractor costs, other direct costs and overhead. Other direct costs include travel, supplies
and other miscellaneous costs. Cost of services for fiscal year 2009 increased $909.3 million as
compared to fiscal year 2008, primarily the result of the ramp-up of the INSCOM contract. As a
percentage of revenue, cost of services increased to 89.3% of revenue in fiscal year 2009 from
86.9% of revenue in fiscal year 2008. This was primarily a result of a change in contract mix as we
earned more revenue from cost reimbursement type contracts than from firm fixed priced type
contracts, with the INSCOM contract and changes in portions of the CIVPOL contract driving this
shift. In addition to our change in contract mix, cost overruns by our Afghanistan construction
contracts, as further described below, also contributed to higher cost of services as a percentage
of revenue in fiscal year 2009 compared to fiscal year 2008.
Selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A) SG&A primarily relates to functions
such as management, legal, finance, accounting, contracts and administration, human resources,
management information systems, purchasing and business development. SG&A for fiscal year 2009
decreased $14.3 million, or 12.2%, compared to fiscal year 2008. SG&A decreased primarily as a result
of lean infrastructure initiatives, primarily through personnel reductions and process efficiency
implementations, focused on controlling SG&A costs, offset by approximately $5.0 million in
severance costs, including severance costs from the involuntary termination of our former CEO.
Fiscal year 2009 SG&A compared to fiscal year 2008 was also positively impacted by non-recurring
bid and proposal costs associated with the INSCOM contract which were incurred in fiscal year 2008.
Interest expense Interest expense for fiscal year 2009 increased by $3.4 million, or 6.2%,
as compared to fiscal year 2008. The increase in interest expense is primarily due to a higher
average outstanding debt balance and higher average interest rates as a result of our fiscal year
2009 debt financing as further discussed in Liquidity & Capital Resources. In addition to the
change in interest expense, deferred financing fees associated with our prior debt were also
written-off as further discussed in Note 7. The impact of this write-off is separately disclosed as
Loss on early extinguishment of debt in our consolidated statements of income.
Income tax expense Our effective tax rate of 31.7% for fiscal year 2009 decreased from
38.5% for fiscal year 2008. Our effective tax rate was impacted by the tax treatment of our GLS and
DIFZ joint ventures which are consolidated for financial reporting purposes but are not
consolidated for tax purposes as they are taxed as partnerships under the Internal Revenue Code.
Minority Interest Minority interest reflects the impact of our joint venture partners
interest in our consolidated joint ventures, GLS and DIFZ. For fiscal year 2009, minority interest
for GLS and DIFZ was $18.5 million and $2.4 million, respectively. In fiscal year 2008, minority
interest for GLS was additive to our net income as GLS was operating at a net loss. There was no
minority interest related to DIFZ, as it was a wholly owned subsidiary during fiscal year 2008.
Impact of our Afghanistan Construction Contracts
For fiscal year 2009, revenue from our Afghanistan construction contracts was $71.2 million,
as compared to $18.0 million for fiscal year 2008. The remaining revenue through completion of
these contracts is expected to be approximately $98.9 million.
As discussed in Current Operating Environment and Outlook Fiscal Year 2009
Developments above, our Afghanistan construction business encountered operational difficulties
during fiscal year 2009, which resulted in higher non-reimbursable delivery costs and contractual
milestone delays. As a result, a contract loss reserve and associated provision, specific to a
large firm fixed price construction contract in Afghanistan, was estimated and recorded during the
second quarter of fiscal year 2009, which totaled $18.4 million. Based on our assessment of the
status of this project and considering the current security environment in Afghanistan, additional
contract losses totaling $19.9 million were recorded in the third and fourth quarters of fiscal
year 2009. Utilization of the contract loss reserve through April 3, 2009 was $28.5 million.
The recording of the additional third quarter loss also triggered an interim assessment of
goodwill for potential impairment, as further discussed in Note 3 to our financial statements. As a
result of this assessment, we concluded that no goodwill impairment had occurred.
Additionally, revisions were made to the estimated margins on all other firm fixed priced
Afghanistan construction contracts within the Operations Maintenance and Construction Management
(OMCM) strategic business unit. These firm fixed price Afghanistan construction contracts are
expected to operate with margins at or approaching zero over their remaining contract terms.
31
The contract loss provision and revisions to estimated margins are based on the best
information currently available. Although we believe that these amounts have been estimated
appropriately, there can be no assurance that future events will not require us to revise these
estimates.
Results by Segment
The following table sets forth the revenue and operating income for the ISS, LCM and MTSS
operating segments, for fiscal year 2009, as compared to fiscal year 2008 (dollar amounts in
thousands).
International Security Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
1,823,141 |
|
|
$ |
1,097,083 |
|
|
$ |
726,058 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
151,888 |
|
|
$ |
89,588 |
|
|
$ |
62,300 |
|
Revenue Revenue for fiscal year 2009 increased $726.1 million, or 66.2%, as compared to
fiscal year 2008. The increase primarily resulted from the following:
Law
Enforcement and Security: Revenue increased $45.7 million,
or 6.7%, primarily due to
increases in our security services in Iraq, Palestine, Liberia and Haiti, offset by a decline in
security services in Afghanistan. Revenue from our civilian police
services in Iraq increased $31.0
million primarily due to higher personnel levels. As a result of new contracts started in early
fiscal year 2009, we provided civilian police and security services in Palestine, Liberia and
Haiti, which contributed $24.8 million, $4.4 million and $3.6 million, respectively, in increased
revenue for the fiscal year. These increases were offset by a decline
in Afghanistan of $31.1
million, which was a result of fewer supplies and equipment sales to the customer during fiscal
year 2009, as compared to fiscal year 2008, combined with a shift from a fixed price contract
structure in fiscal year 2008 to a cost reimbursable contract structure in fiscal year 2009. While
we expect revenue from our continuing security services to remain relatively stable in the near
term, we anticipate fiscal year 2010 revenue to benefit from our new mentoring and training program
to Iraqs Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Interior, which
contributed $6.1 million of revenue in fiscal year 2009.
Specialty Aviation and Counter-drug Operations: Revenue decreased $25.1 million, or 6.2%,
primarily due to a decline in our International Narcotics Law Enforcement programs resulting from
scope reductions, offset by new contracts associated with security and drug eradication training in
Afghanistan.
Global Linguist Solutions: Revenue was $709.1 million for the INSCOM contract through our GLS
joint venture, which began in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008. Revenue also benefited from
the recognition of the INSCOM contract award fee of $30.4 million for fiscal year 2009. The award
fee is based on achieving specific contract performance criteria, such as operational fill rates.
Based on our contract performance history to date, we anticipate the ability to accrue award fees
through the remaining life of the INSCOM contract.
Operating Income Operating income for fiscal year 2009 increased $62.3 million, or 69.5%,
as compared to fiscal year 2008. Operating income benefited from a reduction in SG&A expense of
$15.4 million due primarily to proposal costs in fiscal year 2008 associated with INSCOM, specific
contract litigation expenses in fiscal year 2008 associated with the Worldwide Network Services
(WWNS) litigation as further described in Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements and
from our lean infrastructure initiatives focused on controlling SG&A costs. Specific to our SBUs,
the increase primarily resulted from the following:
Law Enforcement and Security: Operating income decreased $14.2 million, or 12.7%, due to
declining margins, primarily in our Civilian Police services. This margin decline resulted from a
shift in portions of our task orders for these services from fixed price in the prior fiscal year
to cost reimbursable in the current fiscal year. These declines were partially offset by the
successful resolution of approximately $10 million of prior period billing matters, which positively impacted operating income.
Specialty Aviation and Counter-drug Operations: Operating income increased $14.2 million, or
58.9%, primarily due to higher margins on several new security and drug eradication training
contracts in Afghanistan, offset by lower revenue for the fiscal year.
Global Linguist Solutions: Operating income increased by $46.9 million to $40.8 million for
fiscal year 2009 as GLS commenced operations at the end of fiscal year 2008. Fiscal year 2009
operating income benefited from the accrual of the INSCOM contract award fee, which represents the
award earned or accrued based on achieving specific contract performance criteria, such as
32
operational fill rates. Operating income earned by GLS benefits net income only by our 51%
ownership portion, as 49% of earnings from the joint venture are reflected in minority interest as
a reduction to net income.
Logistics and Construction Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
352,196 |
|
|
$ |
285,317 |
|
|
$ |
66,879 |
|
Operating (loss)/income |
|
$ |
(33,406 |
) |
|
$ |
10,854 |
|
|
$ |
(44,260 |
) |
Revenue Revenue for fiscal year 2009 increased $66.9 million, or 23.4%, as compared to
fiscal year 2008. The increase primarily resulted from the following:
Contingency
and Logistics Operations: Revenue increased by
$44.1 million, or 33.6%, primarily
due to the expansion of services in the Philippines, which
contributed $24.2 million of the revenue
increase. Revenue also benefited from our support services, where we provided temporary housing in
response to the severe flooding in Iowa during the summer of 2008 and increased mediation and
humanitarian services provided in Sudan. Additionally, LOGCAP IV
contributed $4.7 million of
revenue as work began in March 2009 on awarded task orders. These increases were partially offset
by a decline in our Africa Peacekeeping program, primarily a result of reductions in current work
levels within this program. We anticipate fiscal year 2010 revenue to benefit significantly from
task orders under the LOGCAP IV contract with our other programs remaining steady or experiencing
declines due to non-recurring work completed during fiscal year 2009.
Operations Maintenance and Construction Management: Revenue increased $22.9 million, or 14.9%,
primarily due to continued progress on our Afghanistan construction projects. This was partially
offset by the completion of the Forward Operating Locations contract and contract termination for a
construction project in Nigeria. As discussed above in Consolidated Results of Operations
Impact of our Afghanistan Construction Contracts, due to significant challenges on several
Afghanistan construction contracts, resulting partly from the deteriorating security situation in
that country, we do not expect to bid on any similar firm fixed-price contracts without revised
terms and conditions. This is expected to impact future revenue in OMCM by limiting the
construction opportunities available to us.
Operating Income Operating income for fiscal year 2009 decreased $44.3 million to an
operating loss of $33.4 million as compared to operating income of $10.9 million in fiscal year
2008. Although operating income benefited by approximately $1.3 million from our lean
infrastructure initiatives focused on controlling SG&A costs in the current year, we encountered
SBU specific decreases in operating income, primarily as a result of the following:
Contingency
and Logistics Operations: Operating income decreased by
$2.3 million, or 23.3% for
fiscal year 2009, as compared to fiscal year 2008. The decrease was primarily driven by a decline
in our Africa Peacekeeping program, as a result of reductions in current work levels within this
program. Operating income was also negatively impacted by costs related to the ramp-up of our new
LOGCAP IV contract, which was awarded in early fiscal year 2009. In fiscal year 2009, LOGCAP IV did
not contribute significantly to revenue but incurred costs associated with contract set-up and
other overhead costs. In the fourth quarter, we were awarded two LOGCAP IV task orders based in
Kuwait worth $98 million which we expect will positively impact operating income in future periods
over the life of the task orders.
Operations Maintenance and Construction Management: Operating income decreased by $43.3
million for fiscal year 2009, as compared to fiscal year 2008. This
was primarily due to costs
associated with the construction in Afghanistan, which generated $2.6 million of positive operating
income in fiscal year 2008; but, lost $40.5 million in fiscal year 2009. This is further discussed
above in Consolidated Results of Operations Impact of our Afghanistan Construction Contracts.
We anticipate operating OMCM at near breakeven for the foreseeable future.
Maintenance and Technical Support Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
930,983 |
|
|
$ |
757,361 |
|
|
$ |
173,622 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
69,509 |
|
|
$ |
19,561 |
|
|
$ |
49,948 |
|
Revenue Revenue for fiscal year 2009 increased $173.6 million, or 22.9%, as compared to
fiscal year 2008. The increase primarily resulted from the following:
33
Contract Logistics Support: Revenue increased $56.4 million, or 27.5%, primarily due to higher
deliveries of support equipment associated with our C-21 and LCCS programs. This increase is
primarily due to supplemental increases in U.S. government spending for aircraft upgrades to
support the global war on terror. Within these programs, we expect pressure on fiscal year 2010
revenue as we anticipate less business from supplemental initiatives.
Field Service Operations: Revenue increased $42.8 million, or 13%, primarily due to a new
contract for logistics services at Fort Campbell, which started in May 2008, and increased revenue
from higher personnel levels in our CFT program. We expect increased competition on our CFT program
over the next fiscal year as the number of contractors has increased from four to seven in this
service space. While this could put downward pressure on revenue in fiscal year 2010, we do not
believe this will limit our long term opportunities under the CFT program.
Aviation and Maintenance Services: Revenue increased $74.4 million, or 33.5%, primarily due to
increased work associated with MRAP vehicles and increased revenue associated with our General
Maintenance Corps contract, offset by a decline in our marine services and a decrease in threat
management systems work. We expect higher revenue in the fiscal year 2010, primarily driven by
growth in our MRAP program through anticipated work in Afghanistan, partially offset by MRAP
declines in Iraq.
Operating
Income Operating income for fiscal year 2009 increased
$49.9 million, to $69.5
million, as compared to $19.6 million for fiscal year 2008. Operating income benefited from our
lean infrastructure initiatives focused on controlling SG&A costs, offset by severance associated
with the retiring of our MTSS divisional President. The overall year over year cost reduction
attributable to MTSS was approximately $6.9 million. Specific to our SBAs, the increase primarily
resulted from the following:
Contract
Logistics Support: Operating income for fiscal year 2009 increased by $10.4 million,
to $11.5 million, as compared to fiscal year 2008. The increase was primarily due to improved
project management in several key programs. Specifically, we experienced improved profitability on
our LCCS program due to stringent cost controls implemented during the year and a more favorable
product mix which resulted in improved margins. We expect to sustain the operating income
improvements achieved in fiscal year 2009 into the next fiscal year.
Field Service Operations: Operating income increased $3.6 million, or 18.4%, for fiscal year
2009, as compared to fiscal year 2008, driven primarily by increased revenue. We expect near term
pressure on our margins in fiscal year 2010 as a result of more competition on new awards from
additional IDIQ contractors.
Aviation
and Maintenance Services: Operating income increased
$29.0 million, to $47.0 million for
fiscal year 2009, as compared to $17.9 million for fiscal year 2008, primarily due to increased revenue and improved
mix of contracts with better margins, such as MRAP. We expect operating income to benefit by
continued growth in our MRAP program in fiscal year 2010.
Fiscal Year Ended March 28, 2008 to Fiscal Year Ended March 30, 2007
Consolidated Results of Operations
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, our consolidated results of
operations, both in dollars and as a percentage of revenue:
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
March 30, 2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
2,139,761 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
2,082,274 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost of services |
|
|
(1,859,666 |
) |
|
|
(86.9 |
)% |
|
|
(1,817,707 |
) |
|
|
(87.3 |
)% |
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
(117,919 |
) |
|
|
(5.5 |
)% |
|
|
(107,681 |
) |
|
|
(5.2 |
)% |
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
|
(42,173 |
) |
|
|
(2.0 |
)% |
|
|
(43,401 |
) |
|
|
(2.1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
120,003 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
113,485 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
% |
Interest expense |
|
|
(55,374 |
) |
|
|
(2.6 |
)% |
|
|
(58,412 |
) |
|
|
(2.8 |
)% |
Loss on mandatory redeemable shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
(3,002 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
)% |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt and preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
(9,201 |
) |
|
|
(0.4 |
)% |
Earnings from affiliates |
|
|
4,758 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
2,913 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
Interest income |
|
|
3,062 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
|
1,789 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
Other income, net |
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes |
|
|
72,648 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
% |
|
|
47,572 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
% |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
(27,999 |
) |
|
|
(1.3 |
)% |
|
|
(20,549 |
) |
|
|
(1.0 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interest |
|
|
44,649 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
% |
|
|
27,023 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
3,306 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
$ |
27,023 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue Revenue for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008 increased $57.5 million or 2.8% as
compared with the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007, reflecting increased revenue in all reporting
segments. See Results by Segment below for more analysis of our revenue growth by reportable
segment.
Cost of services Cost of services for fiscal year 2008 increased $42.0 million or 2.3%
primarily due to growth in operations. As a percentage of revenue, costs of services decreased to
86.9% for fiscal year ended March 28, 2008 from 87.3% for fiscal year ended March 30, 2007. The key
factors contributing to the decrease in cost of services as a percentage of revenue were continued
strong performance of fixed-price task orders combined with contract modifications for construction
efforts completed in earlier periods within the LCM operating segment.
Selling, general and administrative expenses SG&A for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008
increased $10.2 million or 9.5% as compared with the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007. Factors
contributing to the increased SG&A included: (i) litigation costs associated primarily with the
WWNS litigation, which is further described in Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements,
(ii) costs incurred in fiscal year 2008 related to our Sarbanes-Oxley compliance preparation, (iii)
consulting costs related to proposal activity for potential new contracts; and (iv) general SG&A
costs necessary to support the current and anticipated growth of our business. Offsetting these
increases were (i) non-recurring severance costs incurred in fiscal year 2007 for certain former
executives, and (ii) bonus compensation incurred in fiscal year 2007 associated with our initial
public offering.
Depreciation and amortization expense Depreciation and amortization for the fiscal year
ended March 28, 2008 decreased $1.2 million, or 2.8% as compared to the fiscal year ended March 30,
2007, primarily due to the effects of acquired software becoming fully amortized during the fiscal
year.
Interest expense Interest expense for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008 decreased $3.0
million, or 5.2% as compared with the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007. The decrease was primarily
due to lower average debt outstanding in the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008, as compared with the
fiscal year ended March 30, 2007. The interest expense incurred relates to our then existing senior
secured credit facility, the senior subordinated notes and amortization of deferred financing fees.
Interest income Interest income for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008 increased $1.3
million, or 71.2% as compared with the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007 due to higher average
balance of our cash sweep accounts.
Provision for income taxes Provision for income taxes for the fiscal year ended March 28,
2008 increased $7.5 million or 36.3% as compared to the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007 due to an
increase in taxable income offset by a reduction in the effective tax rate to 38.5% from 43.2% for
the fiscal years ended March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007 respectively.
Results by Segment
The following tables set forth the revenue and operating income for the ISS, LCM and MTSS
operating segments, for fiscal year 2008, as compared to fiscal year 2007 (dollar amounts in
thousands).
35
International Security Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
March 30, 2007 |
|
|
Change |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
1,097,083 |
|
|
$ |
1,086,481 |
|
|
$ |
10,602 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
89,588 |
|
|
$ |
89,130 |
|
|
$ |
458 |
|
Revenue Revenue for fiscal year 2008 increased $10.6 million, or 1.0%, as compared to
fiscal year 2007. The increase primarily resulted from the following fluctuations within our SBUs
as viewed by segment management:
Law Enforcement and Security: Revenue decreased $49.3 million primarily due to a decline in
revenue from our operations in Iraq of $84.4 million offset by an increase in Afghanistan of $35.0
million. An additional $0.6 million increase was attributable mainly to non-recurring work in other
Middle Eastern nations. In Iraq, we experienced a $66.1 million decrease in our CIVPOL services due
to the transition of our operations from leased facilities to customer furnished facilities. As we
had operated these leased locations and earned revenue through task orders, this planned transition
from these facilities negatively affected our CIVPOL revenue. Despite the decline from the
relocation, our core CIVPOL personnel levels remained consistent in Iraq and were not a driver of
the decrease. The remaining decrease in revenue from our operations in Iraq was driven primarily by
declines in non-recurring work associated with our personal protection services of $18.3 million.
The increase in revenue from our operations in Afghanistan was due largely to increased personnel
levels as well as additional services associated with the Afghan Poppy Eradication Program.
Specialty Aviation and Counter-drug Operations: Revenue increased $56.5 million primarily due
to a $45.1 million increase in drug eradication services and $11.4 million of increase in other
services. Our drug eradication services continue to grow through increases in our scope of services
for these projects. We experienced significant growth in Afghanistan where our services have played
a key role in reducing narcotics in that country.
Global Linguist Solutions: Revenue was $3.6 million for the new INSCOM contract through our
GLS joint venture, which began in our fiscal fourth quarter.
Operating income Operating income for fiscal year 2008 was consistent with fiscal year
2007. The following sets forth the operating income for the ISS segment for fiscal year 2008 as
compared to fiscal year 2007.
Law Enforcement and Security: Operating income increased $31.0 million as a result of
improved contract performance and elimination of non-recurring write-offs from contract losses that
occurred in the prior year. Our improved contract performance was primarily a result of effective
cost management strategies executed in fiscal year 2008, which allowed us to improve operating
income despite a decline in revenue for our services within this SBU.
Specialty Aviation and Counter-drug Operations: Operating income decreased $4.7 million due
to charges related to non-fee bearing, unscheduled maintenance of aircraft during the fiscal year.
