Form 10-K
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 December 31, 2009
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number 1-3876
HOLLY CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
75-1056913
(I.R.S Employer
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
100 Crescent Court, Suite 1600, Dallas, Texas
(Address of principle executive offices)
|
|
75201-6915
(Zip Code) |
Registrants telephone number, including area code (214) 871-3555
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Common Stock, $0.01 par value registered on the New York Stock Exchange.
Securities registered pursuant to 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 Securities Act. Yes þ No o
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 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 definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
On June 30, 2009 the aggregate market value of the Common Stock, par value $.01 per share, held by
non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $746 million. (This is not to be deemed an
admission that any person whose shares were not included in the computation of the amount set forth
in the preceding sentence necessarily is an affiliate of the registrant.)
53,103,336 shares of Common Stock, par value $.01 per share, were outstanding on February 8, 2010.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrants proxy statement for its annual meeting of stockholders to be held
on May 5, 2010, which proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
within 120 days after December 31, 2009, are incorporated by reference in Part III.
PART I
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of
the federal securities laws. All statements, other than statements of historical fact included in
this Form 10-K, including, but not limited to, those under Business and Properties in Items 1 and
2, Risk Factors in Item 1A, Legal Proceedings in Item 3 and Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7, are forward-looking
statements. These statements are based on managements beliefs and assumptions using currently
available information and expectations as of the date hereof, are not guarantees of future
performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties. Although we believe that the expectations
reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that our
expectations will prove to be correct. Therefore, actual outcomes and results could materially
differ from what is expressed, implied or forecast in these statements. Any differences could be
caused by a number of factors including, but not limited to:
|
|
|
risks and uncertainties with respect to the actions of actual or potential competitive
suppliers of refined petroleum products in our markets; |
|
|
|
the demand for and supply of crude oil and refined products; |
|
|
|
the spread between market prices for refined products and market prices for crude oil; |
|
|
|
the possibility of constraints on the transportation of refined products; |
|
|
|
the possibility of inefficiencies, curtailments or shutdowns in refinery operations or
pipelines; |
|
|
|
effects of governmental and environmental regulations and policies; |
|
|
|
the availability and cost of our financing; |
|
|
|
the effectiveness of our capital investments and marketing strategies; |
|
|
|
our efficiency in carrying out construction projects; |
|
|
|
our ability to acquire refined product operations or pipeline and terminal operations on
acceptable terms and to integrate any existing or future acquired operations; |
|
|
|
the possibility of terrorist attacks and the consequences of any such attacks; |
|
|
|
general economic conditions; and |
|
|
|
other financial, operational and legal risks and uncertainties detailed from time to
time in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings. |
Cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ
materially from our expectations are set forth in this Form 10-K, including without limitation the
forward-looking statements that are referred to above. When considering forward-looking
statements, you should keep in mind the risk factors and other cautionary statements set forth in
this Form 10-K under Risk Factors in Item 1A and in conjunction with the discussion in this Form
10-K in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
under the heading Liquidity and Capital Resources. All forward-looking statements included in
this Form 10-K and all subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to us or
persons acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary
statements. The forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made and, other than as
required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking
statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
-3-
DEFINITIONS
Within this report, the following terms have these specific meanings:
Alkylation means the reaction of propylene or butylene (olefins) with isobutane to form an
iso-paraffinic gasoline (inverse of cracking).
Aromatic oil is long chain oil that is highly aromatic in nature that is used to manufacture
tires and in the production of asphalt.
BPD means the number of barrels per calendar day of crude oil or petroleum products.
BPSD means the number of barrels per stream day (barrels of capacity in a 24 hour period) of
crude oil or petroleum products.
Black wax crude oil is a low sulfur, low gravity crude oil produced in the Uintah Basin in
Eastern Utah that has certain characteristics that require specific facilities to transport, store
and refine into transportation fuels.
Catalytic reforming means a refinery process which uses a precious metal (such as platinum)
based catalyst to convert low octane naphtha to high octane gasoline blendstock and hydrogen. The
hydrogen produced from the reforming process is used to desulfurize other refinery oils and is the
primary source of hydrogen for the refinery.
Cracking means the process of breaking down larger, heavier and more complex hydrocarbon
molecules into simpler and lighter molecules.
Crude distillation means the process of distilling vapor from liquid crudes, usually by
heating, and condensing slightly above atmospheric pressure the vapor back to liquid in order to
purify, fractionate or form the desired products.
Delayed coker unit is a refinery unit that removes carbon from the bottom cuts of crude oil
to produce unfinished light transportation fuels and petroleum coke.
Ethanol means a high octane gasoline blend stock that is used to make various grades of
gasoline.
FCC, or fluid catalytic cracking, means a refinery process that breaks down large complex
hydrocarbon molecules into smaller more useful ones using a circulating bed of catalyst at
relatively high temperatures.
Hydrocracker means a refinery unit that breaks down large complex hydrocarbon molecules into
smaller more useful ones using a fixed bed of catalyst at high pressure and temperature with
hydrogen.
Hydrodesulfurization means to remove sulfur and nitrogen compounds from oil or gas in the
presence of hydrogen and a catalyst at relatively high temperatures.
Hydrogen plant means a refinery unit that converts natural gas and steam to high purity
hydrogen, which is then used in the hydrodesulfurization, hydrocracking and isomerization
processes.
HF alkylation, or hydrofluoric alkylation, means a refinery process which combines isobutane
and C3/C4 olefins using HF acid as a catalyst to make high octane gasoline blend stock.
Isomerization means a refinery process for rearranging the structure of C5/C6 molecules
without changing their size or chemical composition and is used to improve the octane of C5/C6
gasoline blendstocks.
LPG means liquid petroleum gases.
-4-
LSG, or low sulfur gasoline, means gasoline that contains less than 30 PPM of total sulfur.
Lube extraction unit is a unit used in the lube process that separates aromatic oils from
paraffinic oils using furfural as a solvent.
Lubricant or lube means a solvent neutral paraffinic product used in passenger and
commercial vehicle engine oils, specialty products for metal working or heat transfer applications
and other industrial applications.
MEK means a lube process that separates waxy oil from non-waxy oils using methyl ethyl
ketone as a solvent.
MMSCFD means one million standard cubic feet per day.
MTBE means methyl tertiary butyl ether, a high octane gasoline blend stock that is used to
make various grades of gasoline.
Natural gasoline means a low octane gasoline blend stock that is purchased and used to blend
with other high octane stocks produced to make various grades of gasoline.
PPM means parts-per-million.
Parafinnic oil is a high paraffinic, high gravity oil produced by extracting aromatic oil
and waxes from gas oil and is used in producing high-grade lubricating oils.
Refinery gross margin means the difference between average net sales price and average costs
of products per barrel of produced refined products. This does not include the associated
depreciation and amortization costs.
Reforming means the process of converting gasoline type molecules into aromatic, higher
octane gasoline blend stocks while producing hydrogen in the process.
Roofing flux is produced from the bottom cut of crude oil and is the base oil used to make
roofing shingles for the housing industry.
ROSE, or Solvent deasphalter / residuum oil supercritical extraction, means a refinery
unit that uses a light hydrocarbon like propane or butane to extract non-asphaltene heavy oils from
asphalt or atmospheric reduced crude. These deasphalted oils are then further converted to
gasoline and diesel in the FCC process. The remaining asphaltenes are either sold, blended to fuel
oil or blended with other asphalt as a hardener.
Scanfiner is a refinery unit that removes sulfur from gasoline to produce low sulfur
gasoline blendstock.
Sour crude oil means crude oil containing quantities of sulfur greater than 0.4 percent by
weight, while sweet crude oil means crude oil containing quantities of sulfur equal to or less
than 0.4 percent by weight.
ULSD, or ultra low sulfur diesel, means diesel fuel that contains less than 15 PPM of total
sulfur.
Vacuum distillation means the process of distilling vapor from liquid crudes, usually by
heating, and condensing below atmospheric pressure the vapor back to liquid in order to purify,
fractionate or form the desired products.
-5-
INDEX TO DEFINED TERMS AND NAMES
The following other terms and names that appear in this form 10-K are defined on the following
pages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
Reference |
|
|
|
2005 ACT |
|
|
58 |
|
ACESA |
|
|
31 |
|
Agreement |
|
|
42 |
|
Alon PTA |
|
|
23 |
|
Amended NOV |
|
|
41 |
|
Beeson Pipeline |
|
|
22 |
|
CAA |
|
|
25 |
|
CERCLA |
|
|
26 |
|
CWA |
|
|
26 |
|
Centurion Pipeline |
|
|
22 |
|
Court of Appeals |
|
|
40 |
|
Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets |
|
|
8 |
|
EBITDA |
|
|
47 |
|
EPA |
|
|
14 |
|
Exchange Act |
|
|
115 |
|
FERC |
|
|
23 |
|
Fixed Rate Swap |
|
|
63 |
|
GAAP |
|
|
8 |
|
Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries |
|
|
106 |
|
HEP |
|
|
8 |
|
HEP CPTA |
|
|
23 |
|
HEP ETA |
|
|
22 |
|
HEP IPA |
|
|
22 |
|
HEP PTA |
|
|
23 |
|
HEP PTTA |
|
|
22 |
|
HEP RPA |
|
|
22 |
|
HEP Credit Agreement |
|
|
53 |
|
HEP Pipeline Operating Agreement |
|
|
23 |
|
HEP Senior Notes |
|
|
54 |
|
Holly Asphalt |
|
|
9 |
|
Holly Credit Agreement |
|
|
53 |
|
HPI |
|
|
50 |
|
HRM-Tulsa |
|
|
42 |
|
LIBOR |
|
|
62 |
|
LIFO |
|
|
37 |
|
MDEQ |
|
|
41 |
|
MRC |
|
|
41 |
|
MSAT2 |
|
|
14 |
|
Magellan |
|
|
12 |
|
NEP |
|
|
41 |
|
NMED |
|
|
41 |
|
NPDES |
|
|
26 |
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
9 |
|
Non-Guarantor Non-Restricted Subsidiaries |
|
|
106 |
|
Non-Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries |
|
|
106 |
|
ODEQ |
|
|
42 |
|
OSHA |
|
|
41 |
|
Plains |
|
|
8 |
|
Plan |
|
|
103 |
|
PPI |
|
|
23 |
|
PSM |
|
|
42 |
|
RCRA |
|
|
26 |
|
Restricted Subsidiaries |
|
|
106 |
|
Rio Grande |
|
|
22 |
|
Roadrunner Pipeline |
|
|
22 |
|
SEC |
|
|
8 |
|
SDWA |
|
|
26 |
|
SFPP |
|
|
12 |
|
SLC Pipeline |
|
|
9 |
|
Sinclair |
|
|
8 |
|
Sinclair Tulsa |
|
|
42 |
|
Sunoco |
|
|
8 |
|
-6-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
Reference |
|
|
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
8 |
|
Tulsa Refinery east facility |
|
|
8 |
|
Tulsa Refinery west facility |
|
|
8 |
|
UNEV Pipeline |
|
|
9 |
|
UOSH |
|
|
41 |
|
Variable Rate Swap |
|
|
62 |
|
VIE |
|
|
8 |
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
9 |
|
WRB |
|
|
12 |
|
Terms used in the financial statements and footnotes are as defined therein.
-7-
Items 1 and 2. Business and Properties
COMPANY OVERVIEW
References herein to Holly Corporation include Holly Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries.
In accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC) Plain English guidelines,
this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been written in the first person. In this document, the words
we, our, ours and us refer only to Holly Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries or
to Holly Corporation or an individual subsidiary and not to any other person. For periods after
our reconsolidation of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (HEP) effective March 1, 2008, the words we,
our, ours and us generally include HEP and its subsidiaries as consolidated subsidiaries of
Holly Corporation with certain exceptions. This document contains certain disclosures of
agreements that are specific to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries and do not necessarily
represent obligations of Holly Corporation. When used in descriptions of agreements and
transactions, HEP refers to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries.
We are principally an independent petroleum refiner that produces high value light products such as
gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, specialty lubricant products, and specialty and modified asphalt.
We were incorporated in Delaware in 1947 and maintain our principal corporate offices at 100
Crescent Court, Suite 1600, Dallas, Texas 75201-6915. Our telephone number is 214-871-3555 and
our internet website address is www.hollycorp.com. The information contained on our website does
not constitute part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. A print copy of this Annual Report on Form
10-K will be provided without charge upon written request to the Vice President, Investor Relations
at the above address. A direct link to our filings at the SEC website is available on our website
on the Investors page. Also available on our website are copies of our Corporate Governance
Guidelines, Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter, Nominating / Corporate
Governance Committee Charter and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, all of which will be provided
without charge upon written request to the Vice President, Investor Relations at the above address.
Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics applies to all of our officers, employees and directors,
including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting
officer. Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading symbol HOC.
On June 1, 2009, we acquired an 85,000 BPSD refinery located in Tulsa, Oklahoma (the Tulsa
Refinery west facility) from an affiliate Sunoco, Inc. (Sunoco) for $157.8 million in cash,
including crude oil, refined product and other inventories valued at $92.8 million. The refinery
produces fuel products including gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel and serves markets in the
Mid-Continent region of the United States and also produces specialty lubricant products that are
marketed throughout North America and are distributed in Central and South America. On October 20,
2009, we sold to an affiliate of Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. (Plains) a portion of the
crude oil petroleum storage tanks and certain refining-related crude oil receiving pipeline
facilities, that were acquired as part of the refinery assets for $40 million.
On December 1, 2009, we acquired a 75,000 BPSD refinery from an affiliate of Sinclair Oil Company
(Sinclair) also located in Tulsa, Oklahoma (the Tulsa Refinery east facility) for $183.3
million, including crude oil, refined product and other inventories valued at $46.4 million. The
total purchase price consisted of $109.3 million in cash and 2,789,155 shares of our common stock
having a value of $74 million. Additionally, we will reimburse Sinclair approximately $8 million
upon their satisfactory completion of certain environmental projects at the refinery. The refinery
also produces gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel products and also serves markets in the
Mid-Continent region of the United States. We are in the process of integrating the operations of
both Tulsa Refinery facilities (collectively, the Tulsa Refinery). Upon completion, the Tulsa
Refinery will have an integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BPSD.
On February 29, 2008, we sold certain crude pipelines and tankage assets (the Crude Pipelines and
Tankage Assets) to HEP for $180 million. The assets consisted of crude oil trunk lines that
deliver crude oil to our refinery in southeast New Mexico, gathering and connection pipelines
located in west Texas and New Mexico, on-site crude tankage located within both of our refinery
complexes, a jet fuel products pipeline and leased terminal between Artesia and Roswell, New Mexico
and crude oil and product pipelines that support our refinery in Woods Cross, Utah. HEP is a
variable interest entity (VIE) as defined under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP). Under GAAP, HEPs purchase of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets qualified as a
reconsideration event whereby we reassessed our beneficial interest in HEP. Following this
transaction, we
-8-
determined that our beneficial interest in HEP exceeded 50%. Accordingly, we reconsolidated HEP
effective March 1, 2008. Therefore, intercompany transactions with HEP are eliminated in our
consolidated financial statements.
HEP had a number of acquisitions in 2009. Information on these acquisitions can be found under the
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. section provided later in this discussion of Items 1 and 2, Business
and Properties.
As of December 31, 2009, we:
|
|
|
owned and operated three refineries consisting of a petroleum refinery in Artesia, New
Mexico that is operated in conjunction with crude oil distillation and vacuum distillation
and other facilities situated 65 miles away in Lovington, New Mexico (collectively, the
Navajo Refinery), a refinery in Woods Cross, Utah (the Woods Cross Refinery) and the
Tulsa Refinery; |
|
|
|
owned and operated Holly Asphalt Company (formerly, NK Asphalt Partners) which
manufactures and markets asphalt products from various terminals in Arizona, New Mexico and
Texas; |
|
|
|
owned a 75% interest in a 12-inch refined products pipeline project from Salt Lake City,
Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada, together with terminal facilities in the Cedar City, Utah and
North Las Vegas areas (the UNEV Pipeline); and |
|
|
|
owned a 34% interest in HEP (which includes our 2% general partnership interest), which
owns and operates logistics assets including approximately 2,500 miles of petroleum product
and crude oil pipelines located principally in west Texas and New Mexico; ten refined
product terminals; a jet fuel terminal; four refinery loading rack facilities; a refined
products tank farm facility; on-site crude oil tankage at our Navajo, Woods Cross and Tulsa
Refineries, on-site refined product tankage at our Tulsa Refinery and a 25% interest in a
95-mile, crude oil pipeline joint venture (the SLC Pipeline). |
Navajo Refining Company, L.L.C., one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, owns the Navajo
Refinery. The Navajo Refinery has a crude capacity of 100,000 BPSD, can process up to 100% sour
crude oil and serves markets in the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. Our Woods
Cross Refinery, located just north of Salt Lake City, Utah has a crude capacity of 31,000 BPSD and
is operated by Holly Refining & Marketing Company Woods Cross, one of our wholly-owned
subsidiaries. The Woods Cross Refinery is a high conversion refinery that processes regional sweet
and Canadian sour crude oils and serves markets in Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Wyoming and
eastern Washington. Our Tulsa Refinery located in Tulsa, Oklahoma has a crude capacity of 125,000
BPSD and is owned and operated by Holly Refining & Marketing Company Tulsa LLC, one of our
wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Tulsa Refinery primarily processes sweet crude oils, however has
the capability to process sour crude oils when economics dictate, and serves the Mid-Continent
region of the United States.