While the nature of this incremental work had a positive and significant impact on revenue, its
structure as a cost reimbursable only contract did not provide a benefit to operating income.
Global Linguist Solutions: Start-up costs associated with this contract contributed to a
decrease in our operating income of $6.7 million through the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008.
General SG&A Factors: We incurred a decrease of $19.1 million in operating income related to
SG&A expenses in the current fiscal year. The fluctuation was due primarily to additional expenses
from proposal costs associated with INSCOM, specific contract litigation expenses associated with
the WWNS litigation, further described in Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements, and
increases in necessary support functions associated with our current and anticipated growth. These
cost increases were offset by one-time costs incurred in the prior year related to severance
expenses for certain former executives and bonus compensation associated with our initial public
offering.
Logistics & Construction Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
March 30, 2007 |
|
|
Change |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
285,317 |
|
|
$ |
266,050 |
|
|
$ |
19,267 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
10,854 |
|
|
$ |
13,227 |
|
|
$ |
(2,373 |
) |
Revenue Revenue for fiscal year 2008 increased $19.3 million, or 7.2%, as compared to
fiscal year 2007. The
increase primarily resulted from the following fluctuations within our SBUs
as viewed by segment management:
36
Contingency and Logistics Operations: Revenue decreased by $10.1 million primarily due to
non-recurring revenue associated with Hurricane Katrina in fiscal year 2007.
Operations Maintenance and Construction Management: Revenue increased $25.5 million due to
the ramp-up in various construction projects in Afghanistan. Our strategic focus has been on our
construction services where we are executing a strategy that includes capitalizing on our
construction expertise and our global resources in these areas. Because of our focus on this aspect
of the business, growth in construction has outpaced our other services within this SBU, such as
equipment positioning and military logistics.
Operating income Operating income for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008 decreased $2.4
million or 17.9%, as compared to the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007. The decrease primarily
resulted from the following:
Contingency and Logistics Operations: Operating income decreased by $6.0 million primarily
due to the decline in revenue for non-recurring projects as discussed above.
Operations Maintenance and Construction Management: Continued growth through the ramp-up of
new construction projects helped increase our operating income by $2.4 million.
General SG&A Factors: We incurred an increase of $1.2 million in operating income. The
improvement in SG&A expense was primarily a result of one-time costs incurred in the prior year
related to severance expenses for certain former executives and bonus compensation associated with
our initial public offering offset by additional expenses from proposal costs associated with
LOGCAP IV.
Maintenance & Technical Support Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
March 30, 2007 |
|
|
Change |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
757,361 |
|
|
$ |
729,743 |
|
|
$ |
27,618 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
19,561 |
|
|
$ |
11,128 |
|
|
$ |
8,433 |
|
Revenue Revenue for fiscal year 2008 increased $27.6 million, or 3.8%, as compared to
fiscal year 2007. The increase primarily resulted from the following fluctuations within our SBAs
as viewed by segment management:
Contract Logistics Support: Revenue increased $31.9 million due to escalating support
requirements associated with our LCCS programs, which include various services such as overhauls,
support personnel and equipment supply, primarily for deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. The
increase was driven by shorter time periods between field overhauls on engines and propellers,
which are two of our key services. A trend of higher overhauls was noted during the year due to a
combination of factors including longer equipment deployments, higher flight volumes and the harsh
desert conditions in those regions.
Field Service Operations: Revenue decreased $31.9 million due to a temporary decline in
personnel and level of services provided resulting from longer deployment cycles of equipment in
Iraq and Afghanistan. While the longer deployment cycles have benefited our Contract Logistics
Support SBA, it has created a temporary decline in our FSO as planes and equipment are not rotated
out of the theatre as frequently for complete resetting overhauls.
Aviation & Maintenance Services: Revenue increased $27.6 million primarily due to increased
work associated with mine resistant vehicles and new threat management systems offset by normal
occurrence of completed projects.
Operating income Operating income for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008 increased $8.4
million or 75.8%, as compared to the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007. The increase primarily
resulted from the following:
Contract Logistics Support: Operating income increased $12.7 million due to better margins
realized on higher revenue associated with our LCCS programs primarily supporting deployments in
Iraq and Afghanistan, in addition to non-recurring losses from fiscal year 2007 associated with our
Commercial Support Services program.
Field Service Operations: Operating income decreased $6.5 million due to lower revenue offset
by lower operating costs. The decrease in revenue created an undesirable cost structure due to the
nature of our services within this SBA.
37
Aviation & Maintenance Services: Operating income increased $0.1 million, which was a result
of higher revenue offset by a decrease in margin from several high margin non-recurring projects in
fiscal year 2007, in addition to no margin cost reimbursement only projects for aircraft
maintenance in fiscal year 2008, which increased revenue but ultimately reduced operating margin
percentages.
General SG&A Factors: We incurred an increase of $2.1 million in operating income related to
SG&A expenses in the current fiscal year. The fluctuation was primarily due to one time costs
incurred in the prior year related to severance expenses for certain former executives and bonus
compensation associated with our initial public offering.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Cash generated by operations and borrowings available under our senior secured credit facility
are our primary sources of short-term liquidity. Based on our current level of operations, we
believe our cash flow from operations and our available borrowings under our senior secured credit
facility will be adequate to meet our liquidity needs for the next twelve months.
Our ability to generate sufficient cash depends on numerous factors beyond our control. We
cannot be assured that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that
future borrowings will be available to us under our senior secured credit facility in an amount
sufficient to enable us to repay our indebtedness or to fund our other liquidity needs. We expect
that our improved cash collection efforts achieved in fiscal year 2009, evidenced by our reduced
days sales outstanding, are sustainable in fiscal year 2010 and will help facilitate sufficient
cash flow from operations to fund our expected growth. In addition, we expect cash contributions
from our LOGCAP IV collaborative partners to contribute funding for operations. However, to support
growth related to potential contract and task order awards that could occur in the next fiscal year
and servicing our current indebtedness, we may require additional financing beyond that currently
provided from operations and by our senior secured credit facility. There can be no assurance that
sufficient financing will continue to be available in the future or that it will be available on
terms acceptable to us. Failure to obtain sufficient capital could materially hinder our future
expansion strategies.
We are required, under certain circumstances as defined in our senior secured credit facility,
to use a percentage of cash generated from operations to reduce the outstanding principal of our
term loan. Based on the fiscal year 2009 financial performance and ending balances, we expect this
repayment to be $30.5 million, which is anticipated to be paid in July 2009. The amount of the
actual repayment can be reduced at the option of our lenders.
Cash Flow Analysis
The following table sets forth cash flow data for the periods indicated therein:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
April 3, |
|
March 28, |
|
March 30, |
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
140,871 |
|
|
$ |
42,361 |
|
|
$ |
86,836 |
|
Net cash used by investing activities |
|
|
(9,148 |
) |
|
|
(11,306 |
) |
|
|
(7,595 |
) |
Net cash (used by) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(16,880 |
) |
|
|
(48,131 |
) |
|
|
2,641 |
|
Fiscal Year 2009 Compared to Fiscal Year 2008
Cash provided by operating activities for fiscal year 2009 was $140.9 million as compared to
$42.4 million cash provided by operations for fiscal year 2008. Our increase in operating cash flow
for the 2009 fiscal year was primarily the result of higher cash generated from operations,
partially offset by a reduction in cash from an increase in our net working capital. Cash generated
from operations benefited from the combination of our continued revenue growth from new contracts
and improved operating efficiency. The change in net working capital was primarily due to an
increase in accounts receivable. Net of revenue growth, our accounts receivable actually improved
due to billing and collection efficiencies implemented during fiscal year 2009. As a result of
these efforts, days sales outstanding, a key metric utilized by management to monitor collection
efforts on accounts receivable, decreased from 73 days as of March 28, 2008 to 60 days as of April
3, 2009.
Cash used in investing activities was $9.1 million for fiscal year 2009, as compared to $11.3
million for fiscal year 2008. This use of cash from investing activities was primarily a result of
the combination of fewer PP&E and software purchases during fiscal year 2009, as compared to such
purchases in fiscal year 2008.
38
Cash used in financing activities was $16.9 million for fiscal year 2009, as compared to $48.1
million for fiscal year 2008. The cash used in financing activities during the fiscal year 2009 was
primarily a result of the $8.2 million net effect of extinguishing debt and issuing new debt
discussed below as well as in Note 7 of our consolidated financial statements. Cash used of $48.1
million in financing activities for fiscal year 2008 was due primarily to repayments of principal
on debt.
Fiscal Year 2008 Compared to Fiscal Year 2007
Operating cash flow was $42.4 million for fiscal year 2008, a decrease of $44.5 million, or
51.2%, as compared to the fiscal year 2007. The decrease in operating cash flow compared to fiscal
year 2007 was primarily attributable to changes in working capital, particularly in accounts
receivable and prepaid expenses and other current assets of $92.1 million offset by a net release
of restricted cash in fiscal year 2008, as compared to a net use of cash in fiscal year 2007, which
had a net impact of $29.1 million. The $20.9 million increase in net income also helped offset the
decreases from working capital. The changes in working capital were due to the timing of
collections along with business growth from new customers net of GLS expenditures in the fiscal
year.
Net cash used in investing activities was $11.3 million in fiscal year 2008 compared to $7.6
million in fiscal year 2007. The increase in cash used by investing activities was primarily due to
a permanent investment in an unconsolidated equity investee.
Cash flows used in financing activities were $48.1 million for fiscal year 2008, compared to
cash flows provided by financing activities of $2.6 million in fiscal year 2007. The cash used by
financing activities was primarily related to the repayment of borrowings under our term loans of
$37.8 million and net repayments made under other financing arrangements of $11.0 million.
Financing
Long-term debt consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Term loans |
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
|
$ |
301,130 |
|
9.5% Senior subordinated notes |
|
|
399,912 |
|
|
|
292,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
599,912 |
|
|
|
593,162 |
|
Less current portion of long-term debt |
|
|
(30,540 |
) |
|
|
(3,096 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt |
|
$ |
569,372 |
|
|
$ |
590,066 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On July 28, 2008 we entered into a senior secured credit facility consisting of a senior
secured term loan (Term Loan) of $200.0 million, and a senior secured revolving credit facility
(Revolving Facility) of up to $200.0 million. Borrowings under our Term Loan bear interest at a
rate per annum equal to the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), plus an applicable margin
determined by reference to the leverage ratio, as set forth in the credit agreement (the
Applicable Margin), or the base rate plus the Applicable Margin at our election. The Applicable
Margin for LIBOR as of April 3, 2009 was 2.5%, resulting in a 3.7% interest rate on our Term Loan.
On March 6, 2009, we amended our senior secured credit facility. This amendment reduced
certain excess cash flow repayment requirements as defined under our existing secured credit
agreement dated as of July 28, 2008, and expanded the current ability to repurchase our common
stock to include the right to redeem a portion of the 9.5% senior subordinated notes due 2013
issued by our operating company and DIV Capital Corporation. We expect to make a $30.5 million
principal payment in July 2009 as required by our senior secured credit facility. This repayment
will impact the remaining Term Loan principal payment schedule. The revised Term Loan principal
installments are due quarterly starting with September 2010 for $7.0 million, $15.0 million in
quarterly installments from December 2010 through June 2011, $13.5 million in quarterly payments
from September 2011 through June 2012, and a final principal payment of $63.5 million on the August
2012, the Term Loan expiration date. Borrowings under the senior secured credit facility are
secured by substantially all of our assets and the capital stock of our subsidiaries. A portion of
the Revolving Facility is available for letters of credit and swingline loans.
Borrowings under the Revolving Facility bear interest at a rate per annum equal to the base
rate plus an Applicable Margin or LIBOR plus the Applicable Margin. As of April 3, 2009 and March
28, 2008, we had no outstanding borrowings under the Revolving Facility.
Our available borrowing capacity under the Revolving Facility totaled $171.5 million at April
3, 2009, which gives effect to $28.5 million of outstanding letters of credit under the letter of
credit sub facility. With respect to each letter of credit, a quarterly
39
commission in an amount equal to the face amount of such letter of credit multiplied by the
Applicable Margin and a nominal fronting fee are required to be paid. The combined rate as of April
3, 2009 was 2.6%.
We entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge our exposure to cash flows related to
our senior secured credit facility. These agreements are more fully described in Note 10 to our
consolidated financial statements and Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about
Market Risk Interest Rate Risk.
In July 2008, we completed a private placement pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act
of 1933, as amended, of $125.0 million in aggregate principal amount of additional 9.5% senior
subordinated notes, which were issued under the same indenture as the senior subordinated notes
issued in February 2005. Net proceeds from the additional offering of senior subordinated notes
were used to refinance our then existing senior secured credit facility, to pay related fees and
expenses and for general corporate purposes. The additional senior subordinated notes mature on
February 15, 2013. The additional senior subordinated notes were issued at approximately a 1.0%
discount totaling $1.2 million. Deferred financing fees associated with this offering totaled
$4.7 million. Our registration statement with respect to these notes was declared effective on
January 13, 2009. We launched an exchange offer for the notes that ended on February 11, 2009.
We can redeem the senior subordinated notes, in whole or in part, at defined redemption
prices, plus accrued interest to the redemption date. The senior subordinated notes may require us
to repurchase the senior subordinated notes at defined prices in the event of certain specified
triggering events, including but not limited to certain asset sales, change-of-control events, and
debt covenant violations. In March 2009, under a board authorized program, we redeemed
approximately $16.1 million face value of our senior subordinated notes in the open market for
$15.4 million, including applicable transaction fees. As of April 3, 2009, $14.4 million of this
transaction was cash settled, with the remaining settlement occurring in fiscal year 2010. We
recorded a $0.3 million gain on this extinguishment after deduction of associated deferred
financing fees and discounts.
Contractual Commitments
The following table represents our contractual commitments associated with our debt and other
obligations as of April 3, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
2014 |
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Contractual obligations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term Loan(1) |
|
$ |
30,540 |
|
|
$ |
36,960 |
|
|
$ |
55,500 |
|
|
$ |
77,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
Senior subordinated notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
399,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
399,912 |
|
Operating leases(2) |
|
|
22,392 |
|
|
|
9,406 |
|
|
|
9,284 |
|
|
|
8,886 |
|
|
|
6,554 |
|
|
|
19,901 |
|
|
|
76,423 |
|
Interest on indebtedness(3) |
|
|
44,257 |
|
|
|
45,603 |
|
|
|
42,847 |
|
|
|
41,342 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
174,049 |
|
Management fee(4) |
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
1,800 |
|
Interest rate swap(5) |
|
|
6,152 |
|
|
|
1,139 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual obligations |
|
$ |
103,641 |
|
|
$ |
93,408 |
|
|
$ |
107,931 |
|
|
$ |
527,440 |
|
|
$ |
6,854 |
|
|
$ |
20,201 |
|
|
$ |
859,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes mandatory payment of term loan with excess cash flow. See Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements. |
|
(2) |
|
For additional information about our operating leases, see Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents interest expense calculated using interest rates of: (i) 3.7% on the term loan, (ii) 9.5% on the senior
subordinated notes and (iii) 0.5% interest applied to unutilized revolver borrowing capacity. The term loan
interest is variable and resets each quarter based on changes in three-month LIBOR and the spread. The senior
subordinated debt 9.5% rate as well as the 0.5% rate applied to the unutilized borrowing capacity is fixed. |
|
(4) |
|
For additional information on the management fee, see Note 15 to our consolidated financial statements. |
|
(5) |
|
This is based on the present value of the estimated settlement payments as of April 3, 2009. The actual amounts
could differ based on the variability of three-month LIBOR. |
Backlog
For a detailed discussion on backlog, see Item 1. Business Backlog.
Estimated Remaining Contract Value
For a detailed discussion on estimated remaining contract value, see Item 1. Business Estimated
Remaining Contract Value.
40
Estimated Total Contract Value
For a detailed discussion on estimated total contract value, see Item 1. Business Estimated
Total Contract Value.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
In accordance with the definition under SEC rules, the following qualify as off-balance sheet
arrangements:
|
|
|
Any obligation under certain guarantee contracts; |
|
|
|
|
A retained or contingent interest in assets transferred to an unconsolidated entity
or similar arrangement that serves as credit, liquidity or market risk support to that
entity for such assets; |
|
|
|
|
Any obligation under certain derivative instruments; and |
|
|
|
|
Any obligation arising out of a material variable interest held by us in an
unconsolidated entity that provides financing, liquidity, market risk or
credit risk support to us, or engages in leasing, hedging or research and development
services with us. |
As of April 3, 2009, we were not directly liable for the debt of any unconsolidated entity,
and we did not have any retained or contingent interest in assets as defined above. We recognize
all derivatives as either assets or liabilities at fair value in our consolidated balance sheets.
Refer to Note 8 and Note 10 of our consolidated financial statements for additional disclosure.
Effects of Inflation
We have generally been able to anticipate increases in costs when pricing our contracts. Bids
for longer-term fixed-price and time-and-materials type contracts typically include sufficient
labor and other cost escalations in amounts expected to cover cost increases over the period of
performance. Consequently, because costs and revenue include an inflationary increase commensurate
with the general economy in which we operate, net income as a percentage of revenue has not been
materially impacted by inflation.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The process of preparing financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires the use of
estimates and assumptions to determine reported amounts of certain assets, liabilities, revenue and
expenses and the disclosure of related contingent assets and liabilities. These estimates and
assumptions are based upon information available at the time of the estimates or assumptions,
including our historical experience, where relevant. These significant estimates and assumptions
are reviewed quarterly by management with oversight by the Disclosure Committee, an internal
committee comprised of members of senior management with detailed knowledge of our business. We ask
this committee to review our compliance with accounting and disclosure requirements, to evaluate
the fairness of our financial and non-financial disclosures, and to report their findings to us.
This evaluation process includes a thorough review of key estimates and assumptions used in
preparing our financial statements. Because of the uncertainty of factors surrounding the
estimates, assumptions and judgments used in the preparation of our financial statements, actual
results may differ from the estimates, and the difference may be material.
Our critical accounting policies and estimates are those policies and estimates that are both
most important to our financial condition and results of operations and require the most difficult,
subjective or complex judgments on the part of management in their application, often as a result
of the need to make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. We believe
that the following represents our critical accounting policies. For a summary of all of our
significant accounting policies, see Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included in
this Annual Report. Management and our external auditors have discussed our critical accounting
policies and estimates with the Audit Committee of our board of directors.
Revenue Recognition
We are predominantly a services provider and only include products or systems when necessary
for the execution of the service arrangement and as such, systems, equipment or materials are not
generally separable from services. Revenue is recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement
exists, services or products have been provided to the client, the sales price is fixed or
determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured. Each arrangement is unique and revenue
recognition is evaluated on a contract by contract basis. Our contracts typically fall into four
categories with the first representing the vast majority of our revenue. The categories are federal
government contracts, construction type contracts, software contracts and other contracts. We apply
the appropriate guidance consistently to similar contracts.
41
We expense pre-contract costs as incurred for an anticipated contract until the contract is
awarded. Throughout the life of the contract, indirect costs, including general and administrative
costs, are expensed as incurred. Management regularly reviews project profitability and underlying
estimates. Revisions to estimates are reflected in results of operations as a change in accounting
estimate in the period in which the facts that give rise to the revision become known by
management.
Major factors we consider in determining total estimated revenue and cost include the basic
contract price, contract options, change orders (modifications of the original contract), back
charges and claims, and contract provisions for penalties, award fees and performance incentives.
All of these factors and other special contract provisions are evaluated throughout the life of our
contracts when estimating total contract revenue under the percentage-of-completion or proportional
methods of accounting.
Federal Government Contracts For all non-construction and non-software U.S. federal
government contracts or contract elements, we apply the guidance in the American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants Audit and Accounting Guide, Federal Government Contractors, or
AAG-FGC. We apply the combination and segmentation guidance in the AAG-FGC in analyzing the
deliverables contained in the applicable contract to determine appropriate profit centers. Revenue
is recognized by profit center using the percentage-of-completion method or completed contract
method. The completed contract method is sometimes used when reliable estimates cannot be supported
for percentage-of-completion method recognition or for short duration projects when the results of
operations would not vary materially from those resulting from use of the percentage-of-completion
method. Until complete, project costs are maintained in work in progress, a component of inventory.
Projects under our U.S. federal government contracts typically have different pricing
mechanisms that influence how revenue is earned and recognized. These pricing mechanisms are
classified as cost plus fixed-fee, fixed-price, cost plus award fee, time-and-materials (including
unit-price/level-of-effort contracts). Any of these contract types can be executed under an IDIQ
contract, which does not represent a firm order for services. As a result, the exact timing and
quantity of delivery and pricing mechanism for IDIQ profit centers are not known at the time of
contract award, but they can contain any type of pricing mechanism.
Revenue on projects with a fixed-price or fixed-fee, including award fees, is generally
recognized ratably over the contract period measured by either output or input methods appropriate
to the services or products provided. For example, output measures can include period of service,
such as for aircraft fleet maintenance; and units delivered or produced, such as aircraft for which
modification has been completed. Input measures can include a cost-to-cost method, such as for
procurement-related services.
Revenue on time and materials projects is recognized at contractual billing rates for
applicable units of measure (e.g. labor hours incurred, units delivered).
Construction Contracts or Contract Elements For all construction contracts or contract
elements, revenue is recognized by profit center using the percentage-of-completion method.
Software Contracts or Contract Elements It is our policy to review any arrangement
containing software or software deliverables using applicable GAAP guidance for software revenue
recognition to ensure accurate accounting of these arrangements as discussed further in Note 1 to
our consolidated financial statements for fiscal year 2009. We never sell software on a separate,
standalone basis. As a result, software arrangements are typically accounted for as one unit of
accounting and are recognized over the service period, including the period of post-contract
customer support.
Other Contracts or Contract Elements Our contracts with non-federal government customers
are predominantly multiple-element. Multiple-element arrangements involve multiple obligations in
various combinations to perform services, deliver equipment or materials, grant licenses or other
rights, or take certain actions. We evaluate all deliverables in an arrangement to determine
whether they represent separate units of accounting and arrangement consideration is allocated
among the separate units of accounting based on their relative fair values. Fair values are
established by evaluating vendor specific objective evidence (VSOE) or third-party evidence if
available. Due to the customized nature of our arrangements, VSOE and third-party evidence is
generally not available resulting in applicable arrangements being accounted for as one unit of
accounting.
Deferred Taxes, Tax Valuation Allowances and Tax Reserves
Our income tax expense, deferred tax assets and liabilities and reserves for uncertain tax
positions reflect managements best estimate of future taxes to be paid. We are subject to income
taxes in both the U.S. and numerous foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgments and estimates are
required in determining the consolidated income tax expense.
42
Deferred income taxes arise from temporary differences between the tax and financial statement
recognition of revenue and expense. In evaluating our ability to recover our deferred tax assets, we consider all
available positive and negative evidence, including scheduled reversals of deferred tax
liabilities, projected future taxable income, tax planning strategies and recent financial
operations. In projecting future taxable income, we develop assumptions including the amount of
future state, federal and foreign pretax operating income, the reversal of temporary differences,
and the implementation of feasible and prudent tax planning strategies. These assumptions require
significant judgment about the forecasts of future taxable income and are consistent with the plans
and estimates we are using to manage the underlying businesses.
Valuation allowances are recognized to reduce the carrying value of deferred tax assets to
amounts that we expect are more likely than not to be realized. Valuation allowances applicable to
our company primarily relate to the deferred tax assets established for certain tax credit
carryforwards and net operating loss carryforwards for U.S. and non-U.S. subsidiaries. In
evaluating the realizability of our deferred tax assets, we assess the need for any related
valuation allowances or adjust the amount of any allowances, if necessary. We assess such factors
as our forecast of future taxable income and available tax planning strategies that could be
implemented to realize the net deferred tax assets in determining the need for or sufficiency of a
valuation allowance. Failure to achieve forecasted taxable income in the applicable tax
jurisdictions could affect the ultimate realization of deferred tax assets and could result in an
increase in our effective tax rate on future earnings. Implementation of different tax structures
in certain jurisdictions could also impact the need for certain valuation allowances.
The amount of income taxes we pay is subject to ongoing audits by federal, state and foreign
tax authorities, which often result in potential assessments. Significant judgment is required in
determining income tax provisions and evaluating tax positions. We establish reserves for open tax
years for uncertain tax positions that may be subject to challenge by various tax authorities. The
consolidated tax provision and related accruals include the impact of such reasonably estimable
losses and related interest and penalties as deemed appropriate.
On March 31, 2007, we adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an Interpretation of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 109 (FIN No. 48), which addresses the determination of whether tax benefits
claimed, or expected to be claimed, on a tax return should be recorded in the financial statements.
Under FIN No. 48, we may recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is
more-likely-than-not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing
authorities. The determination is based on the technical merits of the position and presumes that
each uncertain tax position will be examined by the relevant taxing authority that has full
knowledge of all relevant information.
The tax benefits recognized in the financial statements from such a position are measured
based on the largest benefit that has a greater than fifty percent likelihood of being realized
upon ultimate settlement. FIN No. 48 also provides guidance on derecognition, classification,
interest and penalties on income taxes, accounting in interim periods and requires increased
disclosures.
We believe we have adequately provided for any reasonably foreseeable outcome related to these
matters, and our future results may include favorable or unfavorable adjustments to our estimated
tax liabilities. To the extent that the expected tax outcome of these matters changes, such changes
in estimate will impact the income tax provision in the period in which such determination is made.
Equity-Based Compensation Expense
We have adopted the provisions of and accounted for equity-based compensation in accordance
with FASB No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (SFAS No. 123R). Under the fair value
recognition provisions, equity-based compensation expense is measured using the grant date fair
value for equity awards or is revalued each accounting period for liability awards. See Note 11 for
further information regarding the SFAS No. 123(R) disclosures.
We currently have two types of share-based payment awards, RSUs and Class B membership
interests in DIV Holding LLC (the Class B membership interests). Our RSUs are classified as liability awards
under GAAP and are revalued based on our closing stock price at the end of each accounting period.
The Class B membership interests are equity awards under GAAP. Class B membership interests are
valued at the grant date using a discounted cash flow technique to arrive at a fair value of the
Class B membership interests. Our fair value analysis includes the following variables: our stock
price, outstanding common shares, DIV Holding LLC ownership percentage, remaining preference to
Class A holders, and a discount for lack of marketability. The discount for lack of marketability
for each grant was estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton put-call parity
relationship computation.
The determination of the fair value of the Class B membership interests is affected by our
stock price as well as assumptions including volatility, the risk-free interest rate and expected
dividends. We base the risk-free interest rate that we use in the pricing model on a forward curve
of risk-free interest rates based on constant maturity rates provided by the U.S. Treasury. We have
not paid,
43
and do not anticipate paying, any cash dividends in the foreseeable future and therefore used
an expected dividend yield of zero in the pricing model.
We are required to estimate forfeitures at the time of grant and revise those estimates in
subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. We use historical data and
probable future events to estimate forfeitures and record stock-based compensation expense only for
those awards that are expected to vest. Our share-based payment awards vest ratably, based on
vesting terms which typically range from one to three years, over the requisite service periods,
which differ from our recognition of compensation expense that is
recognized on a straight line basis over the requisite service
period for each separately vesting portion of the award.
Impairment of Goodwill
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, we evaluate goodwill
for impairment annually during the fourth quarter and in any interim period in which circumstances
arise that indicate our goodwill may be impaired. Indicators of impairment include, but are not
limited to, the loss of significant business; operating performance indicators, sizable decreases
in federal government appropriations or funding for our contracts; or other considerable adverse
changes in industry or market conditions.
We estimate a portion of the fair value of our reporting units under the income approach by
utilizing a discounted cash flow model based on several factors including balance sheet carrying
values, historical results, our most recent forecasts, and other relevant quantitative and
qualitative information. We discount the related cash flow forecasts using the weighted-average
cost of capital method at the date of evaluation. We also use the market approach to estimate the
remaining portion of our reporting unit valuation. This technique utilizes comparative market
multiples in the valuation estimate. While the income approach has the advantage of utilizing more
company specific information, the market approach has the advantage of capturing market based
transaction pricing.
Preparation of forecasts and the selection of the discount rate involve significant judgments
that we base primarily on existing firm orders, expected future orders, and general market
conditions. Also, the weighting assigned to the income approach results and market approach results
also impacts the reporting unit valuation. Significant changes in these forecasts, the discount
rate selected, or the weighting of the income and market approach could affect the estimated fair
value of one or more of our reporting units and could result in a goodwill impairment charge in a
future period. The combined estimated fair value of all of our reporting units from the weighted
total of the market approach and income approach often results in a premium over our market
capitalization, commonly referred to as a control premium.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
The information regarding recent accounting pronouncements is included in Note 1 to our
consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report, which is incorporated
herein by reference.
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
We are subject to market risk primarily relating to potential losses arising from adverse
changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates. For a further discussion of market
risks we may encounter, see Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Interest Rate Risk
We have interest rate risk relating to changes in interest rates on our variable rate debt.
Our policy is to manage interest rate exposure through the use of a combination of fixed and
floating rate debt instruments. Our 9.5% senior subordinated notes represent our fixed rate debt,
which totaled $399.9 million, including unamortized discount, as of April 3, 2009. Our Term Loan
and Revolving Facility represent our variable rate debt. As of April 3, 2009, the balance of our
Term Loan was $200 million and we had no borrowings under our Revolving Facility. Borrowings under
our variable rate debt bear interest, based on our option, at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR, plus
the Applicable Margin or the base rate plus the Applicable Margin. Each quarter point change in
interest rates on our outstanding variable rate debt as of April 3, 2009, results in approximately
$0.5 million change in annual interest expense.
Our Term Loan and Revolving facility are structured through a syndicate of banks and are not
actively traded. Our 9.5% senior subordinated notes are publicly traded and had a quoted aggregate
market value of approximately $390.9 million based on an actual market trade price on April 3,
2009.
During fiscal year 2008, in order to mitigate interest rate risk related to our Term Loan, we
entered into three interest rate swap agreements with notional amounts totaling $275 million. These
interest rate swaps effectively fixed the interest rate, including
44
Applicable Margin, on the first $275 million of our debt indexed to LIBOR. The notional
principal of $75 million that was covered through September 2008 expired and the remaining $200
million is protected through May 2010.
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk
We are exposed to changes in foreign currency rates. At present, we do not utilize any
derivative instruments to manage risk associated with foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations.
The functional currency of certain foreign operations is the local currency. Accordingly, these
foreign entities translate assets and liabilities from their local currencies to U.S. dollars using
year-end exchange rates while income and expense accounts are translated at the average rates in
effect during the year. The resulting translation adjustment is recorded as accumulated other
comprehensive (loss) income. Our foreign currency transactions are not material as of April 3,
2009.
45
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
Financial Statement Schedules: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
82 |
|
46
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of DynCorp International Inc.
Falls Church, Virginia
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of DynCorp International Inc. and
subsidiaries (the Company) as of April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008, and the related consolidated
statements of income, shareholders equity, and cash flows for the fiscal years ended April 3,
2009, March 28, 2008, and March 30, 2007. Our audits also included the financial statement
schedules listed in the Index at Item 15. These financial statements and financial statement
schedules are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on the financial statements and financial statement schedules based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles
used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material
respects, the financial position of the Company as of April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008, and the
results of their operations and their cash flows for the fiscal years ended April 3, 2009, March
28, 2008, and March 30, 2007, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. Also, in our opinion, such financial statement schedules, when considered
in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as whole, present fairly in all
material respects the information set forth therein.
As discussed in Note 4, effective March 31, 2007 the Company adopted the provisions of
Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
April 3, 2009, based on the criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated June
11, 2009 expressed an unqualified opinion on the Companys internal control over financial
reporting.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Fort Worth, Texas
June 11, 2009
47
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data) |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
3,101,093 |
|
|
$ |
2,139,761 |
|
|
$ |
2,082,274 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
(2,768,962 |
) |
|
|
(1,859,666 |
) |
|
|
(1,817,707 |
) |
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
(103,583 |
) |
|
|
(117,919 |
) |
|
|
(107,681 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
|
(40,557 |
) |
|
|
(42,173 |
) |
|
|
(43,401 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
187,991 |
|
|
|
120,003 |
|
|
|
113,485 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(58,782 |
) |
|
|
(55,374 |
) |
|
|
(58,412 |
) |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt, net |
|
|
(4,131 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,484 |
) |
Interest expense on mandatory redeemable shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,002 |
) |
Loss on extinguishment of preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,717 |
) |
Earnings from affiliates |
|
|
5,223 |
|
|
|
4,758 |
|
|
|
2,913 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
3,062 |
|
|
|
1,789 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
132,641 |
|
|
|
72,648 |
|
|
|
47,572 |
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
(41,995 |
) |
|
|
(27,999 |
) |
|
|
(20,549 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interest |
|
|
90,646 |
|
|
|
44,649 |
|
|
|
27,023 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
(20,876 |
) |
|
|
3,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
$ |
27,023 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
1.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.84 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
48
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, |
|
|
|
except share data) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
200,222 |
|
|
$ |
85,379 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
5,935 |
|
|
|
11,308 |
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $68 and $268 |
|
|
564,432 |
|
|
|
513,312 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
124,214 |
|
|
|
109,027 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,341 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
894,803 |
|
|
|
736,367 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
18,338 |
|
|
|
15,442 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
420,180 |
|
|
|
420,180 |
|
Tradename |
|
|
18,318 |
|
|
|
18,318 |
|
Other intangibles, net |
|
|
142,719 |
|
|
|
176,146 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
12,788 |
|
|
|
18,168 |
|
Other assets, net |
|
|
32,068 |
|
|
|
18,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,539,214 |
|
|
$ |
1,402,709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt |
|
$ |
30,540 |
|
|
$ |
3,096 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
160,419 |
|
|
|
148,787 |
|
Accrued payroll and employee costs |
|
|
137,993 |
|
|
|
85,186 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
8,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other accrued liabilities |
|
|
111,590 |
|
|
|
129,240 |
|
Income taxes payable |
|
|
5,986 |
|
|
|
8,245 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
454,806 |
|
|
|
374,554 |
|
Long-term debt, less current portion |
|
|
569,372 |
|
|
|
590,066 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
6,779 |
|
|
|
13,804 |
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
10,736 |
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value 232,000,000 shares authorized;
57,000,000 shares issued and 56,306,800 and 57,000,000 shares outstanding, respectively |
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
570 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
366,620 |
|
|
|
357,026 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
143,373 |
|
|
|
73,603 |
|
Treasury stock, 693,200 shares |
|
|
(8,618 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(4,424 |
) |
|
|
(6,914 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
497,521 |
|
|
|
424,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,539,214 |
|
|
$ |
1,402,709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
49
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
$ |
27,023 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
41,634 |
|
|
|
43,492 |
|
|
|
45,251 |
|
Loss on early extinguishment of debt, net |
|
|
4,131 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,657 |
|
Loss on early extinguishment of preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,717 |
|
Excess tax benefits from equity-based compensation |
|
|
(184 |
) |
|
|
(686 |
) |
|
|
(495 |
) |
Amortization of deferred loan costs |
|
|
3,694 |
|
|
|
3,015 |
|
|
|
3,744 |
|
Recovery for losses on accounts receivable |
|
|
(185 |
) |
|
|
(923 |
) |
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
Earnings from affiliates |
|
|
(5,223 |
) |
|
|
(4,758 |
) |
|
|
(2,913 |
) |
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
34,273 |
|
|
|
(1,017 |
) |
|
|
(14,010 |
) |
Equity-based compensation |
|
|
1,883 |
|
|
|
4,599 |
|
|
|
2,353 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
20,876 |
|
|
|
(3,306 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
(291 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
5,373 |
|
|
|
8,916 |
|
|
|
(20,224 |
) |
Accounts receivable |
|
|
(50,896 |
) |
|
|
(49,675 |
) |
|
|
(19,255 |
) |
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
(18,934 |
) |
|
|
(36,123 |
) |
|
|
(25,165 |
) |
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
|
36,441 |
|
|
|
31,679 |
|
|
|
82,427 |
|
Redeemable preferred stock dividend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,695 |
) |
Income taxes payable |
|
|
(3,930 |
) |
|
|
(3,458 |
) |
|
|
5,921 |
|
Distributions from affiliates |
|
|
2,439 |
|
|
|
2,651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
140,871 |
|
|
|
42,361 |
|
|
|
86,836 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of property and equipment |
|
|
(4,684 |
) |
|
|
(6,081 |
) |
|
|
(7,037 |
) |
Purchase of computer software |
|
|
(2,596 |
) |
|
|
(1,657 |
) |
|
|
(2,280 |
) |
Proceeds from sale of property and equipment |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributions to equity method investees |
|
|
(2,233 |
) |
|
|
(3,366 |
) |
|
|
(363 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(202 |
) |
|
|
2,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used by investing activities |
|
|
(9,148 |
) |
|
|
(11,306 |
) |
|
|
(7,595 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net proceeds from initial public offering |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
346,483 |
|
Redemption of preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(216,126 |
) |
Payment of special Class B distribution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(100,000 |
) |
Purchases of treasury stock |
|
|
(8,618 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings under debt agreements |
|
|
323,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on debt agreements |
|
|
(315,538 |
) |
|
|
(37,832 |
) |
|
|
(30,556 |
) |
Premium paid on redemption of senior subordinated notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,657 |
) |
Premium paid on redemption of preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,717 |
) |
Payment of deferred financing costs |
|
|
(10,790 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(640 |
) |
Borrowings under other financing arrangements |
|
|
26,254 |
|
|
|
7,423 |
|
|
|
18,770 |
|
Payments under other financing arrangements |
|
|
(26,628 |
) |
|
|
(18,408 |
) |
|
|
(7,411 |
) |
Excess tax benefits from equity-based compensation |
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
686 |
|
|
|
495 |
|
Receipt of proceeds on note receivable from DIFZ sale |
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments of minority interest dividends |
|
|
(5,995 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(16,880 |
) |
|
|
(48,131 |
) |
|
|
2,641 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
114,843 |
|
|
|
(17,076 |
) |
|
|
81,882 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year |
|
|
85,379 |
|
|
|
102,455 |
|
|
|
20,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year |
|
$ |
200,222 |
|
|
$ |
85,379 |
|
|
$ |
102,455 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes paid (net of refunds) |
|
$ |
19,292 |
|
|
$ |
36,740 |
|
|
$ |
26,183 |
|
Interest paid |
|
$ |
58,782 |
|
|
$ |
53,065 |
|
|
$ |
55,486 |
|
Non-cash sale of DIFZ, including related financing |
|
$ |
9,545 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
50
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Paid-in |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Income (Loss) |
|
|
Shareholders |
|
|
|
(Dollars and shares in thousands) |
|
Balance at March 30, 2006 |
|
|
32,000 |
|
|
$ |
320 |
|
|
$ |
102,097 |
|
|
$ |
4,139 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(218 |
) |
|
$ |
106,338 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,023 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,023 |
|
Interest rate cap, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Currency translation
adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,023 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
27,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial public offering of
common stock |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
343,161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
343,411 |
|
Dividend on Class B equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(95,861 |
) |
|
|
(4,139 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(100,000 |
) |
Tax benefit associated with
equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
495 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
495 |
|
Equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 30, 2007 |
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
352,245 |
|
|
$ |
27,023 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(164 |
) |
|
$ |
379,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,955 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,955 |
|
Interest rate cap, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
Interest rate swap, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,174 |
) |
|
|
(7,174 |
) |
Currency translation
adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,955 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,750 |
) |
|
|
41,205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment for the adoption
of FIN No. 48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,375 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,375 |
) |
Tax benefit associated with
equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
686 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
686 |
|
Equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,095 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,095 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 28, 2008 |
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
357,026 |
|
|
$ |
73,603 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(6,914 |
) |
|
$ |
424,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,770 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,770 |
|
Interest rate swap, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,212 |
|
|
|
3,212 |
|
Currency translation
adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(722 |
) |
|
|
(722 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,770 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,490 |
|
|
|
72,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of noncontrolling
interest in DIFZ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,220 |
|
DIFZ financing, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
325 |
|
Treasury stock |
|
|
(693 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,618 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,618 |
) |
Tax benefit associated with
equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
184 |
|
Equity-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at April 3, 2009 |
|
|
56,307 |
|
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
366,620 |
|
|
$ |
143,373 |
|
|
$ |
(8,618 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,424 |
) |
|
$ |
497,521 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
51
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
For the Fiscal Years Ended April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007
Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies and Accounting Developments
Unless the context otherwise indicates, references herein to we, our, us or DynCorp
International refer to DynCorp International Inc. and our consolidated subsidiaries. DynCorp
International Inc., through its subsidiaries (together, the Company), provides defense and
technical services and government outsourced solutions primarily to the United States (U.S.)
government agencies throughout the U.S. and internationally. Key offerings include aviation
services, such as maintenance and related support, as well as base maintenance/operations and
personal and physical security services. Primary customers include the U.S. Department of Defense
(DoD) and U.S. Department of State (DoS), but also include other government agencies, foreign
governments and commercial customers.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include our accounts and those of our domestic and
foreign subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in
consolidation. Generally, investments in which we own a 20% to 50% ownership interest are accounted
for by the equity method. These investments are in business entities in which we do not have
control, but have the ability to exercise significant influence over operating and financial
policies and are not the primary beneficiary as defined in Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) Interpretation No. 46R (Revised 2003), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (FIN
No. 46R). We have no ownership interests in business entities of less than 20%.