Our operations are currently organized into two reportable segments, Refining and HEP.
The Refining segment includes the operations of our Navajo, Woods Cross and Tulsa Refineries and
Holly Asphalt Company (Holly Asphalt). Information regarding Holly Asphalt can be found under
our discussion of the Navajo Refinery provided under the Refinery Operations section provided
below. The HEP segment involves all of the operations of HEP effective March 1, 2008 (date of
reconsolidation).
REFINERY OPERATIONS
Our refinery operations include the operations of our three refineries. The following table
sets forth information, including performance measures about our refinery operations that are not
calculations based upon GAAP. The cost of products and refinery gross margin do not include the
effect of depreciation and amortization. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are
provided under Reconciliations to Amounts Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude charge (BPD) (1) |
|
|
142,430 |
|
|
|
100,680 |
|
|
|
103,490 |
|
Refinery production (BPD) (2) |
|
|
151,420 |
|
|
|
110,850 |
|
|
|
113,270 |
|
Sales of produced refined products (BPD) |
|
|
151,580 |
|
|
|
111,950 |
|
|
|
115,050 |
|
Sales of refined products (BPD) (3) |
|
|
155,820 |
|
|
|
120,750 |
|
|
|
126,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery utilization (4) |
|
|
78.9 |
% |
|
|
89.7 |
% |
|
|
94.1 |
% |
-9-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Average per produced barrel (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
74.06 |
|
|
$ |
108.83 |
|
|
$ |
89.77 |
|
Cost of products (6) |
|
|
66.85 |
|
|
|
97.87 |
|
|
|
73.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
|
7.21 |
|
|
|
10.96 |
|
|
|
16.74 |
|
Refinery operating expenses (7) |
|
|
5.24 |
|
|
|
5.14 |
|
|
|
4.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
1.97 |
|
|
$ |
5.82 |
|
|
$ |
12.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feedstocks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sour crude oil |
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
63 |
% |
|
|
62 |
% |
Sweet crude oil |
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
Black wax crude oil |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
Other feedstocks and blends |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Crude charge represents the barrels per day of crude oil processed at our refineries. |
|
(2) |
|
Refinery production represents the barrels per day of refined products yielded from
processing crude and other refinery feedstocks through the crude units and other conversion
units at our refineries. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes refined products purchased for resale. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents crude charge divided by total crude capacity (BPSD). Our consolidated crude
capacity was increased from 109,000 BPSD to 111,000 BPSD in mid-year 2007 (our 2007 Navajo
Refinery expansion) and by an additional 5,000 BPSD in the fourth quarter of 2008 (our 2008
Woods Cross Refinery expansion). During 2009, we increased our consolidated crude capacity
by 15,000 BPSD in the first quarter of 2009 (our 2009 Navajo Refinery expansion), by 85,000
BPSD in second quarter of 2009 (our June 2009 Tulsa Refinery west facility acquisition) and
by 40,000 BPSD in the fourth quarter of 2009 (our December 2009 Tulsa Refinery east
facility acquisition), increasing our consolidated crude capacity to 256,000 BPSD. |
|
(5) |
|
Represents average per barrel amount for produced refined products sold, which is a
non-GAAP measure. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K. |
|
(6) |
|
Transportation costs billed from HEP are included in cost of products. |
|
(7) |
|
Represents operating expenses of our refineries, exclusive of depreciation and
amortization. |
Set forth below is information regarding our principal products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of produced refined products: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasolines |
|
|
51 |
% |
|
|
58 |
% |
|
|
60 |
% |
Diesel fuels |
|
|
31 |
% |
|
|
32 |
% |
|
|
29 |
% |
Jet fuels |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Fuel oil |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
4 |
% |
Asphalt |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Lubricants |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
Gas oil / intermediates |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
LPG and other |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have several significant customers, none of which accounted for more than 10% of our
business in 2009. However, in conjunction with our refinery acquisition from Sinclair we have
entered into a refined products purchase agreement, or offtake agreement, with an affiliate of
Sinclair. Information on this offtake agreement can be found under our discussion of the Tulsa
Refinery provided later in this section of Refinery Operations. Our principal customers for
gasoline include other refiners, convenience store chains, independent marketers, and retailers.
Diesel fuel is sold to other refiners, truck stop chains, wholesalers and railroads. Jet fuel is
sold for military and commercial airline use. Specialty lubricant products are sold in both
commercial and specialty markets.
Asphalt is sold to governmental entities or contractors. LPGs are sold to LPG wholesalers and LPG
retailers and carbon black oil is sold for further processing or blended into fuel oil.
-10-
Navajo Refinery
Facilities
The Navajo Refinery has a crude oil capacity of 100,000 BPSD and has the ability to process sour
crude oils into high value light products such as gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel. The Navajo
Refinery converts approximately 92% of its raw materials throughput into high value light products.
For 2009, gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel (excluding volumes purchased for resale) represented
58%, 32% and 2%, respectively, of the Navajo Refinerys sales volumes.
The following table sets forth information about the Navajo Refinery operations, including non-GAAP
performance measures. The cost of products and refinery gross margin do not include the effect of
depreciation and amortization. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles following Item
7A of Part II of this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude charge (BPD) (1) |
|
|
78,160 |
|
|
|
79,020 |
|
|
|
79,460 |
|
Refinery production (BPD) (2) |
|
|
86,760 |
|
|
|
88,680 |
|
|
|
87,930 |
|
Sales of produced refined products (BPD) |
|
|
87,140 |
|
|
|
89,580 |
|
|
|
88,920 |
|
Sales of refined products (BPD) (3) |
|
|
90,870 |
|
|
|
97,320 |
|
|
|
100,460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery utilization (4) |
|
|
81.2 |
% |
|
|
93.0 |
% |
|
|
94.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average per produced barrel (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
73.15 |
|
|
$ |
108.52 |
|
|
$ |
89.68 |
|
Cost of products (6) |
|
|
65.95 |
|
|
|
98.97 |
|
|
|
74.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
|
7.20 |
|
|
|
9.55 |
|
|
|
15.58 |
|
Refinery operating expenses (7) |
|
|
4.81 |
|
|
|
4.58 |
|
|
|
4.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
4.97 |
|
|
$ |
11.28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feedstocks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sour crude oil |
|
|
85 |
% |
|
|
79 |
% |
|
|
82 |
% |
Sweet crude oil |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
Other feedstocks and blends |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Crude charge represents the barrels per day of crude oil processed at our refinery. |
|
(2) |
|
Refinery production represents the barrels per day of refined products yielded from
processing crude and other refinery feedstocks through the crude units and other conversion
units at our refinery. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes refined products purchased for resale. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents crude charge divided by total crude capacity (BPSD). The crude capacity was
increased from 83,000 BPSD to 85,000 BPSD in mid-year 2007 (our 2007 Navajo Refinery
expansion) and by an additional 15,000 BPSD in the first quarter of 2009 (our 2009 Navajo
Refinery expansion), increasing crude capacity to 100,000 BPSD. |
|
(5) |
|
Represents average per barrel amount for produced refined products sold, which is a
non-GAAP measure. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K. |
|
(6) |
|
Transportation costs billed from HEP are included in cost of products. |
|
(7) |
|
Represents operating expenses of our refinery, exclusive of depreciation and
amortization. |
The Navajo Refinerys Artesia, New Mexico facility is located on a 561-acre site and is a
fully integrated refinery with crude distillation, vacuum distillation, FCC, ROSE (solvent
deasphalter), HF alkylation, catalytic reforming, hydrodesulfurization, isomerization, sulfur
recovery and product blending units. Other supporting infrastructure includes approximately 2
million barrels of feedstock and product tankage at the site of which 0.2 million barrels of
tankage are owned by HEP, maintenance shops, warehouses and office buildings. The operating units
at the Artesia facility include newly constructed units, older units that have been relocated from other
facilities and upgraded and re-erected in Artesia, and units that have been operating as part of
the Artesia facility (with periodic major maintenance) for many years, in some very limited cases
since before 1970. The Artesia facility is operated in conjunction with a refining facility
located in Lovington, New Mexico, approximately 65 miles east of Artesia. The principal equipment
at the Lovington facility consists of a crude distillation unit and associated vacuum distillation
units that were constructed after 1970. The facility also has an additional 1.1 million barrels of
feedstock and product tankage of which 0.2 million barrels of tankage are owned by HEP. The
Lovington facility processes crude oil into intermediate products that are transported to Artesia
by means of three intermediate pipelines owned by HEP. These products are then upgraded into
finished products at the Artesia facility. The combined crude oil capacity of the Navajo Refinery
facilities is 100,000 BPSD and it typically processes or blends an additional 10,000 BPSD of
natural gasoline, butane, gas oil and naphtha. The Navajo Refinery completed a major maintenance
turnaround in February 2009.
-11-
We distribute refined products from the Navajo Refinery to markets in Arizona, New Mexico, west
Texas and northern Mexico primarily through two of HEPs pipelines that extend from Artesia, New
Mexico to El Paso, Texas and from El Paso to Albuquerque and to Mexico via products pipeline
systems owned by Plains and from El Paso to Tucson and Phoenix via a products pipeline system owned
by Kinder Morgans subsidiary, SFPP, L.P. (SFPP). In addition, we use pipelines owned and leased
by HEP to transport petroleum products to markets in central and northwest New Mexico. We have
refined product storage through our pipelines and terminals agreement with HEP at terminals in El
Paso, Texas; Tucson, Arizona; and Artesia, Moriarty and Bloomfield, New Mexico.
Holly Asphalt Company
We manufacture and market commodity and modified asphalt products in Arizona, New Mexico,
Texas and northern Mexico under Holly Asphalt. We have four manufacturing facilities located in
Glendale, Arizona, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Artesia, New Mexico and Lubbock, Texas. Our
Albuquerque, Artesia and Lubbock facilities manufacture modified hot asphalt products and commodity
emulsions from base asphalt materials provided by our Navajo Refinery and third-party suppliers.
Our Lubbock facility is leased under a lease agreement expiring in 2011. Our Glendale facility
manufactures modified hot asphalt products from base asphalt materials provided by our Navajo and
Woods Cross Refineries and third-party suppliers. Our products are shipped via third-party
trucking companies to commercial customers that provide asphalt based materials for commercial and
government projects.
Markets and Competition
The Navajo Refinery primarily serves the southwestern United States market, which has historically
experienced a high growth rate, including El Paso, Texas; Albuquerque, Moriarty and Bloomfield, New
Mexico; Phoenix and Tucson, Arizona; and the northern Mexico market. Our products are shipped
through HEPs pipelines from Artesia, New Mexico to El Paso, Texas and from El Paso to Albuquerque
and to Mexico via products pipeline systems owned by Plains and from El Paso to Tucson and Phoenix
via a products pipeline system owned by SFPP. In addition, the Navajo Refinery transports
petroleum products to markets in northwest New Mexico and to Moriarty, New Mexico, near
Albuquerque, via HEPs pipelines running from Artesia to San Juan County, New Mexico.
El Paso Market
The El Paso market for refined products is currently supplied by a number of area and gulf coast
refiners and pipelines. Area refiners include Navajo, WRB Refining, LLC (WRB) (a joint venture
between ConocoPhillips and EnCana Corp.), Valero, Alon, and Western Refining. Pipelines serving
this market are owned by Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. (Magellan), NuStar Energy L.P. and
HEP. Refined products from the Gulf Coast are transported via Magellan pipelines, including
Magellans Longhorn Pipeline acquired in 2009. We supply approximately 17% 20% of the refined
products consumed in the El Paso market.
Arizona Market
The Arizona market for refined products is currently supplied by a number of refiners via pipelines
and trucks. Refiners include companies located in west Texas, eastern New Mexico, northern New
Mexico, the Gulf Coast and the West Coast. We supply approximately 17% 20% of the refined
products consumed in the Arizona market, comprised primarily of Phoenix and Tucson, via the SFPP
Pipeline.
New Mexico Markets
The Artesia, Albuquerque, Moriarty and Bloomfield markets are supplied by a number of refiners via
pipelines and trucks. Refiners include Navajo, Valero, Western Refining, Alon and WRB. We supply
approximately 18% 20% of the refined products consumed in the New Mexico market.
-12-
The common carrier pipeline we use to serve the Albuquerque market out of El Paso currently
operates at near capacity. In addition, HEP leases from Mid-America Pipeline Company, L.L.C., a
pipeline between White Lakes, New Mexico and the Albuquerque vicinity and Bloomfield, New Mexico.
The lease agreement currently runs through 2017, and HEP has options to renew for two ten-year
periods. HEP owns and operates a 12-inch pipeline from the Navajo Refinery to the leased pipeline
as well as terminalling facilities in Bloomfield, New Mexico, which is located in the northwest
corner of New Mexico, and in Moriarty, which is 40 miles east of Albuquerque. These facilities
permit us to ship light products to the Albuquerque and Santa Fe, New Mexico areas, which have
historically experienced high growth rates. If needed, additional pump stations could further
increase the pipelines capabilities.
Magellans Longhorn Pipeline is a 72,000 BPD common carrier pipeline that has the ability to
deliver refined products utilizing a direct route from the Texas Gulf Coast to El Paso and, through
interconnections with third-party common carrier pipelines, into the Arizona market.
An additional factor that could affect some of our markets is the presence of pipeline capacity
from El Paso and the West Coast into our Arizona markets. Additional increases in shipments of
refined products from El Paso and the West Coast into our Arizona markets could result in
additional downward pressure on refined product prices in these markets.
Crude Oil and Feedstock Supplies
The Navajo Refinery is situated near the Permian Basin in an area that historically has had
abundant supplies of crude oil available both for regional users, such as us, and for export to
other areas. We purchase crude oil from producers in nearby southeastern New Mexico and west Texas
and from major oil companies. Additionally, crude oil is gathered through HEPs pipelines, our
tank trucks and through third-party crude oil pipeline systems. Crude oil acquired in locations
distant from the refinery is exchanged for crude oil that is transportable to the refinery.
Additionally, the Navajo Refinery has access to a wide variety of crude oils available at Cushing,
Oklahoma via HEPs Roadrunner Pipeline that connects to Centurion Pipeline L.P.s pipeline running
from west Texas to Cushing Oklahoma. Cushing Oklahoma is a significant crude oil pipeline
crossroad and storage hub that has access to regional crude production as well as many United
States onshore, Gulf of Mexico, Canadian and other foreign crudes.
We also purchase volumes of isobutane, natural gasoline and other feedstocks to supply the Navajo
Refinery from sources in southeastern New Mexico and the Mid-Continent area that are delivered to
our region on a common carrier pipeline owned by Enterprise Products, L.P. Ultimately all volumes
of these products are shipped to the Artesia refining facilities on HEPs intermediate pipelines
running from Lovington to Artesia. From time to time, we also purchase gas oil, naphtha and light
cycle oil from other oil companies for use as feedstock.
Principal Products and Customers
Set forth below is information regarding the principal products produced at our Navajo Refinery:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of produced refined products: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasolines |
|
|
58 |
% |
|
|
57 |
% |
|
|
59 |
% |
Diesel fuels |
|
|
32 |
% |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
30 |
% |
Jet fuels |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
Fuel oil |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
Asphalt |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
LPG and other |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Light products are shipped by product pipelines or are made available at various points by
exchanges with others. Light products are also made available to customers through truck loading
facilities at the refinery and at terminals.
-13-
Our principal customers for gasoline include other refiners, convenience store chains, independent
marketers, and retailers. Our gasoline produced at the Navajo Refinery is marketed in the
southwestern United States, including the metropolitan areas of El Paso, Phoenix, Albuquerque,
Bloomfield, and Tucson, and in portions of northern Mexico. The composition of gasoline differs,
because of local regulatory requirements, depending on the area in which gasoline is to be sold.
Diesel fuel is sold to other refiners, truck stop chains, wholesalers, and railroads. Jet fuel is
sold for military and commercial airline use. All asphalt produced and purchased from
third-parties is blended to fuel oil and is either sold locally, or is shipped by rail to the Gulf
Coast, shipped by rail directly to our customers or marketed through Holly Asphalt to governmental
entities, contractors or manufacturers. LPGs are sold to LPG wholesalers and LPG retailers and
carbon black oil is sold for further processing.
Capital Improvement Projects
Our total approved capital budget for the Navajo Refinery for 2010 is $16.7 million. Additionally,
capital costs of $11.5 million have been approved for refinery turnarounds and tank work. We
expect to spend approximately $58.5 million in capital costs in 2010, including capital projects
approved in prior years. The following summarizes our key capital projects.
Phase I of our Navajo Refinery major capital projects was mechanically completed in March 2009
increasing refinery capacity to 100,000 BPSD effective April 1, 2009. Phase I required the
installation of a new 15,000 BPSD mild hydrocracker, 28 MMSCFSD hydrogen plant and the expansion of
our Lovington crude and vacuum units at a cost of approximately $190 million.
We are nearing completion of phase II of the major capital projects at the Navajo Refinery. These
improvements will provide the capability to process up to 40,000 BPSD of heavy type crudes. Phase
II involves the installation of a new 18,000 BPSD solvent deasphalter and the revamp of our Artesia
crude and vacuum units. The solvent deasphalter unit was complete in the fourth quarter of 2009
and is in operation. The crude / vacuum unit revamp is expected to be to be completed in the first
quarter of 2010. We expect the phase II project to cost approximately $100 million.