The following table sets forth our ownership in joint ventures and companies that are not
consolidated into our financial statements as of April 3, 2009, and are accounted for by the equity
method. For all of the entities listed below, we have the right to elect half of the board of
directors or other management body. Economic rights are indicated by the ownership percentages
listed below.
|
|
|
|
|
DynEgypt LLC |
|
|
50.0 |
% |
TSDI Pty Ltd. |
|
|
50.0 |
% |
Dyn Puerto Rico Corporation |
|
|
49.9 |
% |
Contingency Response Services LLC |
|
|
45.0 |
% |
Babcock DynCorp Limited |
|
|
44.0 |
% |
Partnership for Temporary Housing LLC |
|
|
40.0 |
% |
DCP Contingency Services LLC |
|
|
40.0 |
% |
We have a 51% ownership interest in Global Linguist Solutions LLC (GLS), the right to elect
half of the board of directors of such entity, and are the primary beneficiary as defined in FIN
No. 46R. Therefore, GLS is consolidated into our financial statements for the year ended April 3,
2009.
On July 31, 2008, we sold 50% of our ownership interest in our previously wholly-owned
subsidiary, DynCorp International FZ-LLC (DIFZ), for approximately $8.2 million. DIFZ was
previously a wholly-owned subsidiary and therefore consolidated into our financial statements. We
have financed the transaction by accepting three promissory notes provided by the purchaser. As a
result, the sale was accounted for as a capital transaction reflected in additional paid in capital
(APIC) with the exception of $0.5 million cash received from the buyer, which was recognized as a
gain. The sale price was contingent upon a revaluation based on actual DIFZ results through January
30, 2009. As of April 3, 2009, the sales price was adjusted to $9.7 million, based on the results
of the revaluation, contingent on approval by the DIFZ board of directors. The adjustment to the
purchase price was reflected as an increase to the promissory notes. Additionally, the interest
component of the three promissory notes held by us will also increase APIC due to the structure of
this transaction and will not impact our consolidated statements of income. The sale agreement
governing the transaction provides indemnification to the buyer for potential losses arising out of
certain tax related matters specific to DIFZ. As of the transaction date, it was determined that we
were the primary beneficiary as defined in FIN No. 46R. Therefore, we continue to consolidate
DIFZs results on our financial statements.
The following table sets forth our ownership in joint ventures that are consolidated into our
financial statements as of April 3, 2009. For the entities list below, we are the primary
beneficiary as defined in FIN No. 46R.
52
Minority Interest
We record the impact of our joint venture partners interests in consolidated joint ventures
as minority interest. Minority interest is presented on the face of the income statement as an
increase or reduction in arriving at net income. The presentation of minority interest on the
balance sheet is located in a mezzanine account between liabilities and equity. As of March 28,
2008, the minority interest balance related to GLS was recorded as an asset within prepaid expenses
and other current assets, due to cumulative losses incurred. As of April 3, 2009, all minority
interest, including minority interest related to DIFZ, was recorded as mezzanine equity. Minority
interest recorded on our consolidated balance sheet is increased by earnings of our consolidated
joint ventures and reduced for dividends paid to our non-controlling interest partners. Minority
interest related to DIFZ is also impacted by the portion of our non-controlling interest partners
dividends which are applied to the promissory notes in accordance with the sales agreement, as
discussed above.
Revenue Recognition and Cost Estimation on Long-Term Contracts
General Revenue is recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, services
or products have been provided to the client, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and
collectability is reasonably assured.
We are predominantly a service provider and only include products or systems when necessary
for the execution of the service arrangement and as such, systems, equipment or materials are not
generally separable from services. Each arrangement is unique and revenue recognition is evaluated
on a contract by contract basis. We apply the appropriate guidance consistently to similar
contracts.
The evaluation of the separation and allocation of an arrangement fee to each deliverable
within a multiple-deliverable arrangement is dependent upon the guidance applicable to the specific
arrangement.
We expense pre-contract costs as incurred for an anticipated contract until the contract is
awarded. Throughout the life of the contract, indirect costs, including general and administrative
costs, are expensed as incurred. When revenue recognition is deferred relative to the timing of
cost incurred, costs that are direct and incremental to a specific transaction are deferred and
charged to expense in proportion to the revenue recognized.
Management regularly reviews project profitability and underlying estimates. Revisions to the
estimates are reflected in results of operations as a change in accounting estimate in the period
in which the facts that give rise to the revision become known by management. When estimates of
total costs to be incurred on a contract exceed estimates of total revenue to be earned, a
provision for the entire loss on the contract is recorded to cost of services in the period the
loss is determined. Loss provisions are first offset against costs that are included in inventoried
assets, with any remaining amount reflected in liabilities.
Major factors we consider in determining total estimated revenue and cost include the basic
contract price, contract options, change orders (modifications of the original contract), back
charges and claims, and contract provisions for penalties, award fees and performance incentives.
All of these factors and other special contract provisions are evaluated throughout the life of our
contracts when estimating total contract revenue under the percentage-of-completion or proportional
methods of accounting.
Federal Government Contracts For all non-construction and non-software U.S. federal
government contracts or contract elements, we apply the guidance in the American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Audit and Accounting Guide, Federal Government Contractors
(AAG-FGC). We apply the combination and segmentation guidance in the AAG-FGC in analyzing the
deliverables contained in the applicable contract to determine appropriate profit centers. Revenue
is recognized by profit center using the percentage-of-completion method or completed contract
method.
Projects under our U.S. federal government contracts typically have different pricing
mechanisms that influence how revenue is earned and recognized. These pricing mechanisms are
classified as cost plus fixed-fee, fixed-price, cost plus award fee, time-and-materials (including
unit-price/level-of-effort contracts), or Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ). The
exact timing and quantity of delivery and pricing mechanism for IDIQ profit centers are not known
at the time of contract award, but they can contain any type of pricing mechanism.
Revenue on projects with a fixed-price or fixed-fee, including award fees, is generally
recognized ratably over the contract period measured by either output or input methods appropriate
to the services or products provided. For example, output measures
53
can include period of service, such as for aircraft fleet maintenance; and units delivered or
produced, such as aircraft for which modification has been completed. Input measures can include
a cost-to-cost method, such as for procurement-related services.
Revenue on time and materials projects is recognized at contractual billing rates for
applicable units of measure (e.g. labor hours incurred or units delivered).
The completed contract method is sometimes used when reliable estimates cannot be supported
for percentage-of-completion method recognition or for short duration projects when the results of
operations would not vary materially from those resulting from use of the percentage-of-completion
method. Until complete, project costs are maintained in work in progress, a component of inventory.
Contract costs on U.S. federal government contracts, including indirect costs, are subject to
audit and adjustment by negotiations between us and government representatives. Substantially all
of our indirect contract costs have been agreed upon through 2004. Contract revenue on U.S. federal
government contracts have been recorded in amounts that are expected to be realized upon final
settlement.
Award fees are recognized based on the guidance in the AAG-FGC. Award fees are excluded from
estimated total contract revenue until a historical basis has been established for their receipt or
the award criteria have been met including the completion of the award fee period at which time the
award amount is included in the percentage-of-completion estimation.
Construction Contracts or Contract Elements For all construction contracts or contract
elements, we apply the combination and segmentation guidance found in Statement of Position (SOP)
81-1, Accounting for Performance of Construction-Type and Certain Production-Type Contracts in
analyzing the deliverables contained in the contract to determine appropriate profit centers.
Revenue is recognized by profit center using the percentage-of-completion method.
Software Contracts or Contract Elements It is our policy to review any arrangement
containing software or software deliverables against the criteria contained in SOP 97-2, Software
Revenue Recognition, and related technical practice aids. In addition, Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF) 03-5, Applicability of AICPA Statement of Position 97-2 to Non-Software Deliverables in
an Arrangement Containing More-Than-Incidental Software is also applied to determine if any
non-software deliverables are outside of the scope of SOP 97-2 when the software is more than
incidental to the products or services as a whole. Under the provisions of SOP 97-2 software
deliverables are separated and contract value is allocated based on Vendor Specific Objective
Evidence (VSOE). We have never sold software on a separate, standalone basis. As a result,
software arrangements are typically accounted for as one unit of accounting and are recognized over
the service period, including the period of post-contract customer support. All software
arrangements requiring significant production, modification, or customization of the software are
accounted for under SOP 81-1.
Other Contracts or Contract Elements Our contracts with non-U.S. federal government
customers are predominantly multiple-element. Multiple-element arrangements involve multiple
obligations in various combinations to perform services, deliver equipment or materials, grant
licenses or other rights, or take certain actions. We evaluate all deliverables in an arrangement
to determine whether they represent separate units of accounting per the provisions of EITF 00-21,
Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables and arrangement consideration is allocated among
the separate units of accounting based on their relative fair values. Fair values are established
by evaluating VSOE or third-party evidence if available. Due to the customized nature of our
arrangements, VSOE and third-party evidence is generally not available resulting in applicable
arrangements being accounted for as one unit of accounting.
We apply the guidance in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements and other transaction-specific
accounting literature to deliverables related to non-U.S. federal government services, equipment
and materials. The timing of revenue recognition for a given unit of accounting will depend on the
nature of the deliverable(s) and whether revenue recognition criteria have been met. The same
pricing mechanisms found in U.S. federal government contracts are found in other contracts.
Cash and cash equivalents
For purposes of reporting cash and cash equivalents, we consider all highly liquid investments
purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
54
Restricted cash
Restricted cash represents cash restricted by certain contracts in which advance payments are
not available for use except to pay specified costs and vendors for work performed on the specific
contract. Changes in restricted cash related to our contracts are included as operating cash flows
in the consolidated statements of cash flows. From time to time we have invested cash restricted as
collateral as required by our letters of credit. Changes in restricted cash for funds invested as
collateral are included as investing activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows. As of
April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008, we had no cash restricted as collateral.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes.
Management evaluates these estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis, including but not limited
to, those relating to allowances for doubtful accounts, fair value and impairment of intangible
assets and goodwill, income taxes, profitability on contracts, anticipated contract modifications,
contingencies and litigation. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
We establish an allowance for doubtful accounts against specific billed receivables based upon
the latest information available to determine whether invoices are ultimately collectible. Such
information includes the historical trends of write-offs and recovery of previously written-off
accounts, the financial strength of the respective customer and projected economic and market
conditions. The evaluation of these factors involves subjective judgments and changes in these
factors may cause an increase to our estimated allowance for doubtful accounts, which could
significantly impact our consolidated financial statements by incurring bad debt expense. Given
that we primarily serve the U.S. government, management believes the risk to be low that changes in
our allowance for doubtful accounts would have a material impact on our financial results.
Property and Equipment
The cost of property and equipment, less applicable residual values, is depreciated using the
straight-line method. Depreciation commences when the specific asset is complete, installed and
ready for normal use. Depreciation related to equipment purchased for specific contracts is
typically included within cost of services, as this depreciation is directly attributable to
project costs. We evaluate property and equipment for impairment quarterly by examining factors
such as existence, functionality, obsolesce and physical condition. In the event that we
experience impairment, we revise the useful life estimate and record the impairment as an addition
to depreciation expense and accumulated depreciation. Our standard depreciation and amortization
policies are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Computer and related equipment |
|
3 to 5 years |
|
Furniture and other equipment |
|
2 to 10 years |
|
Leasehold improvements |
|
Shorter of lease term or useful life |
Impairment of Long Lived Assets
Our long lived assets are primarily made up of customer related intangibles. The initial
values assigned to customer-related intangibles were the result of fair value calculations
associated with business combinations. The values were determined based on estimates and judgments
regarding expectations for the estimated future after-tax cash flows from those assets over their
lives, including the probability of expected future contract renewals and sales, less a
cost-of-capital charge, all of which was discounted to present value. We evaluate the carrying
value of our customer-related intangibles on a quarterly basis. The customer related intangible
carrying value is considered impaired when the anticipated undiscounted cash flows from such asset
is less than its carrying value. In that case, a loss is recognized based on the amount by which
the carrying value exceeds the fair value.
Indefinite Lived Assets
Indefinite-lived assets, including goodwill and tradename, are not amortized but are subject
to an annual impairment test. The first step of the impairment test, used to identify potential
impairment, compares the fair value of each of our reporting units with its carrying amount,
including indefinite-lived assets. If the fair value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying
amount, the indefinite-lived assets of the reporting unit are not considered impaired, and the
second step of the impairment test is unnecessary. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit
exceeds its fair value, the second step of the impairment test shall be performed to measure the
amount of the impairment loss, if any. We perform the annual test for impairment as of the end of
February of each fiscal year. Based on the
55
results of these tests, no impairment losses were identified for the fiscal years ended April
3, 2009 and March 28, 2008.
Income Taxes
We account for income taxes using the asset and liability method in accordance with Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes (SFAS No. 109)
and Financial Interpretation No. 48 Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an Interpretation
of FASB Statement No. 109 (FIN No. 48). Under this approach, deferred income taxes represent the
expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the carrying amounts and tax
basis of assets and liabilities.
In July 2006, the FASB issued FIN No. 48, which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in
income taxes recognized in the financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109. FIN No. 48
provides that a tax benefit from an uncertain tax position may be recognized when it is
more-likely-than-not that the position will be sustained upon examination, including resolutions of
any related appeals or litigation processes, based on the technical merits. Income tax positions
must meet a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold at the effective date to be recognized upon
the adoption of FIN No. 48 and in subsequent periods. This interpretation also provides guidance on
measurement, derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods,
disclosure and transition. The impact on our consolidated financial condition and results of
operations of adopting FIN No. 48 in the first quarter of fiscal year 2008 is presented in Note 4.
Equity-Based Compensation Expense
We have adopted the provisions of, and accounted for equity-based compensation in accordance
with FASB No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (SFAS No. 123R). Under the fair value
recognition provisions, equity-based compensation expense is measured at the grant date based on
the fair value of the award and is recognized on a straight line basis over the requisite service
period for each separately vesting portion of the award, adjusted
for forfeitures. Our RSUs have been determined to be liability awards; therefore, the fair value of
the RSUs are re-measured at each financial reporting date as long as they remain liability awards.
See Note 11 for further discussion on equity-based compensation.
Fair Values of Financial Instruments
We estimate fair values of financial instruments by using available market information and
other valuation methods. Values are based on available market quotes or estimates using a
discounted cash flow approach based on the interest rates currently available for similar
instruments. The fair values of financial instruments for which estimated fair value amounts are
not specifically presented are estimated to approximate the related recorded values. As presented
in further detail in Note 16, we adopted SFAS No. 157 during our first quarter of fiscal year 2009.
SFAS No. 157 establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used
in measuring fair value. These tiers include:
|
|
|
Level 1, defined as observable inputs, such as quoted prices in active markets; |
|
|
|
|
Level 2, defined as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either
directly or indirectly observable; and |
|
|
|
|
Level 3, defined as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exists,
therefore requiring an entity to develop its own assumptions. |
Currency Translation
The assets and liabilities of our subsidiaries, that are outside the U.S. and that have a
functional currency that is not the U.S. dollar, are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of
exchange in effect at the balance sheet dates. Income and expense items, for these subsidiaries,
are translated at the average exchange rates prevailing during the period. Gains and losses
resulting from currency transactions and the remeasurement of the financial statements of U.S.
functional currency foreign subsidiaries are recognized currently in income and those resulting
from translation of financial statements are included in accumulated other comprehensive income.
56
Operating Segments
On April 1, 2008, we announced that we changed from reporting financial results on two
segments, Government Services (GS) and Maintenance and Technical Support (MTSS), to reporting
three segments, beginning with the first quarter of fiscal year 2009. This was accomplished by
splitting GS into two distinct operating segments.
The three segments are as follows:
International Security Services, or ISS segment, which consists of the Law Enforcement
and Security, or LES, business unit, the Specialty Aviation and Counter Drug , or SACD, business
unit, and Global Linguist Solutions, or GLS.
Logistics and Construction Management, or LCM segment, is comprised of the Contingency
and Logistics Operations, or CLO, business unit and the Operations, Maintenance, and Construction
Management, or OMCM, business unit. This segment is also responsible for winning and performing new
work on our LOGCAP IV contract.
Maintenance and Technical Support Services, or MTSS segment, consists of its original
components and DynMarine Services, which was previously reported under the GS segment.
On April 6, 2009, we announced a further reorganization of our business structure to better
align with strategic markets and to streamline our infrastructure. Under the new alignment, our
three reportable segments were realigned into three new segments, two of which, Global
Stabilization and Development Solutions (GSDS) and Global Platform Support Solutions (GPSS),
are wholly-owned, and a third segment, GLS, which is a 51% owned joint venture. The new structure
became effective April 4, 2009, the start of our 2010 fiscal year, and is more fully described in
Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements.
Accounting Developments
Pronouncements Implemented in Fiscal Year 2009
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157
establishes a single definition of fair value and a framework for measuring fair value under GAAP
and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. Additionally, in February 2008, the FASB
issued FASB Staff Position No. 157-2, Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, which provided a
one year deferral of the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for non-financial assets and non-financial
liabilities, except those that are recognized or disclosed in the financial statements at fair
value at least annually. SFAS No. 157 applies under other accounting pronouncements that require or
permit fair value measurements; however, it does not require any new fair value measurements. The
adoption of SFAS No. 157 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial condition and
results of operations. However, this adoption is reflected through additional disclosure
requirements as presented in Note 16.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets
and Financial Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115 (SFAS No. 159).
SFAS No. 159 permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other
items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value. It provides
entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring
related assets and liabilities differently without having to apply complex hedge accounting
provisions. SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The
adoption of SFAS No. 159 did not impact our consolidated financial condition and results of
operations as we did not elect to apply the fair value option to items that have previously been
measured at historical cost.
In December 2008, the FASB issued FSP FIN 46R-8, Interests in Variable Interest Entities.
The FSP was issued by the FASB to expeditiously meet the need for enhanced information about
transferred financial assets and an enterprises involvement with a variable interest entity
(VIE). The FSP requires extensive additional disclosures by public entities with continuing
involvement in transfers of financial assets to special-purpose entities and with VIEs, including
sponsors that have a variable interest in a VIE. The FSP is effective for fiscal periods ending
after December 15, 2008. The adoption of FSP FIN 46R-8 did not have a significant impact to our
financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, this statement was adopted
through enhanced disclosures in Note 15.
In March 2008, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 161,
Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 161). SFAS No. 161 is
intended to improve financial reporting about derivative instruments and hedging activities by
requiring enhanced disclosures to enable investors to better understand their effects on an
entitys financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. The provisions of SFAS No. 161
are effective for financial
57
statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with
early application encouraged. The adoption of SFAS No. 161 did not have a material impact on our
consolidated financial condition and results of operations. However, this statement was adopted
through enhanced disclosures in Note 10.
Pronouncements Not Yet Implemented
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated
Financial Statements, which is an amendment of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51. This statement
covers several areas including (i) defining the way the noncontrolling interests should be
presented in the financial statements and notes, (ii) clarifies that all transactions between a
parent and subsidiary are to be accounted for as equity transactions if the parent retains its
controlling financial interest in the subsidiary and (iii) requires that a parent recognize a gain
or loss in net income when a subsidiary is deconsolidated. This statement is effective for the
fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning on or after December 15,
2008. We expect this statement to change our presentation of minority interest on our consolidated
statements of income, consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of shareholders
equity. We anticipate the impact on our April 3, 2009
shareholders equity upon implementation of this statement will
be $10,736. We will adopt this statement in our first quarter of fiscal year 2010, and will apply
prospectively, except for the presentation and disclosure requirements, which are required to be
applied retrospectively.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations (SFAS
No. 141(R)). This statement replaces FASB Statement No. 141, Business Combinations. This
statement retains the fundamental requirements in SFAS No. 141 that the acquisition method of
accounting (which SFAS No. 141 called the purchase method) be used for all business combinations
and for an acquirer to be identified for each business combination. This statement defines the
acquirer as the entity that obtains control of one or more businesses in the business combination
and establishes the acquisition date as the date that the acquirer achieves control. This statement
requires an acquirer to recognize the assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any
noncontrolling interest in the acquiree at the acquisition date, measured at their fair values as
of that date, with limited exceptions specified in the statement. This statement applies
prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning
of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. This will be
impactful prospectively in the event that we have any applicable events and transactions governed
by SFAS No. 141(R).
In December 2007, the FASB ratified EITF 07-1, Accounting for Collaborative Arrangements.