We are also proceeding with a project to add asphalt tankage at the Navajo Refinery and at the
Holly Asphalt facility in Artesia, New Mexico to enhance asphalt economics by storing asphalt
during the winter months when asphalt prices are generally lower. These asphalt tank additions and
an approved upgrade of our rail loading facilities at the Artesia refinery are estimated to cost
$21 million and are expected to be completed about the same time as the phase II projects.
Once the Navajo projects discussed above are complete, the Navajo Refinery will be able to process
up to 40% of lower cost heavy crude oil. The projects will also increase the yield of diesel,
supply Holly Asphalt with all its performance grade asphalt requirements, increase refinery liquid
volume yield, increase the refinerys capacity to process outside feedstocks and enable the
refinery to meet new LSG specifications required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).
The Navajo Refinery currently plans to comply with new Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from
Mobile Sources (MSAT2) regulations issued by the EPA by the fractionation of raw naphtha with
existing equipment to achieve benzene in gasoline levels below 1.3%. The Navajo Refinery will
purchase credits from the Woods Cross and Tulsa Refineries in order reduce benzene down to the
required 0.62%. Due to our acquisition of the Tulsa Refinery facilities from Sunoco and Sinclair,
our Navajo Refinery has until the end of 2012 to comply with the MSAT2 regulation because we have
lost our small refiners exemption and as a large refiner we have 30 months to comply.
Additionally, our total approved capital budget for Holly Asphalt for 2010 is $1.2 million.
Woods Cross Refinery
Facilities
The Woods Cross Refinery has a crude oil capacity of 31,000 BPSD and is located in Woods Cross,
Utah. The Woods Cross Refinery processes regional sweet and black wax crude as well as Canadian
sour crude oils into high value light products. For 2009, gasoline and diesel fuel (excluding
volumes purchased for resale) represented 64% and 28%, respectively, of the Woods Cross Refinerys
sales volumes.
-14-
The following table sets forth information about the Woods Cross Refinery operations, including
non-GAAP performance measures about our refinery operations. The cost of products and refinery
gross margin do not include the effect of depreciation and amortization. Reconciliations to
amounts reported under GAAP are provided under Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude charge (BPD) (1) |
|
|
24,900 |
|
|
|
21,660 |
|
|
|
24,030 |
|
Refinery production (BPD) (2) |
|
|
25,750 |
|
|
|
22,170 |
|
|
|
25,340 |
|
Sales of produced refined products (BPD) |
|
|
26,870 |
|
|
|
22,370 |
|
|
|
26,130 |
|
Sales of refined products (BPD) (3) |
|
|
27,250 |
|
|
|
23,430 |
|
|
|
26,340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery utilization (4) |
|
|
80.3 |
% |
|
|
79.5 |
% |
|
|
92.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average per produced barrel (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
70.25 |
|
|
$ |
110.07 |
|
|
$ |
90.09 |
|
Cost of products(6) |
|
|
58.98 |
|
|
|
93.47 |
|
|
|
69.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
|
11.27 |
|
|
|
16.60 |
|
|
|
20.69 |
|
Refinery operating expenses (7) |
|
|
6.60 |
|
|
|
7.42 |
|
|
|
4.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
4.67 |
|
|
$ |
9.18 |
|
|
$ |
15.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feedstocks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sour crude oil |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Sweet crude oil |
|
|
62 |
% |
|
|
72 |
% |
|
|
75 |
% |
Black wax crude oil |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
Other feedstocks and blends |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Crude charge represents the barrels per day of crude oil processed at our refinery. |
|
(2) |
|
Refinery production represents the barrels per day of refined products yielded from
processing crude and other refinery feedstocks through the crude units and other conversion
units at our refinery. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes refined products purchased for resale. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents crude charge divided by total crude capacity (BPSD). The crude capacity was
increased by 5,000 BPSD in the fourth quarter of 2008 (our 2008 Woods Cross Refinery
expansion), increasing crude capacity to 31,000 BPSD. |
|
(5) |
|
Represents average per barrel amount for produced refined products sold, which is a
non-GAAP measure. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K. |
|
(6) |
|
Transportation costs billed from HEP are included in cost of products. |
|
(7) |
|
Represents operating expenses of the refinery, exclusive of depreciation and
amortization. |
The Woods Cross Refinery facility is located on a 200-acre site and is a fully integrated
refinery with crude distillation, solvent deasphalter, FCC, HF alkylation, catalytic reforming,
hydrodesulfurization, isomerization, sulfur recovery and product blending units. Other supporting
infrastructure includes approximately 1.5 million barrels of feedstock and product tankage of which
0.2 million barrels of tankage are owned by HEP, maintenance shops, warehouses and office
buildings. The operating units at the Woods Cross Refinery include newly constructed units, older
units that have been relocated from other facilities, upgraded and re-erected in Woods Cross, and
units that have been operating as part of the Woods Cross facility (with periodic major
maintenance) for many years, in some very limited cases since before 1950. The crude oil capacity
of the Woods Cross Refinery is 31,000 BPSD and the facility typically processes or blends an
additional 2,000 BPSD of natural gasoline, butane and gas oil. The Woods Cross Refinery completed
a major maintenance turnaround in September 2008.
We own and operate 4 miles of hydrogen pipeline that allows us to connect to a hydrogen plant
located at Chevrons Salt Lake City Refinery. Additionally, HEP owns and operates 12 miles of
crude oil and refined products pipelines that allows us to connect our Woods Cross Refinery to
common carrier pipeline systems.
-15-
Markets and Competition
The Woods Cross Refinery is one of five refineries located in Utah. We estimate that the four
refineries that compete with our Woods Cross Refinery have a combined capacity to process
approximately 150,000 BPD of crude oil. The five Utah refineries collectively supply an estimated
70% of the gasoline and distillate products consumed in the states of Utah and Idaho, with the
remainder imported from refineries in Wyoming and Montana via the Pioneer Pipeline owned jointly by
Sinclair and ConocoPhillips. The Woods Cross Refinerys primary markets include Utah, Idaho,
Nevada, Wyoming and eastern Washington. Approximately 50% 55% of the gasoline and diesel fuel
produced by our Woods Cross Refinery is sold through a network of Phillips 66 branded marketers
under a long-term supply agreement.
Utah Market
The Utah market for refined products is currently supplied primarily by a number of local refiners
and the Pioneer Pipeline. Local area refiners include Woods Cross, Chevron, Tesoro, Big West and
Silver Eagle. Other refiners that ship via the Pioneer Pipeline include Sinclair, ExxonMobil and
ConocoPhillips. We supply approximately 15% 20% of the refined products consumed in the Utah
market, to branded and unbranded customers.
Idaho, Wyoming, Eastern Washington and Nevada Markets
We supply approximately 2% of the refined products consumed in the combined Idaho, Wyoming, eastern
Washington and Nevada markets. Our Woods Cross Refinery ships refined products over Chevrons
common carrier pipeline system to numerous terminals, including HEPs terminals at Boise and
Burley, Idaho and Spokane, Washington and to terminals at Pocatello and Boise, Idaho and Pasco,
Washington that are owned by Northwest Terminalling Pipeline Company. We sell to branded and
unbranded customers in these markets. We also truck refined products to Las Vegas, Nevada.
The Idaho market for refined products is primarily supplied via Chevrons common carrier pipeline
system from refiners located in the Salt Lake City area and products supplied from the Pioneer
Pipeline system. Refiners that could potentially supply the Chevron and Pioneer Pipeline systems
include Woods Cross, Chevron, Tesoro, Big West, Silver Eagle, Sinclair, ConocoPhillips and
ExxonMobil.
We market refined products in the Wyoming market on a limited basis. Refiners that supply Wyoming
include Sinclair, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Frontier.
The eastern Washington market is supplied by two common carrier pipelines, Chevron and Yellowstone.
Product is also shipped into the area via rail from various points in the United States and
Canada. Refined products shipped on Chevrons pipeline system are supplied by refiners and other
pipelines located in the Salt Lake City area and from refiners located in the Pacific Northwest.
Pacific Northwest refiners include BP, Tesoro, Shell, ConocoPhillips and US Oil. Products supplied
from the sources located in the Pacific Northwest area are generally shipped over the Columbia
River via barge at Pasco, Washington.
The majority of the Las Vegas, Nevada market for refined products is supplied by various West Coast
refiners and suppliers via Kinder Morgans CalNev common carrier pipeline system.
Principal Products and Customers
Set forth below is information regarding the principal products produced at our Woods Cross
Refinery:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of produced refined products: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasolines |
|
|
64 |
% |
|
|
63 |
% |
|
|
63 |
% |
Diesel fuels |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
27 |
% |
Jet fuels |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Fuel oil |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
Asphalt |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
LPG and other |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-16-
Light products are shipped by product pipelines or are made available at various points by
exchanges with others. Light products are also made available to customers through truck loading
facilities at the refinery and at terminals.
Our principal customers for gasoline include other refiners, convenience store chains, independent
marketers and retailers. The composition of gasoline differs, due to local regulatory
requirements, depending on the area in which gasoline is to be sold. Diesel fuel is sold to other
refiners, truck stop chains and wholesalers. Limited quantities of jet fuel are sold for
commercial airline use. Asphalt produced is either blended to fuel oil or is sold locally, or
shipped by rail to the Gulf Coast, shipped by rail directly to our customers or marketed through
Holly Asphalt to governmental entities or contractors. LPGs are sold to LPG wholesalers and LPG
retailers.
Crude Oil and Feedstock Supplies
The Woods Cross Refinery currently obtains its supply of crude oil primarily from suppliers in
Canada, Wyoming, Utah and Colorado via common carrier pipelines that originate in Canada, Wyoming
and Colorado. In 2009, we also began receiving crude oil via the SLC Pipeline, a joint venture
common carrier pipeline in which HEP owns a 25% interest. Supplies of black wax crude oil are
shipped via truck.
Capital Improvement Projects
Our total approved capital budget for the Woods Cross Refinery for 2010 is $36.4 million.
Additionally, capital costs of $3.3 million have been approved for refinery turnarounds and tank
work. We expect to spend approximately $12.6 million in capital costs in 2010, including capital
projects approved in prior years. The following summarizes our key capital projects.
At the Woods Cross Refinery, we increased the refinerys capacity from 26,000 BPSD to 31,000 BPSD
while increasing its ability to process lower cost crude. The project involved installing a new
15,000 BPSD mild hydrocracker, sulfur recovery facilities, black wax desalting equipment and black
wax unloading systems. The total cost of this project was approximately $122 million. The projects
were mechanically complete in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Our Woods Cross Refinery is required to install a wet gas scrubber on its FCC unit by the end of
2012. We estimate the total cost to be $12 million. The MSAT2 solution for Woods Cross involves
installing a new reformate splitter and a benzene saturation unit at an estimated cost of $18
million. Like our Navajo Refinery, our Woods Cross Refinery has until the end of 2012 to comply
with the MSAT2 regulations.
Tulsa Refinery
Facilities
On June 1, 2009, we acquired the Tulsa Refinery west facility, an 85,000 BPSD refinery in Tulsa,
Oklahoma from Sunoco. On December 1, 2009, we acquired the Tulsa Refinery east facility, a 75,000
BSPD refinery that is also located in Tulsa, Oklahoma from Sinclair. We are in the process of
integrating the operations of both Tulsa Refinery facilities. Upon completion, the Tulsa Refinery
will have an integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BPSD.
The Tulsa Refinery primarily processes sweet crude oils into high value light products such as
gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel and lubricants, however has the capability to process sour crude
oils when economics dictate. For 2009, gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel and lubricants (excluding
volumes purchased for resale) represented 26%, 29%, 10% and 16%, respectively, of the Tulsa
Refinerys sales volumes.
-17-
The following table sets forth information about the Tulsa Refinery operations, including non-GAAP
performance measures about our refinery operations. The cost of products and refinery gross margin
do not include the effect of depreciation and amortization. Reconciliations to amounts reported
under GAAP are provided under Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009(8) |
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
Crude charge (BPD) (1) |
|
|
39,370 |
|
Refinery production (BPD) (2) |
|
|
38,910 |
|
Sales of produced refined products (BPD) |
|
|
37,570 |
|
Sales of refined products (BPD) (3) |
|
|
37,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery utilization (4) |
|
|
74.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
Average per produced barrel (5) |
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
78.89 |
|
Cost of products (6) |
|
|
74.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
|
4.33 |
|
Refinery operating expenses (7) |
|
|
5.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
(0.92 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feedstocks: |
|
|
|
|
Sweet crude oil |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Crude charge represents the barrels per day of crude oil processed at our refinery. |
|
(2) |
|
Refinery production represents the barrels per day of refined products yielded from
processing crude and other refinery feedstocks through the crude units and other conversion
units at our refinery. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes refined products purchased for resale. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents crude charge divided by total crude capacity (BPSD). The crude capacity of
85,000 BPSD (our June 2009 Tulsa Refinery west facility acquisition) was increased by
40,000 BPSD in the fourth quarter of 2009 (our December 2009 Tulsa Refinery east facility
acquisition), increasing crude capacity to 125,000 BPSD. |
|
(5) |
|
Represents average per barrel amount for produced refined products sold, which is a
non-GAAP measure. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K. |
|
(6) |
|
Transportation costs billed from HEP are included in cost of products. |
|
(7) |
|
Represents operating expenses of the refinery, exclusive of depreciation and
amortization. |
|
(8) |
|
The amounts reported for the Tulsa Refinery for the year ended December 31, 2009
include crude oil processed and products yielded from the refinery for the period from June
1, 2009 through December 31, 2009 only, and averaged over the 365 days for the year ended.
Operating data for the period from June 1, 2009 (date of Tulsa Refinery west facility
acquisition) through December 31, 2009 and for the period from December 1, 2009 (date of
Tulsa Refinery east facility acquisition) through December 31, 2009 is as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period From |
|
|
Period From |
|
|
|
June 1, 2009 |
|
|
December 1, 2009 |
|
|
|
Through |
|
|
Through |
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude charge (BPD) |
|
|
67,160 |
|
|
|
93,810 |
|
Refinery production (BPD) |
|
|
66,360 |
|
|
|
99,810 |
|
Sales of produced refined products (BPD) |
|
|
64,080 |
|
|
|
96,170 |
|
Sales of refined products (BPD) |
|
|
64,300 |
|
|
|
96,170 |
|
The Tulsa Refinery west facility is located on a 750-acre site in Tulsa, Oklahoma situated
along the Arkansas River. The principal process units at the Tulsa Refinery west facility consist
of crude distillation (with light ends recovery), naphtha hydrodesulfurization, catalytic
reforming, propane de-asphalting, lube extraction unit, MEK dewaxing, delayed coker and butane
splitter units. Most of the operating units at the facility currently in service were built in the
late 1950s and early 1960s. The refinery was reconfigured to emphasize specialty lubricant
production in the early 1990s. The refinery completed a major maintenance turnaround in July 2007.
The refinerys supporting infrastructure includes approximately 3.2 million barrels of feedstock
and product tankage, of which 0.4 million barrels of tankage is owned by Plains, and an additional
1.2 million barrels of tank capacity that are currently out of service and could be made available
for future use.
-18-
The Tulsa Refinery east facility is located on a 466-acre site also in Tulsa, Oklahoma situated
along the Arkansas River. The principal process units at the Tulsa Refinery east facility consist
of crude distillation, naphtha hydrodesulfurization, FCC, isomerization, catalytic reforming,
alkylation, scanfiner, diesel hydrodesulfurization and sulfur units. Additions and improvements to
the facility since late 2004 include a scanfining unit to meet 2006 gasoline sulfur content
requirements, a new naphtha hydro desulphurizer unit in 2005, a new sulfur plant, modifications to
the distillate hydro desulphurizer unit, a new tail gas unit installed on the new sulfur plant and
the conversion of the reformer from a 17,000 BPD semi-regenerative reformer to a 22,000 BPD
continuous catalyst regeneration reformer (thereby increasing its capacity, octane capability and
yield of gasoline). The refinery completed a partial maintenance turnaround in 2007, including the
crude and FCC units. The refinerys supporting infrastructure includes approximately 3.75 million
barrels of tankage capacity on the refinerys premises, approximately 1.4 million barrels of which
is owned by HEP.
We are integrating the Tulsa Refinery west and east facilities that will result in a single, highly
complex refinery having an integrated crude processing rate of approximately 125,000 BPSD,
primarily by sending intermediate streams from one facility to the other for further processing.
Pursuant to this plan, high sulfur diesel and various gas oil streams will be sent from the Tulsa
Refinery west facility to be processed in the diesel hydrotreater and FCC units, respectively, at
the Tulsa Refinery east facility. Various heavy oil streams will be sent from the Tulsa Refinery
east facility to be processed in our coker unit at our Tulsa Refinery west facility. Various other
streams such as naphtha, hydrogen and fuel gas will be shared between the two refinery facilities.
The Tulsa Refinery produces fuel products including gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, #1 fuel oil,
asphalt, heavy fuels and LPGs and serves markets in the Mid-Continent region of the United States
and also produces specialty lubricant products that are marketed throughout North America and are
distributed in Central and South America.