EITF 07-1 provides guidance for determining if a collaborative arrangement exists and establishes
procedures for reporting revenue and costs generated from transactions with third parties, as well
as between the parties within the collaborative arrangement, and provides guidance for financial
statement disclosures of collaborative arrangements. EITF 07-1 will become effective for us in the
first quarter of fiscal year 2010. The adoption of EITF 07-1 is not expected to have a material
effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. However, we expect to
comply with the additional disclosure requirements beginning with our first quarter fiscal year
2010 reporting.
In April 2008, the FASB issued Staff Position No. 142-3, Determination of the Useful Life of
Intangible Assets (FSP No. 142-3). FSP No. 142-3 amends the factors that should be considered in
developing renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful life of a recognized
intangible asset under SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (SFAS No. 142). FSP
No. 142-3 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years; however, early adoption is not permitted.
We will adopt FSP 142-3 for any applicable events and transactions in fiscal year 2010.
In June 2008, the FASB issued FSP EITF 03-6-1, Determining Whether Instruments Granted in
Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities. This FSP provides that unvested
share-based payment awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents
(whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and shall be included in the computation of
earnings per share pursuant to the two-class method. The FSP is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those years.
All prior period earnings per share data presented shall be adjusted retrospectively. Early
application of this FSP is prohibited. We are currently evaluating the potential impact of adopting
FSP EITF 03-6-1.
Note 2 Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share is based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding
during each period. Diluted earnings per share is based on the weighted average number of common
shares outstanding and the effect of all dilutive common stock equivalents during each period.
At April 3, 2009, 67,490 restricted stock units were included in the diluted earnings per
share calculation because they were dilutive. These restricted stock units may be dilutive and
included or anti-dilutive and excluded in future earnings per share
58
calculations, as they are liability awards as defined by SFAS No. 123(R). The following table
reconciles the numerators and denominators used in the computations of basic and diluted earnings
per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Twelve Months Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, except per share data) |
|
Numerator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
$ |
27,023 |
|
Denominator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares basic |
|
|
56,970 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
54,734 |
|
Weighted average affect of dilutive securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted Stock Units |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares diluted |
|
|
57,037 |
|
|
|
57,004 |
|
|
|
54,734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share |
|
$ |
1.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.84 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
Diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
1.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.84 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
Note 3 Goodwill and other Intangible Assets
We conduct our annual goodwill impairment test as of the end of our February accounting period
each fiscal year. This analysis requires us to generate an estimate of each reporting units fair
value. In estimating fair value, we use income and market based approaches, which involve a
discounted cash flow analysis and a valuation analysis on a 50%/50% relative weighting. The
estimates and assumptions used in assessing the fair value of our reporting units and the valuation
of the underlying assets and liabilities are inherently subject to significant uncertainties. These
analyses also require management to make assumptions and estimates and review relevant industry and
market data.
During the second quarter of fiscal year 2009, indicators of potential impairment,
specifically the operational results of the Afghanistan construction business, caused us to conduct
an interim impairment test specific to our OMCM reporting unit. During the third quarter of fiscal
year 2009, we determined that a second interim impairment analysis of OMCM, as of January 2, 2009,
would be prudent due to the continued challenges in the Afghanistan construction business. In both
instances, the result of the impairment test did not indicate impairment had occurred at that time.
During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009, we conducted our annual goodwill impairment
test for all reporting units, except the GLS reporting unit, which was excluded since it had no
associated goodwill carrying value. The result of the impairment test did not indicate impairment
had occurred. We also conducted an assessment to compare our market capitalization to the
calculated fair value of all of our reporting units. In total, the valuation of all of our
reporting units, including GLS, was greater than our market capitalization. We concluded this
excess premium did not materially impact our goodwill impairment conclusion based on various
quantitative and qualitative factors.
The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill for the fiscal years ended April 3, 2009, March
28, 2008 and March 30, 2007 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISS |
|
|
LCM |
|
|
MTSS |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Balance March 30, 2007 |
|
$ |
319,866 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
100,314 |
|
|
$ |
420,180 |
|
Transfer between operating segments(1) |
|
|
20,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,163 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance March 28, 2008(2) |
|
$ |
340,029 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
80,151 |
|
|
$ |
420,180 |
|
Additions or adjustments (3) |
|
|
(39,935 |
) |
|
|
39,935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of April 3, 2009 |
|
$ |
300,094 |
|
|
$ |
39,935 |
|
|
$ |
80,151 |
|
|
$ |
420,180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Transfer between operating segments is the result of a reorganization of our reporting structure within our segments
and a related independent fair value analysis of the reporting units within our operating segments, in the manner
required by SFAS No. 142. |
|
(2) |
|
Balance as of March 28, 2008 represents the goodwill balance of the GS operating segment. ISS and LCM did not exist
as operating segments at that time. See Note 1 for further discussion regarding our change in operating segments. |
|
(3) |
|
The GS operating segment was broken into two operating segments on March 29, 2008, the beginning of fiscal year 2009. |
59
The following tables provide information about changes relating to intangible assets for the
fiscal years ended April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful Life |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Years) |
|
|
Carrying Value |
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
Net |
|
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, except years) |
|
Finite-lived intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer-related intangible assets |
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
$ |
290,716 |
|
|
$ |
(155,142 |
) |
|
$ |
135,574 |
|
Other |
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
15,351 |
|
|
|
(8,206 |
) |
|
|
7,145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
306,067 |
|
|
$ |
(163,348 |
) |
|
$ |
142,719 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indefinite-lived intangible assets
Tradename |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
18,318 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
18,318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful Life |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Years) |
|
|
Carrying Value |
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
Net |
|
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, except years) |
|
Finite-lived intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer-related intangible assets |
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
$ |
290,716 |
|
|
$ |
(119,997 |
) |
|
$ |
170,719 |
|
Other |
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
10,887 |
|
|
|
(5,460 |
) |
|
|
5,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
301,603 |
|
|
$ |
(125,457 |
) |
|
$ |
176,146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indefinite-lived intangible assets
Tradename |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
18,318 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
18,318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization expense for customer-related and other intangibles was $37.9 million, $40.2
million and $41.9 million for the fiscal years ended April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30,
2007, respectively.
The following schedule outlines an estimate of future amortization based upon the finite-lived
intangible assets owned at April 3, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
Expense |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
Estimate for fiscal year 2010 |
|
$ |
37,579 |
|
Estimate for fiscal year 2011 |
|
|
33,386 |
|
Estimate for fiscal year 2012 |
|
|
22,809 |
|
Estimate for fiscal year 2013 |
|
|
19,221 |
|
Estimate for fiscal year 2014 |
|
|
8,099 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
21,625 |
|
Note 4 Income Taxes
The provision for income taxes consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Current portion: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
$ |
1,127 |
|
|
$ |
22,203 |
|
|
$ |
28,295 |
|
State |
|
|
1,197 |
|
|
|
2,338 |
|
|
|
1,629 |
|
Foreign |
|
|
5,398 |
|
|
|
4,475 |
|
|
|
4,635 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,722 |
|
|
|
29,016 |
|
|
|
34,559 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred portion: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
|
33,199 |
|
|
|
(1,026 |
) |
|
|
(12,635 |
) |
State |
|
|
1,110 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
(348 |
) |
Foreign |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(1,027 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,273 |
|
|
|
(1,017 |
) |
|
|
(14,010 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
$ |
41,995 |
|
|
$ |
27,999 |
|
|
$ |
20,549 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
Temporary differences, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Deferred tax assets related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workers compensation accrual |
|
$ |
5,956 |
|
|
$ |
9,481 |
|
Accrued vacation |
|
|
6,593 |
|
|
|
7,086 |
|
Billed and unbilled reserves |
|
|
2,683 |
|
|
|
3,435 |
|
Completion bonus allowance |
|
|
5,269 |
|
|
|
5,761 |
|
Accrued severance |
|
|
1,122 |
|
|
|
1,027 |
|
Accrued executive incentives |
|
|
4,098 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
Depreciable assets |
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
Warranty reserve |
|
|
|
|
|
|
458 |
|
Legal reserve |
|
|
6,146 |
|
|
|
7,180 |
|
Accrued health costs |
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
Leasehold improvements |
|
|
799 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
Interest rate swap |
|
|
2,549 |
|
|
|
4,223 |
|
FIN 48 deferred tax asset |
|
|
5,955 |
|
|
|
1,354 |
|
Contract loss reserve |
|
|
4,243 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
Other accrued liabilities and reserves |
|
|
1,221 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets |
|
|
47,900 |
|
|
|
44,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid insurance |
|
|
(8,878 |
) |
|
|
(1,096 |
) |
Customer intangibles |
|
|
(11,659 |
) |
|
|
(7,196 |
) |
Deferred revenue |
|
|
(21,579 |
) |
|
|
(609 |
) |
DIFZ sale |
|
|
(1,274 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities |
|
|
(43,390 |
) |
|
|
(8,901 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets, net |
|
$ |
4,510 |
|
|
$ |
35,509 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are reported as:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Current deferred tax (liabilities)/assets |
|
$ |
(8,278 |
) |
|
$ |
17,341 |
|
Non-current deferred tax assets |
|
|
12,788 |
|
|
|
18,168 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets, net |
|
$ |
4,510 |
|
|
$ |
35,509 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In evaluating our deferred tax assets, we assess the need for any related valuation allowances or adjust the amount of any allowances, if necessary. We assess such factors as our forecast of future taxable income and available tax planning strategies that could be implemented to realize the net deferred tax assets in determining the need for or sufficiency of a valuation allowance. Based on this assessment, we concluded no valuation allowances were necessary as of April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008.
A reconciliation of the statutory federal income tax rate to our effective rate is provided
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Statutory rate |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
State income tax, less effect of federal deduction |
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
|
2.0 |
% |
|
|
1.2 |
% |
Nondeductible preferred stock dividends |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
6.7 |
% |
Minority interest |
|
|
(5.5 |
%) |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
Other |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate |
|
|
31.7 |
% |
|
|
38.5 |
% |
|
|
43.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uncertain Tax Positions
We adopted the provisions of FIN No. 48 on March 31, 2007. As a result of the implementation
of FIN No. 48, we recorded a $5.9 million increase in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits,
which was offset by a net reduction of the deferred tax liability of $4.5 million, resulting in a
decrease to the March 31, 2007, retained earnings balance of $1.4 million. The amount of
unrecognized tax benefits at April 3, 2009 was $6.1 million, of which $0.1 million would impact our
effective tax rate if recognized. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of
unrecognized tax benefits is as follows (dollars in thousands):
61
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2007 |
|
$ |
5,881 |
|
Additions for tax positions related to current year |
|
|
1,619 |
|
Additions for tax positions taken in prior years |
|
|
|
|
Reductions for tax positions of prior years |
|
|
(4,786 |
) |
Settlements |
|
|
|
|
Lapse of statute of limitations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 28, 2008 |
|
$ |
2,714 |
|
Additions for tax positions related to current year |
|
|
4,023 |
|
Additions for tax positions taken in prior years |
|
|
2,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reductions for tax positions of prior years |
|
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
(2,675 |
) |
Lapse of statute of limitations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at April 3, 2009 |
|
$ |
6,087 |
|
|
|
|
|
It is expected that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will change in the next twelve
months; however, we do not expect the change to have a significant impact on the results of
operations or our financial position.
We recognize interest accrued related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense and
penalties in income tax expense in our Consolidated Statement of Income, which is consistent with
the recognition of these items in prior reporting periods. We have recorded a liability of
approximately $0.2 million and $0.6 million for the payment of interest and penalties for the years
ended April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008 respectively. For the year ended April 3, 2009, we
recognized a net decrease of approximately $0.5 million in interest and penalty expense.
We file income tax returns in U.S. federal and state jurisdictions and in various foreign
jurisdictions. The statute of limitations is open for U.S. federal and state income tax
examinations for our fiscal year 2005 forward and, with few exceptions, foreign income tax
examinations for the calendar year 2004 forward.
Note 5 Accounts Receivable
Accounts Receivable, net consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Billed, net |
|
$ |
220,501 |
|
|
$ |
193,337 |
|
Unbilled |
|
|
343,931 |
|
|
|
319,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
564,432 |
|
|
$ |
513,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unbilled receivables at April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008 include $30.7 million and $52.8
million, respectively, related to costs incurred on projects for which we have been requested by
the customer to begin work under a new contract or extend work under an existing contract, and for
which formal contracts or contract modifications have not been executed at the end of the
respective periods. This amount includes $5.3 million related to contract claims at both April 3,
2009 and March 28, 2008. The balance of unbilled receivables consists of costs and fees billable
immediately, on contract completion or other specified events, the majority of which is expected to
be billed and collected within one year.
Note 6 401(k) Savings Plans
Effective March 1, 2006, we established the DynCorp International Savings Plan (the Plan).
The Plan is a participant-directed, defined contribution, 401(k) plan for the benefit of employees
meeting certain eligibility requirements. The Plan is intended to qualify under Section 401(a) of
the U.S. Internal Revenue Code (the Code), and is subject to the provisions of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Under the Plan, participants may contribute from 1% to 50%
of their earnings on a pre-tax basis, limited to annual maximums set by the Code. The current
maximum contribution per employee is sixteen thousand five hundred dollars per calendar year.
Company matching contributions are also made in an amount equal to 100% of the first 2% of employee
contributions and 50% of the next 6%, and are invested in various funds at the discretion of the
participant. We incurred savings plan expense of approximately $11.3 million, $10.7 million and
$9.5 million for fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
62
Note 7 Long-Term Debt
Long-term debt consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Term loans |
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
|
$ |
301,130 |
|
9.5% Senior subordinated notes |
|
|
399,912 |
|
|
|
292,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
599,912 |
|
|
|
593,162 |
|
Less current portion of long-term debt |
|
|
(30,540 |
) |
|
|
(3,096 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt |
|
$ |
569,372 |
|
|
$ |
590,066 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future maturities of long-term debt for each of the fiscal years subsequent to April 3, 2009
were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
$ |
30,540 |
|
2011 |
|
|
36,960 |
|
2012 |
|
|
55,500 |
|
2013 |
|
|
476,912 |
|
2014 |
|
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt (including current portion) |
|
$ |
599,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Secured Credit Facility
On July 28, 2008 we entered into a senior secured credit facility (the Credit Facility)
consisting of a revolving credit facility of $200.0 million (including a letter of credit
sub-facility of $125.0 million) (the Revolving Facility) and a senior secured term loan facility
of $200.0 million (the Term Loan). The maturity date of the Revolving Facility and the Term Loan
is August 15, 2012. To the extent that the letter of credit sub-facility is utilized, it reduces
the borrowing capacity on the Revolving Facility. The Credit Facility is subject to various
financial covenants, including a total leverage ratio, an interest coverage ratio, maximum capital
expenditures and certain limitations based upon eligible accounts receivable. Borrowings under the
Credit Facility are secured by substantially all our assets and the capital stock of our
subsidiaries.
On July 28, 2008, we borrowed $200.0 million under the Term Loan at the applicable three-month
LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) plus the applicable margin then in effect to refinance
certain existing indebtedness and pay certain transaction costs related to the Credit Facility and
the offering of additional senior subordinated notes, as described below. The applicable margin for
LIBOR as of April 3, 2009 was 2.5% per annum, resulting in an actual interest rate under the Term
Loan of 3.7% per annum. This rate is partially hedged through our swap agreements, as disclosed in
Note 10.
On July 28, 2008, upon entering into the Credit Facility, our pre-existing senior secured
credit facility was extinguished. Deferred financing fees totaling $4.4 million were expensed in
the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. Deferred financing fees associated with the Credit Facility
totaling $5.2 million were recorded in other assets on our consolidated balance sheet. The
unamortized deferred financing fees associated with the new credit facility were $4.3 million at
April 3, 2009.
Borrowings under the Revolving Facility bear interest at a rate per annum equal to either the
Alternate Base Rate plus an applicable margin determined by reference to the leverage ratio, as set
forth in the Credit Facility (Applicable Margin) or LIBOR plus the Applicable Margin. As of April
3, 2009 and March 28, 2008, we had no outstanding borrowings under the Revolving Facility.
Our available borrowing capacity under the Revolving Facility totaled $171.5 million at April
3, 2009, which gives effect to $28.5 million of outstanding letters of credit under the letter of
credit sub-facility. With respect to each letter of credit, a quarterly commission in an amount
equal to the face amount of such letter of credit multiplied by the Applicable Margin and a nominal
fronting fee are required to be paid. The combined rate as of April 3, 2009 was 2.6%.
On March 6, 2009 we entered into an amendment of our existing secured credit agreement dated
as of July 28, 2008 with Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Administrative Agent. In addition
to certain other changes, the amendment reduced certain excess cash flow repayment requirements as
defined under the Credit Facility and expanded the current ability to repurchase our common stock
to include the right to redeem a portion of the 9.5% senior subordinated notes due 2013. As further
described in Note 9, our board of directors approved a plan in fiscal year 2009 that allows for $25
million in repurchases for a combination of common stock and/or senior subordinated notes per
fiscal year during fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
63
We are required, under certain circumstances as defined in our Credit Facility, to use a
percentage of cash generated from operations to reduce the outstanding principal of our Term Loan.
Based on the fiscal year 2009 financial performance and ending balances, we expect this required
repayment to be $30.5 million, which is anticipated to be paid in July 2009. The amount of the
actual repayment could be substantially less than expected at the option of our lenders. We have
classified the expected $30.5 million excess cash flow payment in current portion of long-term debt
in our consolidated balance sheet as of April 3, 2009.
Our senior secured credit
facility contains various
financial covenants, including minimum interest and leverage ratios, and maximum
capital expenditures limits. Non-financial covenants restrict our ability
to dispose of assets; incur additional indebtedness, prepay other indebtedness
or amend certain debt instruments; pay dividends; create liens on assets;
enter into sale and leaseback transactions; make investments, loans or advances;
issue certain equity instruments; make acquisitions; engage in mergers or
consolidations or engage in certain transactions with affiliates; and
otherwise restrict certain corporate activities. We were in compliance
with these various financial covenants at April 3, 2009.
The fair
value of our borrowings under our
senior secured credit facility approximates 94% of the carrying
amount based on quoted values as of April 3, 2009.
9.5% Senior Subordinated Notes
In February 2005, we completed an offering of $320.0 million in aggregate principal amount of
our 9.5% senior subordinated notes due 2013. Proceeds from the original issuance of the senior
subordinated notes, net of fees, were $310.0 million and were used to pay the consideration for,
and fees and expenses relating to our 2005 formation as an independent company from Computer
Science Corporation. Interest on the senior subordinated notes is due semi-annually. The senior
subordinated notes are general unsecured obligations of our operating company, DynCorp
International LLC, and certain guarantor subsidiaries of DynCorp
International LLC, and contain certain covenants and restrictions,
which limit our operating companys ability to pay us dividends.
In July 2008, we completed an offering in a private placement pursuant to Rule 144A under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, of $125.0 million in aggregate principal amount of additional
9.5% senior subordinated notes under the same indenture as the senior subordinated notes issued in
February 2005. Net proceeds from the additional offering of senior subordinated notes were used to
refinance the then existing senior secured credit facility, to pay related fees and expenses and
for general corporate purposes. The additional senior subordinated notes mature on February 15,
2013. The additional senior subordinated notes were issued at approximately a 1.0% discount
totaling $1.2 million. The effective interest rate at April 3, 2009 was 9.56% stemming from the
impact of the discount. Deferred financing fees associated with this offering totaled $4.7 million.
Our registration statement with respect to these notes was declared effective on January 13, 2009.
We launched an exchange offer for the notes that ended on February 11, 2009.
We can redeem the senior subordinated notes, in whole or in part, at defined redemption
prices, plus accrued interest to the redemption date. The senior subordinated notes may require us
to repurchase the senior subordinated notes at defined prices in the event of certain specified
triggering events, including but not limited to certain asset sales, change-of-control events, and
debt covenant violations. In March 2009, under a board authorized program, we redeemed
approximately $16.1 million face value of our senior subordinated notes in the open market for
$15.4 million, including applicable transaction fees. As of April 3, 2009, $14.4 million of this
transaction was cash settled, with the remaining settlement occurring in fiscal year 2010. We
recorded a $0.3 million gain on this extinguishment after deduction of associated deferred
financing fees and discounts.
The fair value of the senior subordinated notes is based on their quoted market value. As of
April 3, 2009, the quoted market value of the senior subordinated notes was approximately 97.5% of
stated value.
Note 8 Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments
We have operating leases for the use of real estate and certain property and equipment, which
are either non-cancelable, cancelable only by the payment of penalties or cancelable upon one
months notice. All lease payments are based on the lapse of time but include, in some cases,
payments for insurance, maintenance and property taxes. There are no purchase options on operating
leases at favorable terms, but most leases have one or more renewal options. Certain leases on real
estate are subject to annual escalations for increases in base rents, utilities and property taxes.