Markets and Competition
The Tulsa Refinery primarily serves the Mid-Continent region of the United States. Distillates and
gasolines are primarily delivered from the Tulsa Refinery to market via two pipelines owned and
operated by Magellan. These pipelines connect the refinery to distribution channels throughout
Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska and Arkansas. Additionally, the
Tulsa Refinery has a proprietary diesel transfer line to the local Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railroad depot, and the refinerys truck and rail rack capability facilitates access to local
refined product markets.
In conjunction with our acquisition of the Tulsa Refinery east facility, we entered a five-year
offtake agreement with an affiliate of Sinclair whereby Sinclair has agreed to purchase 45,000 to
50,000 BPD of gasoline and distillate products at market prices from us to supply its branded and
unbranded marketing network throughout the Midwest. The offtake agreement can be renewed by
Sinclair for an additional five-year term.
Our Tulsa Refinery also produces specialty lubricant products including agricultural oils,
base oils, process oils and waxes that are sold throughout the United States and to customers with
operations in Central America and South America. Our refinerys production represents 6% of
paraffinic oil capacity and 12% of wax production capacity in the United States market and is one
of four refineries of specialty aromatic oils in North America.
The refinerys asphalt and roofing flux products are sold via truck or railcar directly from the
refinery or from a leased terminal in Phillipsburg, Kansas to customers throughout the
Mid-Continent region.
Principal Products and Customers
Set forth below is information regarding the principal products produced at our Tulsa Refinery:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
Sales of produced refined products: |
|
|
|
|
Gasolines |
|
|
26 |
% |
Diesel fuels |
|
|
29 |
% |
Jet fuels |
|
|
10 |
% |
Lubricants |
|
|
16 |
% |
Gas oil / intermediates |
|
|
17 |
% |
LPG and other |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
-19-
Light products are shipped by product pipelines and are also made available to customers
through truck and rail loading facilities. The Tulsa Refinerys principal customers for
conventional gasoline include Sinclair, other refiners, convenience store chains, independent
marketers and retailers. The composition of gasoline differs, because of regulatory requirements,
depending on the area in which gasoline is to be sold. Sinclair and railroads are the primary
diesel customers. Jet fuel is sold primarily for commercial use. LPGs are sold to LPG wholesalers
and retailers.
The specialty lubricant products produced at the Tulsa Refinery are high value products that
provide a disproportionately high margin contribution to the refinery. Specialty lubricant products
are sold in both commercial and specialty markets. Base oil customers include blender-compounders
who prepare the various finished lubricant and grease products sold to end users. Agricultural
oils, primarily formulated as supplemental carriers for herbicides, are sold to product
formulators. Process oil customers include rubber and chemical industry customers. Specialty waxes
are sold primarily to packaging customers as coating material for paper and cardboard, and to
non-packaging customers in the adhesive or candle-making businesses.
Asphalt and roofing flux are sold primarily to paving contractors and manufacturers of roofing
products.
Crude Oil and Feedstock Supplies
The Tulsa Refinery is located approximately 50 miles from Cushing, Oklahoma, a significant crude
oil pipeline crossroad and storage hub. Local pipelines provide access to regional crude production
as well as many United States onshore, Gulf of Mexico, Canadian and other foreign crudes. The
proximity of the refinery to this pipeline and storage hub provides the refinery with the
flexibility to optimize its crude slate and maintain lower crude inventories than a typical
refinery.
The refinery also purchases other feedstocks on an opportunistic basis. From time to time, the
refinery purchases naphtha, gasoline components, transmix, light cycle oil, lube blend stocks or
residuals from other refineries. These feedstocks are delivered by truck, rail car or pipeline,
depending on product and logistical requirements.
Capital Improvement Projects
Our total approved capital budget for the Tulsa Refinery for 2010 is $101.6 million. Additionally,
capital costs of $24 million have been approved for refinery turnarounds and tank work. We expect
to spend approximately $63.2 million in capital costs in 2010, including capital projects approved
in prior years. The following summarizes our key capital projects.
We are proceeding with the integration project of our Tulsa Refinery west and east facilities.
Upon completion, the Tulsa Refinery will have an integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BPSD.
The integration project involves the installation of interconnect pipelines that will permit us to
transfer various intermediate streams between the two facilities. We have also signed a 10-year
agreement with a third party for the use of an additional line for the transfer of gasoline blend
stocks which is currently in service. These interconnect lines will allow us to eliminate the sale
of gas oil at a discount to WTI under our 5-year gas oil off take agreement with a third party,
optimize gasoline blending, increase our utilization of better process technology, and reduce
operating costs. Also, as part of the integration, we are planning to expand the diesel
hydrotreater unit at the east facility to permit the processing of all high sulfur diesel produced
to ULSD, eliminating the need to construct a new diesel hydrotreater at our west facility as
previously planned. This expansion is expected to cost approximately $20 million and will use the
reactor that we acquired as part of the Tulsa Refinery west facility acquisition. We are currently
planning to complete the integration projects by the end of the 2010.
The combined Tulsa Refinery facilities also will be required to comply with MSAT2 regulations in
order to meet new benzene reduction requirements for gasoline. We have elected to largely use
existing equipment at the Tulsa Refinery east facility to split reformate from reformers at both
west and east facilities and install a new benzene saturation unit to achieve the required benzene
reduction at an estimated cost of approximately $15 million. Our Tulsa Refinery is required to meet
MSAT2 1.3% benzene levels in gasoline beginning in July 2012 and we expect complete this project
well before then. We will be required to buy credits until this project is complete, as required by
law, beginning in 2011.
-20-
Our consent decree with the EPA requires recovery of sulfur from the refinery fuel gas system at
the Tulsa Refinery west facility by the end of 2013. We estimate our investment to comply with the
requirements will be approximately $20 million. The consent decree also requires shutdown,
replacement, or installation of low NOx burners in three low pressure boilers by the end of 2013.
We are still evaluating the best solution to this issue.
We believe that the synergy of the Tulsa Refinery west and east facilities operated as a single
integrated facility will result in savings of approximately $110 million of expected capital
expenditures related to ULSD compliance. Also as a result of the integrated facility, we expect to
be able to reduce capital expenditures for the forthcoming benzene in gasoline requirements from
approximately $30 million for the Tulsa Refinery west facility alone to approximately $15 million
for the integrated complex. Even if we are able to realize the operating synergies of the
integrated facility, our Tulsa Refinery will still require sulfur recovery investment, but we
estimate combining the two refineries will reduce our net near-term capital expenditure
requirements by approximately $125 million, excluding the cost to construct the pipelines that will
integrate the west and east facilities.
UNEV Pipeline
Under a definitive agreement with Sinclair, we are jointly building the UNEV Pipeline, a 12-inch
refined products pipeline from Salt Lake City, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada, together with terminal
facilities in the Cedar City, Utah and North Las Vegas areas. Under the agreement, we own a 75%
interest in the joint venture pipeline with Sinclair, our joint venture partner, owning the
remaining 25% interest. The initial capacity of the pipeline will be 62,000 BPD, with the capacity
for further expansion to 120,000 BPD. The total cost of the pipeline is expected to be $275
million, with our share of the cost totaling $206 million. We expect to spend approximately $80
million in capital costs in 2010, with our share of the cost totaling $60 million.
In connection with this project, we have entered into a 10-year commitment to ship an annual
average of 15,000 BPD of refined products on the UNEV Pipeline at an agreed tariff. Our commitment
for each year is subject to reduction by up to 5,000 BPD in specified circumstances relating to
shipments by other shippers. We have an option agreement with HEP granting them an option to purchase all of our equity interests in this
joint venture pipeline effective for a 180-day period commencing when the UNEV Pipeline becomes
operational, at a purchase price equal to our investment in this joint venture pipeline plus
interest at 7% per annum.
We currently anticipate that all regulatory approvals required to commence the construction of the
UNEV Pipeline will be received by the end of the second quarter of 2010. Once such approvals are
received, construction of the pipeline will take approximately nine months. Under this schedule,
the pipeline would become operational during the first quarter of 2011.
HOLLY ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.
In July 2004, we completed the initial public offering of limited partnership interests in HEP, a
Delaware limited partnership that also trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading
symbol HEP. HEP was formed to acquire, own and operate substantially all of the refined product
pipeline and terminalling assets that support our refining and marketing operations in west Texas,
New Mexico, Utah, Idaho, Arizona and Oklahoma.
HEP owns and operates a system of petroleum product and crude oil pipelines in Texas, New Mexico,
Oklahoma and Utah and distribution terminals and refinery tankage in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona,
Utah, Oklahoma, Idaho and Washington. HEP generates revenues by charging tariffs for transporting
petroleum products and crude oil through its pipelines, by leasing certain pipeline capacity to
Alon, by charging fees for terminalling refined products and other hydrocarbons and storing and
providing other services at its storage tanks and terminals. HEP does not take ownership of
products that it transports or terminals; therefore, it is not directly exposed to changes in
commodity prices.