Rental expense was $55.0 million, $54.9 million and $50.3 million for the fiscal years ended April
3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007, respectively.
Minimum fixed rentals required for the next five years and thereafter under operating leases
in effect at April 3, 2009, are as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year |
|
Real Estate |
|
|
Equipment |
|
|
Services |
|
2010 |
|
$ |
16,207 |
|
|
$ |
2,922 |
|
|
$ |
3,263 |
|
2011 |
|
|
8,758 |
|
|
|
648 |
|
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
|
8,738 |
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
8,590 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
|
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
6,512 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
19,901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
68,706 |
|
|
$ |
4,454 |
|
|
$ |
3,263 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have no significant long-term purchase agreements with service providers.
64
Contingencies
General Legal Matters
We are involved in various lawsuits and claims that have arisen in the normal course of
business. In most cases, we have denied, or believe we have a basis to deny any liability. Related
to these matters, we have recorded a reserve of approximately $17.0 million as of April 3, 2009.
While it is not possible to predict with certainty the outcome of litigation and other matters
discussed below, we believe that liabilities in excess of those recorded, if any, arising from such
matters would not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, consolidated
financial condition or liquidity over the long term.
Pending litigation and claims
On May 14, 2008, a jury in the Eastern District of Virginia found against us in a case brought
by a former subcontractor, Worldwide Network Services (WWNS), on two DoS contracts, in which WWNS
alleged racial discrimination, tortuous interference and certain other claims. The jury awarded
WWNS approximately $15.7 million in compensatory and punitive damages and awarded us approximately
$200,000 on a counterclaim. In addition to the jury award, the court awarded WWNS approximately
$3.0 million in connection with certain contract claims. On September 22, 2008, WWNS was awarded
approximately $1.8 million in attorneys fees. On February 2, 2009, we filed an appeal with respect
to this matter. As of April 3, 2009, we believe we have adequate reserves recorded for this matter.
On April 24, 2007, March 14, 2007, December 29, 2006 and December 4, 2006, four lawsuits were
served, seeking unspecified monetary damages against DynCorp International LLC and several of its
former affiliates in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, concerning the
spraying of narcotic plant crops along the Colombian border adjacent to Ecuador. Three of the
lawsuits, filed on behalf of the Providences of Esmeraldas, Sucumbíos, and Carchi in Ecuador,
allege violations of Ecuadorian law, international law, and statutory and common law tort
violations, including negligence, trespass, and nuisance. The fourth lawsuit, filed on behalf of
citizens of the Ecuadorian provinces of Esmeraldas and Sucumbíos, alleges personal injury, various
counts of negligence, trespass, battery, assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress,
violations of the Alien Tort Claims Act, and various violations of international law. The four
lawsuits were consolidated, and based on our motion granted by the court, the case was subsequently
transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. On March 26, 2008, a First
Amended Consolidated Complaint was filed that identified 3,266 individual plaintiffs. The amended
complaint does not demand any specific monetary damages; however, a court decision against us,
although we believe to be remote, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations
and financial condition. The aerial spraying operations were and continue to be managed by us under
a DoS contract in cooperation with the Colombian government. The DoS contract provides
indemnification to us against third-party liabilities arising out of the contract, subject to
available funding. The DoS has reimbursed us for all legal expenses to date.
A lawsuit filed on September 11, 2001, and amended on March 24, 2008, seeking unspecified
damages on behalf of twenty-six residents of the Sucumbíos Province in Ecuador, was brought against
our operating company and several of its former affiliates in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia. The action alleges violations of the laws of nations and United States
treaties, negligence, emotional distress, nuisance, battery, trespass, strict liability, and
medical monitoring arising from the spraying of herbicides near the Ecuador-Colombia border in
connection with the performance of the DoS, International Narcotics and Law Enforcement contract
for the eradication of narcotic plant crops in Colombia. The terms of the DoS contract provide that
the DoS will indemnify our operating company against third-party liabilities arising out of the
contract, subject to available funding. The DoS has reimbursed us for all legal expenses to date.
We are also entitled to indemnification by Computer Sciences Corporation in connection with this
lawsuit, subject to certain limitations. Additionally, any damage award would have to be
apportioned between the other defendants and our operating company. We believe that the likelihood
of an unfavorable judgment in this matter is remote and that, even if that were to occur, the
judgment is unlikely to result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations or
financial condition as a result of the third party indemnification and apportionment of damages
described above.
Arising out of the litigation described in the preceding two paragraphs, we filed a separate
lawsuit against our aviation insurance carriers seeking defense and coverage of the referenced
claims. The carriers filed a lawsuit against us on February 5, 2009 seeking rescission of certain
aviation insurance policies based on an alleged misrepresentation by us concerning the existence of
certain of the lawsuits relating to the eradication of narcotic plant crops.
On May 29, 2003, Gloria Longest, a former accounting manager for our operating company, filed
suit against our operating company and a subsidiary of Computer Sciences Corporation under the
False Claims Act and the Florida Whistleblower Statute, alleging that the defendants submitted
false claims to the U.S. government under the International Narcotics & Law Enforcement contract
with the DoS. The U.S. Department of Justice approved the terms of the confidential settlement
between the parties and the
65
court entered an order of dismissal on September 26, 2008. The terms of the settlement did not
have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
U.S. Government Investigations
We also are occasionally the subject of investigations by various agencies of the U.S.
government. Such investigations, whether related to our U.S. government contracts or conducted for
other reasons, could result in administrative, civil or criminal liabilities, including repayments,
fines or penalties being imposed upon us, or could lead to suspension or debarment from future U.S.
government contracting.
On January 30, 2007, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) issued a
report on one of our task orders concerning the Iraqi Police Training Program. Among other items,
the report raises questions about our work to establish a residential camp in Baghdad to house
training personnel. Specifically, the SIGIR report recommends that the DoS seek reimbursement from
us of $4.2 million paid by the DoS for work that the SIGIR maintains was not contractually
authorized. In addition, the SIGIR report recommends that the DoS request the Defense Contract
Audit Agency (DCAA) to review two of our invoices totaling $19.1 million. On June 28, 2007, we
received a letter from the DoS contracting officer requesting our repayment of approximately $4.0
million for work performed under this task order, which the letter claims was unauthorized. We
responded to the DoS contracting officer in letters dated July 7, 2007 and September 4, 2007,
explaining that the work for which we were paid by DoS was appropriately performed and denying DoS
request for repayment of approximately $4.0 million. By letter dated April 30, 2008, the DoS
contracting officer responded to our July 7, 2007 and September 4, 2007 correspondence by taking
exception to the explanation set forth in our letters and reasserting the DoS request for a refund
of approximately $4.0 million. On May 8, 2008, we replied to the DoS letter dated April 30, 2008
and provided additional support for our position.
On September 17, 2008, the U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General (OIG) served
us with a records subpoena for the production of documents relating to our Civilian Police Program
in Iraq. Among other items, the subpoena seeks documents relating to our business dealings with a
former subcontractor, Corporate Bank. We are cooperating with the OIGs investigation and, based on
information currently known to management, do not believe this matter will have a material adverse
effect on our operating performance.
U.S. Government Audits
Our contracts are regularly audited by the DCAA and other government agencies. At any given
time, many of our contracts or systems are under review by the DCAA and other government agencies.
We cannot predict the outcome of such ongoing audits and what, if any, impact such audits may have
on our future operating performance.
These agencies review our contract performance, cost structure and compliance with applicable
laws, regulations and standards. The DCAA also reviews the adequacy of, and our compliance with,
our internal control systems and policies, including our labor, billing, accounting, purchasing,
property, estimating, compensation and management information systems. An adverse finding under a
DCAA audit could result in the disallowance of our costs under a U.S. government contract,
termination of U.S. government contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines and
suspension and prohibition from doing business with the U.S. government. Any costs found to be
improperly allocated to a specific contract will not be reimbursed. In addition, government
contract payments received by us for allowable direct and indirect costs are subject to adjustment
after audit by government auditors and repayment to the government if the payments exceed allowable
costs as defined in the government contracts.
The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) formally notified us of non-compliance with
Cost Accounting Standard 403, Allocation of Home Office Expenses to Segments, on April 11, 2007. We
issued a response to the DCMA on April 26, 2007 with a proposed solution to resolve the area of
non-compliance, which related to the allocation of corporate general and administrative costs
between our divisions. On August 13, 2007, the DCMA notified us that additional information would
be necessary to justify the proposed solution. We issued responses on September 17, 2007 and April
28, 2008 and the matter is pending resolution. Based on facts currently known, we do not believe
the matters described in this and the preceding paragraph will have a material adverse effect on
our results of operations or financial condition.
We are currently under audit by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for employment taxes
covering the calendar years 2005 through 2007. In the course of the audit process, the IRS has
questioned our treatment of exempting from U.S. employment taxes all U.S. residents working abroad
for a foreign subsidiary. While we believe our treatment with respect to employment taxes, for
these employees, was appropriate, a negative outcome on this matter could result in a potential
liability, including penalties, of approximately $113.8 million related to these calendar years.
Contract Matters
During the first quarter of fiscal year 2009 we terminated for cause a contract to build the
Akwa Ibom International Airport for the State of Akwa Ibom in Nigeria. Consequently, we terminated
certain subcontracts and purchase orders the customer advised us it did not want to assume. Based
on our experience with this particular Nigerian state government customer, we believe it likely the
customer will challenge our termination of the contract for cause and initiate legal action against
us. Our termination of certain
66
subcontracts not assumed by the customer, including our actions to recover against advance
payment and performance guarantees established by the subcontractors for our benefit is being
challenged in certain instances. Although we believe our right to terminate this contract and such
subcontracts was justified and permissible under the terms of the contracts, and we intend to
rigorously contest any claims brought against us arising out of such terminations, if courts were
to conclude that we were not entitled to terminate one or more of the contracts and damages were
assessed against us, such damages could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations
or financial condition.
Credit Risk
We are subject to concentrations of credit risk primarily by virtue of our accounts
receivable. Departments and agencies of the U.S. federal government account for all but minor
portions of our customer base, minimizing credit risk. Furthermore, we continuously review all
accounts receivable and recorded provisions for doubtful accounts for adequacy.
Risk Management Liabilities and Reserves
We are insured for domestic workers compensation liabilities and a significant portion of our
employee medical costs. However, we bear risk for a portion of claims pursuant to the terms of the
applicable insurance contracts. We account for these programs based on actuarial estimates of the
amount of loss inherent in that periods claims, including losses for which claims have not been
reported. These loss estimates rely on actuarial observations of ultimate loss experience for
similar historical events. We limit our risk by purchasing stop-loss insurance policies for
significant claims incurred for both domestic workers compensation liabilities and medical costs.
Our exposure under the stop-loss policies for domestic workers compensation and medical costs is
limited based on fixed dollar amounts. For domestic workers compensation and employers liability
under state and federal law, the fixed-dollar amount of stop-loss coverage is $1.0 million per
occurrence on most policies; but, $0.25 million on one California based policy. For medical costs,
the fixed dollar amount of stop-loss coverage is from $0.25 million to $0.75 million for total
costs per covered participant per calendar year.
Note 9 Shareholders Equity
Initial public offering
On May 9, 2006, we consummated an initial public offering of 25 million shares of our Class A
common stock, par value $0.01 per share, at a price of $15.00 per share (the Equity Offering).
After underwriting commissions of $22.5 million, a fee of $5.0 million to Veritas Capital, and
transaction costs of $2.5 million, our net proceeds were approximately $345.0 million. We used the
net proceeds, together with cash on hand, to repay a portion of our outstanding debt and complete
the transactions described below.
In conjunction with the Equity Offering, our shareholders approved an amendment and
restatement of our certificate of incorporation with the Secretary of State of the State of
Delaware. The amended and restated certificate of incorporation authorized us to issue up to:
(1) 232 million shares of Class A common stock, par value $0.01 per share; and
(2) 50 million shares of preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share.
The new shares of preferred and common stock have rights identical to the preferred stock and
the Class A common stock of our Company outstanding immediately before filing the amendment.
Stock Split On May 3, 2006, our Board of Directors and shareholders approved a 64-for-1
stock split for the 500,000 shares of our Class B common stock outstanding as of May 3, 2006. After
the stock split, effective May 3, 2006, each holder of record held 64 shares of common stock for
every one share held immediately prior to the effective date.
Following the effective date of the stock split, the par value of the common stock remained at
$0.01 per share. As a result, we have increased common stock in the consolidated balance sheets and
statement of shareholders equity included herein on a retroactive basis for all periods presented,
with a corresponding decrease to additional paid-in capital. All share and per-share amounts and
related disclosures were retroactively adjusted for all periods presented to reflect the 64-for-1
stock split.
Special Cash Dividend Prior to the closing of the Equity Offering, the board of directors
declared a mandatory dividend, payable in cash and subject to the consummation of the Equity
Offering, to the holders of record on May 3, 2006 of the then-
67
outstanding shares of our Class B
common stock, in an aggregate amount of $100.0 million. We paid the mandatory dividend on May 9, 2006. As a result of the dividend, we fully reduced retained earnings by $4.1 million and
reduced additional paid-in capital by $95.9 million for the remainder of the dividend. Upon the
payment of the mandatory dividend to the holders of our Class B common stock and the expiration of
the underwriters over allotment option from the Equity Offering, each share of Class B common
stock then issued and outstanding was automatically converted into one fully paid and
non-assessable share of Class A common stock.
Preferred Stock In conjunction with the Equity Offering, we redeemed all of our outstanding
$0.01 par value Series A-1 and Series A-2 preferred stock for $222.8 million, including accrued and
unpaid dividends as of the date of redemption of May 9, 2006. In addition, we paid $5.7 million in
prepayment penalties as a result of the early redemption. There was no interest expense on the
redeemable shares during the fiscal years ended April 3, 2009 or March 28, 2008; however, interest
expense on the redeemable shares totaled $3.0 million for the fiscal year ended March 30, 2007.
Common Stock and Senior Subordinated Note Repurchase
Our board of directors approved a plan in fiscal year 2009, which allows for $25.0 million in
repurchases for a combination of common stock and/or senior subordinated notes per fiscal year
during fiscal years 2009 and 2010. During fiscal year 2009, we purchased 693,200 shares for $8.6
million and $16.1 million face value of our senior subordinated notes in the open market for $15.4
million, including applicable fees, which utilized $24.0 million of our availability under the
fiscal year 2009 portion of the plan. A combination of $25.0 million of shares and/or senior
subordinated notes will be available for repurchase under this plan during fiscal year 2010.
Current board approval ends at the end of fiscal year 2010.
Note 10 Interest Rate Derivatives
As of April 3, 2009, we had two interest rate swaps which were purchased to hedge exposure on
variable three-month LIBOR interest rate risk associated with our $200 million senior secured
credit facility. These derivative agreements began in April 2007
and expire in May 2010. Our
derivative instruments do not contain credit-risk-related contingent features. We had no other
derivatives as of April 3, 2009. These two interest rate swap derivatives are presented in the
table below as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed |
|
Variable |
|
|
|
|
Notional |
|
Interest |
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Date Entered |
|
Amount |
|
Rate Paid* |
|
Received |
|
Expiration Date |
April 2007 |
|
$ |
168,620 |
|
|
|
4.975 |
% |
|
three-month LIBOR |
|
May 2010 |
April 2007 |
|
$ |
31,380 |
|
|
|
4.975 |
% |
|
three-month LIBOR |
|
May 2010 |
|
|
|
* |
|
plus applicable margin (2.5% at April 3, 2009) |
The $168.6 million interest rate swap derivative is accounted for as a cash flow hedge under
SFAS No. 133. The $31.4 million swap derivative no longer qualifies for hedge accounting as of
April 3, 2009, as a result of our expectation to settle the
majority of the related debt amount
earlier than expected, thus reducing the probability of our hedged forecasted quarterly variable
interest payment transactions. This resulted in $0.8 million of hedge loss being recognized in our
consolidated statement of income for fiscal year 2009 as it became probable that the associated
forecasted transactions would not occur within the originally specified period of time defined
within the hedge relationship.
During fiscal year 2009, we also had an interest rate swap derivative that began in September
2007 and expired in September 2008 to hedge exposure on variable three-month LIBOR interest rate
risk associated with $75.0 million in term loan principal. Activity related to this expired
derivative is included in the tabular disclosure below.
In fiscal year 2009, we paid $5.8 million in net settlements and incurred $6.5 million of
expenses, of which $5.3 million was recorded to interest expense and $1.2 million was recorded to
other expenses/(income). Amounts are reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive (loss)
income into earnings as net cash settlements occur, changes from quarterly derivative valuations
are updated, new circumstances dictate the disqualification of hedge accounting and adjustments for
cumulative ineffectiveness are recorded.
68
The fair values of our derivative instruments and the line items on the Consolidated Balance Sheet to which they were recorded as of April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008 are summarized as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at |
|
|
Fair Value at March |
|
Derivatives designated as hedges under SFAS No. 133 |
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
28, 2008 |
|
|
Interest Rate Swaps |
|
Other accrued liabilities |
|
$ |
5,259 |
|
|
$ |
5,783 |
|
Interest Rate Swaps |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
957 |
|
|
|
5,832 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
6,216 |
|
|
$ |
11,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at |
|
|
Fair Value at March |
|
Derivatives not designated as hedges under SFAS No. 133 |
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
28, 2008 |
|
Interest Rate Swaps |
|
Other accrued liabilities |
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Interest Rate Swaps |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,075 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
7,291 |
|
|
$ |
11,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of our derivative instruments on other comprehensive income (OCI) as of April 3, 2009 and our
Consolidated Statement of Income for the fiscal year ended April 3, 2009 are summarized as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAINS (LOSSES) RECLASSIFIED FROM |
|
|
GAINS (LOSSES) RECOGNIZED |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACCUMULATED OCI INTO INCOME |
|
|
IN INCOME ON DERIVATIVES |
|
|
|
Gains (Losses) |
|
|
(EFFECTIVE PORTION) |
|
|
(INEFFECTIVE PORTION) |
|
Derivatives Designated as |
|
Recognized in OCI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line Item in |
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow Hedging |
|
on Derivatives |
|
|
Line Item in Statement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement |
|
|
|
|
Instruments under SFAS 133 |
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
of
Income |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
of Income |
|
|
Amount |
|
Interest rate derivatives |
|
$ |
(6,201 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
(5,628 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(6,201 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(5,628 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of our derivative instruments on other comprehensive income (OCI) as of March 28, 2008 and our
Consolidated Statement of Income the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008 are summarized as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAINS (LOSSES) RECLASSIFIED FROM |
|
|
GAINS (LOSSES) RECOGNIZED |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACCUMULATED OCI INTO INCOME |
|
|
IN INCOME ON DERIVATIVES |
|
|
|
Gains (Losses) |
|
|
(EFFECTIVE PORTION) |
|
|
(INEFFECTIVE PORTION) |
|
Derivatives Designated as |
|
Recognized in OCI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line Item in |
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow Hedging |
|
on Derivatives |
|
|
Line Item in Statement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement |
|
|
|
|
Instruments under SFAS 133 |
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
of Income |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
of Income |
|
|
Amount |
|
Interest rate derivatives |
|
$ |
(11,240 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
324 |
|
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
(375 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(11,240 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
324 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(375 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of our derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments under SFAS No.
133 on our Consolidated Statement of Income for the fiscal year ended April 3, 2009 are summarized
as follows (in thousands). We did not have any derivative instruments not designated as hedging
instruments under SFAS No. 133 for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not Designated |
|
RECLASS
FROM OCI DUE TO HEDGE DE-DESIGNATION |
|
as Hedging Instruments |
|
Line Item in Statement |
|
|
|
|
under SFAS 133 |
|
of Income |
|
|
Amount |
|
Interest rate derivatives |
|
Other income (loss), net |
|
$ |
(1,245 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(1,245 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of April 3, 2009, we estimate that approximately $5.3 million of losses associated with our
two interest rate swaps included in accumulated other comprehensive income will be reclassified
into earnings in fiscal year 2010. See Note 16 for fair value disclosures associated with these
hedges.
69
Note 11 Equity-Based Compensation
As of April 3, 2009, we have provided equity-based compensation through the grant of Class B
interests in DIV Holding LLC, the majority holder of our common stock and the grant of Restricted
Stock Units (RSUs) under our 2007 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the 2007 Plan). All of our
equity-based compensation is accounted for under SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment. Under this
method, we recorded equity-based compensation expense of $1.9 million, $4.6 million and $2.4
million for fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Class B Equity
During fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, certain members of management and outside directors
were granted an ownership interest through a plan that granted Class B interests in DIV Holding
LLC, the majority holder of our stock. DIV Holding LLC conducts no operations and was established
for the purpose of holding equity in our Company. At April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30,
2007, the aggregate individual grants represented approximately 4.7%, 6.2% and 6.3% of the
ownership in DIV Holding LLC, respectively. On a fully vested basis, these ownership percentages
represent an approximate aggregate ownership of 3.7%.
The Class B interests are subject to either four-year or five-year graded vesting schedules
with any unvested interest reverting to the holders of Class A interests in the event they are
forfeited or repurchased. Class B interests are granted with no exercise price or expiration date.
Pursuant to the terms of the operating agreement governing DIV Holding LLC, the holders of Class B
interest are entitled to receive their respective ownership proportional interest of all
distributions made by DIV Holding LLC provided the holders of the Class A interests have received
an 8% per annum internal rate of return on their invested capital. Additionally, DIV Holdings
operating agreement limits Class B interests to 7.5% in the aggregate.
Pursuant to the terms of the operating agreement governing DIV Holding LLC, if our shares are
publicly traded on or after February 11, 2010, Class B interests may be redeemed at the end of any
fiscal quarter for our stock or cash at the discretion of Veritas Capital on thirty days written
notice upon the later of June 30, 2010 or the date said Class B member is no longer subject to
reduction. Class B members remain subject to reduction until the earlier of such Class B members
fourth or fifth employment/directorship anniversary, depending upon the terms of such members
employment agreement, date of termination, or change in our control.
The grant date fair value of the Class B interest granted through fiscal year 2009 was $18.3
million. We performed a fair value analysis of the Class B interests granted prior to the initial
public offering using discounted cash flow technique to arrive at a fair value of the interest of
$7.6 million at March 31, 2006. Our fair value analysis was based on a market value model that
includes the following variables: our stock price, outstanding common shares, DIV Holding LLC
ownership percentage, remaining preference to Class A holders, and a discount for lack of
marketability. The discount for lack of marketability for each grant was estimated on the date of
grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton put-call parity relationship computation with the following
weighted average assumptions for periods as indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
March 28, |
|
March 30, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
4.30 |
% |
|
|
4.40 |
% |
|
|
4.75 |
% |
Expected volatility |
|
|
43 |
% |
|
|
47 |
% |
|
|
45 |
% |
Expected lives (for Black-Scholes model input) |
|
4.6 years |
|
4.7 years |
|
4.5 years |
Annual rate of quarterly dividends |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Since these Class B interests are redeemed through our currently outstanding stock held by DIV
Holding LLC or cash, no potential dilutive effect exists in relation to these interests. DIV
Holding LLC held 31,992,600 shares of our 56,306,800 outstanding shares of stock at April 3, 2009.
Class B activity for fiscal years ended April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007 is
summarized in the table below (dollars in thousands):
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Interest in |
|
|
Grant Date |
|
|
|
DIV Holding |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Balance March 31, 2006 |
|
|
6.40 |
% |
|
$ |
7,588 |
|
Fiscal Year 2007 Grants |
|
|
3.26 |
% |
|
|
9,703 |
|
Fiscal Year 2007 Forfeitures |
|
|
(3.32 |
)% |
|
|
(4,007 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance March 30, 2007 |
|
|
6.34 |
% |
|
$ |
13,284 |
|
Fiscal Year 2008 Grants |
|
|
0.02 |
% |
|
|
109 |
|
Fiscal Year 2008 Forfeitures |
|
|
(0.12 |
)% |
|
|
(145 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance March 28, 2008 |
|
|
6.24 |
% |
|
$ |
13,248 |
|
Fiscal Year 2009 Grants |
|
|
0.20 |
% |
|
$ |
867 |
|
Fiscal Year 2009 Forfeitures |
|
|
(1.73 |
)% |
|
|
(4,446 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance April 3, 2009 |
|
|
4.71 |
% |
|
$ |
9,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 30, 2007 Vested |
|
|
2.05 |
% |
|
$ |
2,797 |
|
Fiscal Year 2008 Vesting |
|
|
0.77 |
% |
|
|
1,844 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 28, 2008 Vested |
|
|
2.82 |
% |
|
$ |
4,641 |
|
Fiscal Year 2009 Vesting |
|
|
0.87 |
% |
|
$ |
2,309 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 Vested |
|
|
3.69 |
% |
|
$ |
6,950 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2006 Nonvested |
|
|
5.23 |
% |
|
$ |
6,205 |
|
March 30, 2007 Nonvested |
|
|
4.30 |
% |
|
$ |
10,486 |
|
March 28, 2008 Nonvested |
|
|
3.42 |
% |
|
$ |
8,607 |
|
April 3, 2009 Nonvested |
|
|
1.02 |
% |
|
$ |
2,719 |
|
Assuming each grant of Class B equity outstanding as of April 3, 2009 fully vests, we will
recognize additional non-cash compensation expense as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal year ended April 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
650 |
|
Fiscal year ended April 1, 2011 |
|
|
229 |
|
Fiscal year ended March 31, 2012 and thereafter |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
940 |
|
|
|
|
|
2007 Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan
In August 2007, our shareholders approved the adoption of the 2007 Plan. Under the 2007 Plan,
there are 2,250,000 of our authorized shares of Class A common stock reserved for issuance. The
2007 Plan provides for the grant of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock and
other share-based awards and provides that the Compensation Committee, which administers the 2007
Plan, may also make awards of performance shares, performance units or performance cash incentives
subject to the satisfaction of specified performance criteria to be established by the Compensation
Committee prior to the applicable grant date. Our employees or our subsidiaries and non-employee
members of the Board are eligible to be selected to participate in the 2007 Plan at the discretion
of the Compensation Committee.
In December 2007, the Compensation Committee approved the grant of RSUs to certain key
employees (2007 Participants) of ours. The grants were made pursuant to the terms and conditions
of the 2007 Plan and are subject to award agreements between us and each 2007 Participant. 2007
Participants vest in RSUs over the corresponding service periods based on vesting terms, which are
generally one to three years. The RSUs have assigned value equivalent to our common stock and may
be settled in cash or shares of our common stock at the discretion of the Compensation Committee.
During fiscal year 2009, we awarded service-based and performance-based RSUs to certain key
employees (2009 Participants). The grants were made pursuant to the terms and conditions of the
2007 Plan and are subject to award agreements between the Company and each 2009 Participant.
During fiscal year 2009, 236,800 performance-based RSUs were granted to certain key employees.
These performance-based awards are tied to our financial performance, specifically fiscal year 2011
EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), and cliff vest upon
achievement of this target. Based on current estimates, the costs of these awards are being accrued
with the expectation of a 100% achievement of the performance goal.
In addition to employee grants, 19,195 service-based RSUs were granted to Board members. These
awards vest within one year of grant, but include a post-vesting restriction of six months after
the applicable directors Board service ends. The RSUs have
71
assigned value equivalent to our common stock and may be settled in cash or shares of our common
stock at the discretion of the Compensation Committee of the Board.
During fiscal year 2009, 100,000 RSUs were awarded to our current Chief Executive Officer
(CEO). Half of these awards were service-based and vest ratably over a three year period on the
anniversary of the CEOs employment commencement date. The remaining 50,000 RSUs were
performance-based, tied to specific performance goals for fiscal year 2009. In May 2009, it was
determined that the performance measures had been achieved, resulting in the vesting of one-third
of his performance-based awards. The remaining two thirds of his performance-based awards will vest
over the next two years, with one third vesting each year on the anniversary of the CEOs
employment commencement date.
A summary of RSU activity during fiscal year 2009 under the 2007 Plan is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Outstanding |
|
Average |
|
|
Restricted |
|
Grant Date |
|
|
Stock Units |
|
Fair Value |
Outstanding, March 28, 2008 |
|
|
159,600 |
|
|
$ |
21.49 |
|
Units granted |
|
|
307,945 |
|
|
$ |
15.53 |
|
Units forfeited |
|
|
(66,100 |
) |
|
$ |
19.04 |
|
Units vested and settled |
|
|
(55,550 |
) |
|
$ |
21.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding, April 3, 2009 |
|
|
345,895 |
|
|
$ |
16.71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In accordance with SFAS No. 123(R) and our policy, we recognize compensation expense related
to the RSUs on a graded schedule over the requisite service period, net of estimated forfeitures.
Compensation expense related to RSUs was approximately $2.0 million for the fiscal year ended April
3, 2009. Additionally, all RSUs have been determined to be liability awards; therefore, the fair
value of the RSUs are re-measured at each financial reporting date as long as they remain liability
awards. The estimated fair value of the RSUs was approximately $5.8 million, net of forfeitures,
based on the closing market price of our stock on the grant date. The estimated fair value of all
RSUs, net of forfeitures, was approximately $4.7 million based on the closing market price of our
stock on April 3, 2009. During fiscal year 2009, 55,550 RSU awards vested and settled for $0.8
million in cash.
Assuming the RSUs outstanding, net of estimated forfeiture, as of April 3, 2009 fully vest, we
will recognize the related compensation expense as follows based on the value of these liability
awards as of April 3, 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal year ended April 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
1,684 |
|
Fiscal year ended April 1, 2011 |
|
|
916 |
|
Fiscal year ended March 31, 2012 and thereafter |
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,972 |
|
|
|
|
|
Note 12 Composition of Certain Financial Statement Captions
The following tables present financial information of certain consolidated balance sheet
captions (dollars in thousands).
Prepaid expense and other current assets Prepaid expense and other current assets were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Prepaid expenses |
|
$ |
61,570 |
|
|
$ |
43,205 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
10,840 |
|
|
|
8,463 |
|
Work-in-process |
|
|
33,885 |
|
|
|
45,245 |
|
Minority interest receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,306 |
|
Joint venture receivables |
|
|
2,491 |
|
|
|
2,076 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
15,428 |
|
|
|
6,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
124,214 |
|
|
$ |
109,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses include prepaid insurance, prepaid vendor deposits, and prepaid rent, none of
which individually exceed 5% of current assets. For the fiscal year ended March 28, 2008, the
minority interest resulted in a net debit balance due to the net loss in GLS. McNeil Technologies,
our 49% joint venture partner, had guaranteed to fund their portion of the losses; therefore, the
minority interest in the GLS loss resulted in an increase to net income.
72
Property and equipment, net Property and equipment, net were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Computers and other equipment |
|
$ |
13,466 |
|
|
$ |
11,813 |
|
Leasehold improvements |
|
|
7,435 |
|
|
|
4,649 |
|
Office furniture and fixtures |
|
|
6,066 |
|
|
|
5,272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross property and equipment |
|
|
26,967 |
|
|
|
21,734 |
|
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(8,629 |
) |
|
|
(6,292 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
$ |
18,338 |
|
|
$ |
15,442 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets, net Other assets, net were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Deferred financing costs, net |
|
$ |
13,828 |
|
|
$ |
11,350 |
|
Investment in affiliates |
|
|
8,982 |
|
|
|
6,287 |
|
Palm promissory notes, long-term portion |
|
|
6,631 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
2,627 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
32,068 |
|
|
$ |
18,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred financing cost is amortized through interest expense. Amortization related to
deferred financing costs was $3.7 million, $3.0 million and $2.8 million for the fiscal years ended
April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007, respectively.
Accrued payroll and employee costs Accrued payroll and employee costs were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Wages, compensation and other benefits |
|
$ |
108,879 |
|
|
$ |
57,940 |
|
Accrued vacation |
|
|
26,329 |
|
|
|
24,760 |
|
Accrued contributions to employee benefit plans |
|
|
2,785 |
|
|
|
2,486 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
137,993 |
|
|
$ |
85,186 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other accrued liabilities Accrued liabilities were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
$ |
30,739 |
|
|
$ |
53,083 |
|
Insurance expense |
|
|
28,061 |
|
|
|
36,260 |
|
Interest expense and short-term swap liability |
|
|
11,688 |
|
|
|
14,348 |
|
Contract losses |
|
|
11,730 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
Legal matters |
|
|
16,993 |
|
|
|
19,851 |
|
Other |
|
|
12,379 |
|
|
|
5,564 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
111,590 |
|
|
$ |
129,240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue is primarily due to payments in excess of revenue recognized. Contract losses
relate to accrued losses recorded on certain Afghanistan construction contracts.
Note 13 Segment and Geographic Information
Our operations are aligned into three divisions, each of which constitutes an operating
segment: ISS, LCM and MTSS. All of our operating segments provide services domestically and in
foreign countries under contracts with the U.S. government and some foreign customers. The segments
also operate principally within a regulatory environment subject to governmental contracting and
accounting requirements, including Federal Acquisition Regulations, Cost Accounting Standards and
audits by various U.S. federal agencies.
Each operating segment provides different services and involves different strategies and
risks. Each operating segment has a President, who reports directly to our CEO. For decision-making
purposes, our CEO uses financial information generated and reported at the operating segment level.
We evaluate segment performance and allocate resources based on factors such as each segments
operating income, working capital requirements and backlog to name a few. The accounting policies
of the operating segments are the same as those described in the summary of significant accounting
policies.
The following is a summary of the financial information of the reportable segments reconciled
to the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements (dollars in thousands).
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
March 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Security Services |
|
$ |
1,823,141 |
|
|
$ |
1,097,083 |
|
|
$ |
1,086,481 |
|
Logistics and Construction Management |
|
|
352,196 |
|
|
|
285,317 |
|
|
|
266,050 |
|
Maintenance and Technical Support Services |
|
|
930,983 |
|
|
|
757,361 |
|
|
|
729,743 |
|
Corporate/Elimination |
|
|
(5,227 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reportable segments |
|
$ |
3,101,093 |
|
|
$ |
2,139,761 |
|
|
$ |
2,082,274 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Security Services |
|
$ |
151,888 |
|
|
$ |
89,588 |
|
|
$ |
89,130 |
|
Logistics and Construction Management |
|
|
(33,406 |
) |
|
|
10,854 |
|
|
|
13,227 |
|
Maintenance and Technical Support Services |
|
|
69,509 |
|
|
|
19,561 |
|
|
|
11,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187,991 |
|
|
$ |
120,003 |
|
|
$ |
113,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Security Services |
|
$ |
26,907 |
|
|
$ |
27,017 |
|
|
$ |
26,248 |
|
Logistics and Construction Management |
|
|
2,834 |
|
|
|
3,307 |
|
|
|
3,540 |
|
Maintenance and Technical Support Services |
|
|
10,816 |
|
|
|
11,849 |
|
|
|
13,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reportable segments(1) |
|
$ |
40,557 |
|
|
$ |
42,173 |
|
|
$ |
43,401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Security Services |
|
$ |
723,075 |
|
|
$ |
725,775 |
|
|
$ |
709,044 |
|
Logistics and Construction Management |
|
|
207,366 |
|
|
|
199,088 |
|
|
|
187,750 |
|
Maintenance and Technical Support Services |
|
|
323,776 |
|
|
|
336,721 |
|
|
|
308,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reportable segments |
|
|
1,254,217 |
|
|
|
1,261,584 |
|
|
|
1,205,327 |
|
Corporate activities(2) |
|
|
284,997 |
|
|
|
141,125 |
|
|
|
157,574 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,539,214 |
|
|
$ |
1,402,709 |
|
|
$ |
1,362,901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes amounts included in cost of services of $1,077,
$1,319 and $1,850 for fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. |
|
(2) |
|
Assets primarily include cash, deferred income taxes, and deferred debt issuance cost. |
Geographic Information Revenue by geography is determined based on the location of services
provided.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, 2009 |
|
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
March 30, 2007 |
|
United States |
|
$ |
764,034 |
|
|
|
25 |
% |
|
$ |
718,787 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
$ |
668,875 |
|
|
|
32 |
% |
Middle East(1) |
|
|
1,971,411 |
|
|
|
64 |
% |
|
|
1,120,910 |
|
|
|
52 |
% |
|
|
955,811 |
|
|
|
46 |
% |
Other Americas |
|
|
143,423 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
194,767 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
220,176 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Europe |
|
|
65,975 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
46,242 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
59,780 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Asia-Pacific |
|
|
84,018 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
34,400 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
65,817 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Other |
|
|
72,232 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
24,655 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
111,815 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,101,093 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
2,139,761 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
2,082,274 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Middle East includes but is not limited to activities in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Oman,
Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Palestine, Sudan, Pakistan, Jordan, Lebanon, Bahrain, Yemen,
Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt. |
Revenue from the U.S. government accounted for approximately 96%, 95% and 97% of total revenue
in fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. At April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30,
2007, accounts receivable due from the U.S. government represented over 95% of total accounts
receivable, in each fiscal year respectively.
Beginning April 4, 2009, we converted from three operating segments (currently ISS, LCM and
MTSS) to three new operating segments: GLS, GPSS, and GSDS. Please refer to Note 17 for detailed
information.
Note 14 Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
In our opinion, the following unaudited quarterly information includes all adjustments,
consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to fairly present our consolidated results of
operations for such periods (amounts in thousands, except per share data):
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2009 |
|
|
Fourth |
|
Third |
|
Second |
|
First |
|
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
Revenue |
|
$ |
812,821 |
|
|
$ |
792,327 |
|
|
$ |
779,151 |
|
|
$ |
716,794 |
|
Operating Income |
|
$ |
49,781 |
|
|
$ |
51,583 |
|
|
$ |
46,633 |
|
|
$ |
39,994 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
19,166 |
|
|
$ |
19,753 |
|
|
$ |
12,871 |
|
|
$ |
17,980 |
|
Earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
|
$ |
0.35 |
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
Average common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
56,878 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
56,937 |
|
|
|
57,437 |
|
|
|
57,061 |
|
|
|
57,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2008 |
|
|
Fourth |
|
Third |
|
Second |
|
First |
|
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
Revenue |
|
$ |
572,908 |
|
|
$ |
523,071 |
|
|
$ |
495,109 |
|
|
$ |
548,673 |
|
Operating Income |
|
$ |
23,029 |
|
|
$ |
30,825 |
|
|
$ |
33,947 |
|
|
$ |
32,202 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
9,784 |
|
|
$ |
11,960 |
|
|
$ |
13,953 |
|
|
$ |
12,258 |
|
Earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
Average common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
57,001 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
57,000 |
|
Note 15 Related Parties, Joint Ventures and Variable Interest Entities
Management Fee
We pay Veritas Capital an annual management fee of $0.3 million plus expenses to provide us
with general business management, financial, strategic and consulting services. We recorded $0.5
million, $0.5 million and $0.7 million in these fees and expenses for the fiscal years ended April
3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007, respectively.
Joint Ventures
Amounts due from our unconsolidated joint ventures totaled $2.5 million and $2.1 million as of
April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008, respectively. These receivables are a result of items purchased
and services rendered by us on behalf of our unconsolidated joint ventures. We have assessed these
receivables as having minimal collection risk based on our historic experience with these joint
ventures and our inherent influence through our ownership interest. The change in these receivables
from March 28, 2008 to April 3, 2009 resulted in a use of operating cash for the fiscal year ended
April 3, 2009 of $0.4 million. The related revenue associated with our unconsolidated joint
ventures totaled $18.1 million, $8.5 million for the fiscal year ended April 3, 2009 and March 28,
2008 respectively.
As discussed in Note 1, we sold half of our previously wholly owned subsidiary, DIFZ, on July
31, 2008 to Palm Trading Investment Corp. (Palm). DIFZ provides leased contract employees, back
office staff and outsourced payroll and human resource support services through its approximately
6,200 employees. Currently, all DIFZ revenue and costs are eliminated through our consolidation
process.
As a result of the DIFZ sale, we currently hold three promissory notes from Palm for the
purchase price of $8.2 million, plus accrued interest. As discussed in Note 1, the sales price was
adjusted to $9.7 million, based on the results of the revaluation, contingent on approval by the
DIFZ board of directors. The adjustment to the purchase price was reflected as an increase to the
promissory notes. The notes are included in Prepaid expenses and other current assets and in Other
assets on our consolidated balance sheet for the short and long term portions, respectively. As of
April 3, 2009 the loan balance outstanding with Palm was $8.9 million, reflecting the adjustment to
the purchase price, accrued interest and payments against the promissory notes.
Variable Interest Entities
We own an interest in four VIEs: (i) 40% owned PaTH Joint Venture; (ii) 45% owned CRS Joint
Venture; (iii) 44% owned
Babcock DynCorp Limited (Babcock) Joint Venture; (iv) 51% owned GLS Joint Venture; and (iv) the
50% owned DIFZ Joint Venture. We do not encounter any significant risk through our involvement in
our VIEs which is outside the normal course of our business.
75
PaTH is a joint venture formed in May 2006 with two other partners for the purpose of
procuring government contracts with
the Federal Emergency Management Authority. CRS is a joint venture formed in March 2006 with two
other partners for the purpose of procuring government contracts with the U.S. Navy. Babcock is a
Joint Venture formed in January 2005 and currently provides services to the British Armed Forces.
We do not provide any significant financial support and would not absorb the majority of expected
losses or gains from PaTH, CRS or Babcock. We account for PaTH, CRS and Babcock as equity method
investments based on our ownership percentage of the ventures. The equity method investee
income/loss for PaTH and CRS is immaterial to our consolidated financial statements. We earned
$4.3 million in equity method income from the Babcock joint venture in fiscal year 2009.
GLS is a joint venture formed in August 2006 with one partner, McNeil Technologies, for the
purpose of procuring government contracts with the U.S. Army. Our controlling shareholder is the
majority owner of McNeil Technologies. We concluded that we were the primary beneficiary of the
venture, primarily based on our ownership percentage. We account for GLS as a consolidated
subsidiary in our consolidated financial statements. We incur significant costs on behalf of GLS
related to the normal operations of the venture. However, these costs typically support revenue
billable to our customer. GLS assets and liabilities were $150.5 million and $129.6 million,
respectively, as of April 3, 2009. Additionally, GLS revenue was $709.1 million in fiscal year
2009.
DIFZ became a joint venture in July 2008 as Palm purchased a 50% interest in DIFZ. DIFZ
provides foreign staffing, human resources and payroll services. We concluded that we were the
primary beneficiary since we would absorb the majority of expected losses or gains from the venture
based on the terms of the sale agreement. We incur significant costs on behalf of DIFZ related to
the normal operations of the venture. The vast majority of these costs are considered direct
contract costs and thus billable on the various corresponding contracts supported by DIFZ services.
DIFZ assets and liabilities were $38.0 million and $36.5 million, respectively, as of April 3,
2009. Additionally, DIFZ revenue was $261.7 million in fiscal year 2009.
Note 16Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities
We adopted SFAS No. 157 in fiscal year 2009. Although the adoption of SFAS No. 157 did not
materially impact our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flow, we are required to
provide additional disclosures as part of our financial statements. SFAS No. 157 establishes a
three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value. These
tiers include:
|
|
Level 1, defined as observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets; |
|
|
|
Level 2, defined as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either directly or indirectly observable; and |
|
|
|
Level 3, defined as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop
its own assumptions. |
As of April 3, 2009, we held certain assets and had incurred certain liabilities that are
required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis. These included cash equivalents
(including restricted cash) and interest rate derivatives. Cash equivalents consist of petty cash,
cash in-bank and short-term, highly liquid, income-producing investments with original maturities
of 90 days or less. Our interest rate derivatives, as further described in Note 10, consist of
interest rate swap contracts. The fair values of the interest rate swap contracts are determined
based on inputs that are readily available in public markets or can be derived from information
available in publicly quoted markets. Therefore, we have categorized these interest rate swap
contracts as Level 2. We have consistently applied these valuation techniques in all periods
presented.
Our assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis subject to the
disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 157 at April 3, 2009, were as follows:
76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Book value of |
|
|
Quoted prices |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
financial |
|
|
in active |
|
|
other |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
assets/(liabilities) |
|
|
markets assets |
|
|
observable |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
as of April 3, 2009 |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
inputs (Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents(1) |
|
$ |
206,157 |
|
|
$ |
206,157 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets measured at fair value |
|
$ |
206,157 |
|
|
$ |
206,157 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate derivatives |
|
$ |
7,291 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,291 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities measured at fair value |
|
$ |
7,291 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,291 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash |
Note 17 Subsequent Events
Operating Segment change
As announced on April 6, 2009, we will change from reporting financial results on our three
segments utilized in fiscal year 2009 to reporting under three new segments, beginning with our
first fiscal 2010 quarter. Under the new alignment, the three prior business segments of ISS, LCM
and MTSS are realigned into three segments, two of which, Global Stabilization and Development
Solutions, or GSDS and Global Platform Support Solutions, or GPSS, are wholly-owned, and a third
segment, Global Linguist Solutions, or GLS, which is a 51% owned joint venture.
* * * * *
77
Schedule I Condensed Financial Information of Registrant
DynCorp International Inc.
Condensed Balance Sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, |
|
|
|
except share data) |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
$ |
497,521 |
|
|
$ |
424,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value 57,000,000 shares authorized, issued and
outstanding at April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008, respectively |
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
570 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
366,620 |
|
|
|
357,026 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
143,373 |
|
|
|
73,603 |
|
Treasury stock, 693,200 shares at April 3, 2009 |
|
|
(8,618 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(4,424 |
) |
|
|
(6,914 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
497,521 |
|
|
|
424,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
497,521 |
|
|
$ |
424,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to this schedule.
78
DynCorp International Inc.
Condensed Statement of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Equity in income of subsidiaries, net of tax |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to this schedule.
79
DynCorp International Inc.
Condensed Statement of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
March 28, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
69,770 |
|
|
$ |
47,955 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash interest expense (redeemable preferred stock dividend) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in income of subsidiaries |
|
|
(69,770 |
) |
|
|
(47,955 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash purchase of treasury stock by LLC |
|
$ |
(8,618 |
) |
|
|
|
|
See notes to this schedule.
80
Schedule I Condensed Financial Information of Registrant
DynCorp International Inc.
Notes to Schedule
Note 1. Basis of Presentation
Pursuant to rules and regulations of the SEC, the unconsolidated condensed financial
statements of DynCorp International Inc. (the Company) do not reflect all of the information and
notes normally included with financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. Therefore,
these financial statements should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements
and related notes.
Accounting for subsidiaries We have accounted for the income of our subsidiaries under the
equity method in the unconsolidated condensed financial statements.
Note 2. Dividends Received from Consolidated Subsidiaries
We have received no dividends from our consolidated subsidiaries. DynCorp International LLC
(our operating company), a consolidated subsidiary of ours, has covenants related to our
long-term debt, including restrictions on dividend payments at April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and
March 30, 2007. As of that date, our operating companys retained earnings and net assets were not
free from such restrictions.
Note 3. Shareholders Equity
Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase up to $25.0 million per fiscal year of
our outstanding common stock and/or our operating companys senior subordinated notes during fiscal
years 2009 and 2010. The shares may be repurchased from time to time in open market conditions or
through privately negotiated transactions at our discretion, subject to market conditions, and in
accordance with applicable federal and state securities laws and regulations. The share repurchase
program does not obligate us to acquire any particular amount of common stock and may be modified
or suspended at any time at the discretion of our Board of Directors. Shares of common stock
repurchased under this plan will be held as treasury shares. A total of 693,200 shares were
repurchased by LLC as of April 3, 2009. Treasury stock is included in our condensed balance sheet
as a reduction of shareholders equity.
* * * * *
81
Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
DynCorp International Inc.
For the Fiscal Years Ended April 3, 2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charged/(Credited) |
|
Deductions |
|
|
|
|
Beginning |
|
to Costs and |
|
from |
|
End of |
|
|
of Period |
|
Expense |
|
Reserve(1) |
|
Period |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
Allowance for doubtful accounts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 1, 2006 March 30, 2007 |
|
$ |
8,479 |
|
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
|
|
(2,551 |
) |
|
$ |
3,428 |
|
March 31, 2007 March 28, 2008 |
|
$ |
3,428 |
|
|
|
(923 |
) |
|
|
(2,237 |
) |
|
$ |
268 |
|
March 29, 2008 April 3, 2009 |
|
$ |
268 |
|
|
|
(185 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
$ |
68 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Deductions from reserve represent accounts written off, net of recoveries. |
* * * * *
82
|
|
|
ITEM 9. |
|
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE. |
None.
|
|
|
ITEM 9A. |
|
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES. |
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to
be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission
rules and forms. In addition, the disclosure controls and procedures ensure that information
required to be disclosed is accumulated and communicated to management, including the chief
executive officer (CEO) and chief financial officer (CFO), allowing timely decisions regarding
required disclosure. As of the last fiscal quarter covered by this report, based on an evaluation
carried out under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including the CEO
and CFO, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15(d)-15(e) under the Exchange Act of 1934), the CEO and CFO have concluded
that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management, under the supervision and with the participation of our CEO and CFO, is
responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as
such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Internal control over
financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance to our management and
board of directors regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). Internal control over financial reporting
includes policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets; (ii) provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with GAAP, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in
accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and (iii) provide reasonable
assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition
of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of our inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent
or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that
the degree of compliance with existing policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our CEO and CFO, our management conducted
an assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls and procedures over financial reporting
as of April 3, 2009, based on the criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework,
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on
this assessment, our management has concluded that as of April 3, 2009, our internal controls and
procedures over financial reporting were effective based on those criteria.
Deloitte & Touche LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm who audited our
consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report, has issued an attestation report
on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, which is included below.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There has been no significant change in our internal control over financial reporting that
have occurred during the most recently completed fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or
are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
83
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of DynCorp International Inc.
Falls Church, Virginia
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of DynCorp International Inc.
and subsidiaries (the Company) as of April 3, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. The Companys management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over
financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, included in the accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Companys internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was
maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and
evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk,
and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the
supervision of, the companys principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons
performing similar functions, and effected by the companys board of directors, management, and
other personnel 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. A companys internal control over financial reporting includes
those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including
the possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material misstatements
due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any
evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods
are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions,
or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control
over financial reporting as of April 3, 2009, based on the criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedules as of and for the year ended April 3, 2009, and our
report dated June 11, 2009, expressed
an unqualified opinion on such consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules
and included an explanatory paragraph regarding the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards
Board Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of
FASB Statement No. 109 on March 31, 2007.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Fort Worth, Texas
June 11, 2009
84
|
|
|
ITEM 9B. |
|
OTHER INFORMATION. |
None.
PART III
|
|
|
ITEM 10. |
|
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE. |
The information required in this Item 10 is incorporated by reference to our definitive Proxy
Statement. Such definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC no later than 120 days after
the conclusion of the registrants fiscal year ended April 3, 2009.
|
|
|
ITEM 11. |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION. |
The information required in this Item 11 is incorporated by reference to our definitive Proxy
Statement. Such definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC no later than 120 days after
the conclusion of the registrants fiscal year ended April 3, 2009.
|
|
|
ITEM 12. |
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS. |
The information required in this Item 12 is incorporated by reference to our definitive Proxy
Statement. Such definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC no later than 120 days after
the conclusion of the registrants fiscal year ended April 3, 2009.
|
|
|
ITEM 13. |
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS, RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE. |
The information required in this Item 13 is incorporated by reference to our definitive Proxy
Statement. Such definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC no later than 120 days after
the conclusion of the registrants fiscal year ended April 3, 2009.
|
|
|
ITEM 14. |
|
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES. |
The information required in this Item 14 is incorporated by reference to our definitive Proxy
Statement. Such definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC no later than 120 days after
the conclusion of the registrants fiscal year ended April 3, 2009.
85
PART IV
|
|
|
ITEM 15. |
|
EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES. |
(a) Financial statements: The following consolidated financial statements and schedules of
DynCorp International Inc. are included in this report:
|
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm: |
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Income for the fiscal years ended April 3, 2009, March 28,
2008 and March 30, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of April 3, 2009 and March 28, 2008. |
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the fiscal years ended April 3, 2009, March 28,
2008 and March 30, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders Equity for the fiscal years ended April 3, 2009,
March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |
(b) Financial Statement Schedules:
|
|
|
Schedule I Condensed Financial Information of Registrant |
|
|
|
|
Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying Accounts for the fiscal years ended April 3,
2009, March 28, 2008 and March 30, 2007. |
(c) Exhibits: The exhibits, which are filed with this Annual Report or which are incorporated
herein by reference, are set forth in the Exhibit Index, which is incorporated herein by reference.
86
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL INC.
|
|
|
/s/ William L. Ballhaus
|
|
|
Name: |
William L. Ballhaus |
|
|
Title: |
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
Date:
June 11, 2009
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities below on
the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ William L. Ballhaus
William L. Ballhaus
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer and
Director (principal executive officer)
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Michael J. Thorne
Michael J. Thorne
|
|
Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (principal
financial and principal accounting officer)
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Robert B. McKeon
Robert B. McKeon
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Michael J. Bayer
Michael J. Bayer
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Mark H. Ronald
Mark H. Ronald
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ General Richard E. Hawley
General Richard E. Hawley
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Herbert J. Lanese
Herbert J. Lanese
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ General Barry R. McCaffrey
General Barry R. McCaffrey
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Ramzi M. Musallam
Ramzi M. Musallam
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Admiral Joseph W. Prueher
Admiral Joseph W. Prueher
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Charles S. Ream
Charles S. Ream
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ General Peter J. Schoomaker
General Peter J. Schoomaker
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Admiral Leighton W. Smith, Jr.
Admiral Leighton W. Smith, Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ William G. Tobin
William G. Tobin
|
|
Director
|
|
June 11, 2009 |
87
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
Purchase Agreement, dated as of December 12, 2004, by and among Computer Sciences Corporation,
Predecessor DynCorp, Veritas and DI Acquisition
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
First Amendment to Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 11, 2005, by and between Computer
Sciences Corporation, Predecessor DynCorp, Veritas and DI Acquisition
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation of DynCorp International Inc.
|
|
(B) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of DynCorp International Inc.
|
|
(C) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
Certificate of Correction to the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of DynCorp
International Inc.
|
|
(C) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of DynCorp International Inc.
|
|
(B) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
Certificate of Formation of DIV Holding LLC
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV Holding LLC
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV
Holding LLC
|
|
(B) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV
Holding LLC
|
|
(D) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
Amendment No. 3 to the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV
Holding LLC
|
|
(C) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.10
|
|
Amendment No. 4 to the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV
Holding LLC
|
|
(E) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.11
|
|
Amendment No. 5 to the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV
Holding LLC
|
|
(F) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.12
|
|
Amendment No. 6 to the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV
Holding LLC
|
|
(G) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.13
|
|
Amendment No. 8 to the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of DIV
Holding LLC
|
|
(P) |
|
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Indenture dated February 11, 2005 by and among DynCorp International Inc., DIV Capital
Corporation, the Guarantors and The Bank of New York, as Trustee
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Supplemental Indenture dated May 6, 2005 among DynCorp International of Nigeria LLC, DynCorp
International LLC, DIV Capital Corporation, the Guarantors and The Bank of New York, as Trustee
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Guarantee (included in Exhibit 4.1)
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Specimen of Common Stock Certificate
|
|
(D) |
|
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
Certificate of Designation for Series B participating preferred stock (included in Exhibit 4.7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of May 3, 2006, by and among DynCorp International Inc.
and DIV Holding LLC
|
|
(E) |
|
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Rights Agreement, dated as of May 3, 2006, by and among DynCorp International Inc. and The Bank of
New York
|
|
(E) |
|
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Supplemental Indenture, dated as of July 14, 2008, among DynCorp International LLC, DIV Capital
Corporation, the Guarantors named therein and The Bank of New York Mellon.
|
|
(O) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2005 among DynCorp International LLC and
DIV Capital Corporation, and Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc., as Initial
Purchasers
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
Credit and Guaranty Agreement, dated as of February 11, 2005, by and among Finance, DI Acquisition
and the other Guarantors party thereto, various Lenders party thereto, Goldman Sachs Credit
Partners L.P., Bear Stearns Corporate Lending Inc., Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. and Bank of America,
N.A.
|
|
(A) |
88
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
Pledge and Security Agreement, dated as of February 11, 2005, among VCDI, DI Acquisition Corp.,
DynCorp International LLC, DIV Capital Corporation, DTS Aviation Services LLC, DynCorp Aerospace
Operations LLC, DynCorp International Services LLC, Dyn Marine Services LLC, Dyn Marine Services
of Virginia LLC, Services International LLC, Worldwide Humanitarian Services LLC, Guarantors and
Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., Collateral Agent
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Revolving Loan Note, issued by DynCorp International LLC under the SPA, dated February 1, 2005
|
|
(A) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
Form of Director Indemnification Agreement
|
|
(B) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
First Amendment and Waiver, dated January 9, 2006, among DynCorp International LLC, DynCorp
International Inc., and certain subsidiaries of the Company, the lenders party thereto, Goldman
Sachs Credit Partners L.P. and Bank of America, N.A.
|
|
(H) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.7+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of April 12, 2006 between DynCorp International LLC and Michael
J. Thorne.
|
|
(I) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.8+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of April 12, 2006 between DynCorp International LLC and Natale
S. DiGesualdo.
|
|
(I) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.9+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of May 19, 2008 between DynCorp International LLC and William L.
Ballhaus.
|
|
(M) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.10+
|
|
The DynCorp International LLC Executive Incentive Plan
|
|
(K) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.11
|
|
Form of Officer Indemnification Agreement
|
|
(B) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.12
|
|
Second Amendment and Waiver, dated June 28, 2006, among DynCorp International LLC, DynCorp
International Inc., and certain subsidiaries of the Company, the lenders party thereto, Goldman
Sachs Credit Partners L.P. and Bank of America, N.A.
|
|
(C) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.13+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of July 17, 2006 between DynCorp International LLC and Herbert
J. Lanese
|
|
(E) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.14+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of April 6, 2006 between DynCorp International LLC and Robert B.
Rosenkranz
|
|
(L) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.15
|
|
Consulting Agreement effective as of September 1, 2006 between DynCorp International LLC and
General Anthony C. Zinni
|
|
(J) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.16+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of October 24, 2006, between DynCorp International LLC and
Curtis L. Schehr.
|
|
(N) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.17+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of July 16, 2007 between DynCorp International LLC and Anthony
C. Zinni.
|
|
(N) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.18+
|
|
DynCorp International Inc. 2007 Omnibus Incentive Plan
|
|
(R) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.19
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated July 28, 2008 by and among DynCorp International Inc. and DynCorp
International LLC, as borrower, the lenders referred to therein, and Wachovia Bank National
Association.
|
|
(S) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.20
|
|
Collateral Agreement dated as of July 28, 2008 by and among DynCorp International Inc. and DynCorp
International LLC, as borrower, and certain of their respective subsidiaries as guarantors in
favor of Wachovia Bank National Association, as administrative agent.
|
|
(S) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.21
|
|
Holdings Guarantee Agreement dated as of July 28, 2008 by DynCorp International Inc, as guarantor,
in favor of Wachovia Bank National Association, as administrative agent.
|
|
(S) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.22
|
|
Subsidiary Guaranty Agreement dated as of July 28, 2008 by and among certain domestic subsidiaries
of DynCorp International Inc, as subsidiary guarantors, in favor of Wachovia Bank National
Association, as administrative agent.
|
|
(S) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.23
|
|
Purchase Agreement, dated July 14, 2008, among DynCorp International LLC, DIV Capital Corporation,
the guarantors named therein and Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC and Goldman & Sachs
|
|
(T) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.24+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of December 29, 2008, between DynCorp International LLC and Tony
Smeraglinolo.
|
|
(Q) |
89
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
& Co., as
representative of the several purchasers named therein. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.25
|
|
Amendment to Credit Agreement, dated March 6, 2009 by and among DynCorp International Inc. and
DynCorp International LLC, as borrower, the lenders referred to therein, and Wachovia Bank
National Association.
|
|
(U) |
|
|
|
|
|
10.26*+
|
|
Employment Agreement effective as of April 6, 2009, between DynCorp International LLC and Steven
T. Schorer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.27*+
|
|
Amendment No.1 to Employment Agreement for Curtis Schehr, effective as of May 21, 2009. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.1*
|
|
Statement re: computation of ratios. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.1*
|
|
List of subsidiaries of DynCorp International Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1*
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2*
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1*
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2*
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
+ |
|
Management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements. |
|
(A) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 1 to DynCorp International LLCs Registration Statement on
Form S-4/A (Reg. No. 333-127343) filed with the SEC on September 27, 2005. |
|
(B) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 2 to Form S-1 (Reg. No. 333-128637) filed with the SEC on
November 30, 2005. |
|
(C) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 10-K filed with the SEC on June 29, 2006. |
|
(D) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 3 to Form S-1 (Reg. No. 333-128637) filed with the SEC on
March 27, 2006. |
|
(E) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 19, 2006. |
|
(F) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 15, 2006. |
|
(G) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 27, 2007. |
|
(H) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to DynCorp International LLCs Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 11, 2006. |
|
(I) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to DynCorp International LLCs Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 17, 2006. |
|
(J) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on September 18, 2006. |
|
(K) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to DynCorp International LLCs Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 4, 2006. |
|
(L) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 10-K filed with the SEC on June 20, 2007. |
|
(M) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 13, 2008. |
|
(N) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to DynCorp International LLCs Form 10-K filed with the SEC on June 10, 2008. |
|
(O) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on August 12, 2008. |
|
(P) |
| Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 12, 2008. |
|
(Q) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on February 10, 2009. |
|
(R) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 10-K filed with the SEC on June 10, 2008. |
|
(S) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 1, 2008. |
|
(T) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 17, 2008 |
|
(U) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2009. |
90