-21-
2009 Acquisitions
Sinclair Logistics and Storage Assets Transaction
On December 1, 2009, HEP acquired certain logistics and storage assets from an affiliate of
Sinclair for $79.2 million consisting of storage tanks having approximately 1.4 million barrels of
storage capacity and loading racks at Sinclairs refinery located in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The purchase
price consisted of $25.7 million in cash, including $4.2 million in taxes and 1,373,609 of HEPs
common units having a fair value of $53.5 million. Concurrent with this transaction we entered
into a 15-year pipeline, tankage and loading rack throughput agreement with HEP (the HEP PTTA),
whereby we agreed to transport, throughput and load volumes of product via HEPs Tulsa logistics
and storage assets that will initially result in minimum annual payments to HEP of $13.8 million.
Roadrunner / Beeson Pipelines Transaction
Also on December 1, 2009, HEP acquired our two newly constructed pipelines for $46.5 million,
consisting of a 65-mile, 16-inch crude oil pipeline (the Roadrunner Pipeline) that connects our
Navajo Refinery facility located in Lovington, New Mexico to a terminus of Centurion Pipeline
L.P.s pipeline extending between west Texas and Cushing, Oklahoma (the Centurion Pipeline) and a
37-mile, 8-inch crude oil pipeline that connects HEPs New Mexico crude oil gathering system to our
Navajo Refinery Lovington facility (the Beeson Pipeline).
The Roadrunner Pipeline provides our Navajo Refinery with direct access to a wide variety of crude
oils available at Cushing, Oklahoma. In connection with this transaction, we entered into a
15-year pipeline agreement with HEP, (the HEP RPA), whereby we agreed to transport volumes of
crude oil on HEPs Roadrunner Pipeline that will initially result in minimum annual payments to HEP
of $9.2 million.
The Beeson Pipeline operates as a component of HEPs crude pipeline system and provides us with
added flexibility to move crude oil from HEPs crude oil gathering system to our Navajo Refinery
Lovington facility for processing.
Tulsa Loading Racks Transaction
On August 1, 2009, HEP acquired from us, certain truck and rail loading/unloading facilities
located at our Tulsa Refinery west facility for $17.5 million. The racks load refined products and
lube oils produced at the Tulsa Refinery onto rail cars and/or tanker trucks.
In connection with this transaction, we entered into a 15-year equipment and throughput agreement
with HEP, (the HEP ETA), whereby we agreed to throughput a minimum volume of products via HEPs
Tulsa loading racks that will initially result in minimum annual payments to HEP of $2.7 million.
Lovington-Artesia Pipeline Transaction
On June 1, 2009, HEP acquired our newly constructed, 16-inch intermediate pipeline for $34.2
million. The pipeline runs 65 miles from our Navajo Refinerys crude oil distillation and vacuum
facilities in Lovington, New Mexico to our petroleum refinery located in Artesia, New Mexico. This
pipeline was placed in service effective June 1, 2009 and operates as a component of HEPs
intermediate pipeline system that services our Navajo Refinery.
In connection with this transaction, we agreed to amend our intermediate pipeline agreement with
HEP (the HEP IPA). As a result, the term of the HEP IPA was extended by an additional four years
and now expires in June 2024. Additionally, our minimum commitment under the HEP IPA was increased
and currently results in minimum annual payments to HEP of $20.7 million.
SLC Pipeline Joint Venture Interest
On March 1, 2009, HEP acquired a 25% joint venture interest in the SLC Pipeline, a new 95-mile
intrastate pipeline system jointly owned with Plains. The SLC Pipeline commenced operations
effective March 2009 and allows various refineries in the Salt Lake City area, including our Woods
Cross Refinery, to ship crude oil into the Salt Lake City area from the Utah terminus of the
Frontier Pipeline as well as crude oil flowing from Wyoming and Utah via Plains Rocky Mountain
Pipeline. HEPs capitalized joint venture contribution was $25.5 million.
Rio Grande Pipeline Sale
On December 1, 2009, HEP sold its 70% interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company (Rio Grande) to a
subsidiary of Enterprise Products Partners LP for $35 million. Accordingly, the results of
operations of Rio Grande and gain of $14.5 million on the sale are presented in discontinued
operations.
-22-
Transportation Agreements
Agreements with HEP
HEP serves our refineries in New Mexico, Utah and Oklahoma under several long-term pipeline and
terminal, tankage and throughput agreements.
In connection with our 2009 asset transfers to HEP, as described above, we entered into three new
15-year transportation agreements with HEP, each expiring in 2024.
In addition, we have a transportation agreement with HEP that relates to the pipelines and
terminals that we contributed to HEP at the time of its initial public offering in 2004 that
expires in 2019 (the HEP PTA), the HEP IPA that relates to the intermediate pipelines sold to HEP
in 2005 and in June 2009 that expires in 2024 and a transportation agreement that relates to the
Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets sold to HEP in 2008 that expires in 2023 (the HEP CPTA).
Under these agreements, we pay HEP fees to transport, store and throughput volumes of refined
product and crude oil on HEPs pipeline and terminal, tankage and loading rack facilities that
result in minimum annual payments to HEP. These minimum annual payments are adjusted each year at
a percentage change based upon the change in the Producer Price Index (PPI) but will not decrease
as a result of a decrease in the PPI. Under these agreements, the agreed upon tariff rates are
adjusted each year on July 1 at a rate based upon the percentage change in PPI or Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) index, but with the exception of the HEP IPA, generally will not
decrease as a result of a decrease in the PPI or FERC index. The FERC index is the change in the
PPI plus a FERC adjustment factor that is reviewed periodically. Following the July 1, 2009 PPI
rate adjustments, these agreements, including our new 2009 agreements with HEP, will result in
minimum payments to HEP of $118.5 million for the twelve months ending June 30, 2010.
Additionally, in February 2010, we entered into a pipeline systems operating agreement with HEP
expiring in 2014 (the HEP Pipeline Operating Agreement). Under the HEP Pipeline Operating
Agreement, effective December 1, 2009, HEP will operate certain of our tankage, pipelines, asphalt
racks and terminal buildings for an annual management fee of $1.3 million.
We reconsolidated HEP effective March 1, 2008. Following our reconsolidation, our transactions
with HEP including fees that we pay under our HEP transportation agreements are eliminated and have
no impact on our consolidated financial statements since HEP is a consolidated subsidiary.
Agreement with Alon
HEP also has a 15-year pipelines and terminals agreement with Alon expiring in 2020 (the Alon
PTA), under which Alon has agreed to transport on HEPs pipelines and throughput through its
terminals, volumes of refined products that results in a minimum level of annual revenue. The
agreed upon tariff rates are increased or decreased annually at a rate equal to the percentage
change in PPI, but will not decrease below the initial $20.2 million annual amount. Following the
March 1, 2009 PPI adjustment, Alons total minimum commitment for the twelve months ending February
28, 2010 is $21.7 million. Furthermore, for the twelve months ending February 28, 2011, Alons
minimum commitment will increase to $22.7 million as a result of the upcoming March 1, 2010 PPI
adjustment.
-23-
As of December 31, 2009, HEPs contractual minimum revenues under long-term service agreements are
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum Annualized |
|
|
|
|
|
Agreement |
|
Commitment
(In millions) |
|
|
Year of
Maturity |
|
Contract Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HEP PTA(1) |
|
$ |
43.7 |
|
|
2019 |
|
Minimum revenue commitment |
HEP IPA(1)(2) |
|
|
20.7 |
|
|
2024 |
|
Minimum revenue commitment |
HEP CPTA(1)(3) |
|
|
28.4 |
|
|
2023 |
|
Minimum revenue commitment |
HEP PTTA(1) |
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
2024 |
|
Minimum revenue commitment |
HEP RPA(1) |
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
2024 |
|
Minimum revenue commitment |
HEP ETA(1) |
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
2024 |
|
Minimum revenue commitment |
Alon PTA(4) |
|
|
21.7 |
|
|
2020 |
|
Minimum volume commitment |
Alon capacity lease(4) |
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
Various |
|
Capacity lease |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
146.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
HEPs revenue under these transportation agreements with us represents intercompany
revenue and is eliminated in our consolidated financial statements. |
|
(2) |
|
Reflects amended terms of the Holly IPA effective June 2009. |
|
(3) |
|
Reflects amended terms of the Holly CPTA effective January 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
Minimum annual revenues attributable to long-term service contracts with unaffiliated
parties are $28.1 million. |
As of December 31, 2009, HEPs assets include:
Pipelines
|
|
|
approximately 820 miles of refined product pipelines, including 340 miles of leased
pipelines, that transport gasoline, diesel and jet fuel principally from our Navajo
Refinery in New Mexico to our customers in the metropolitan and rural areas of Texas, New
Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah and northern Mexico; |
|
|
|
approximately 510 miles of refined product pipelines that transport refined products
from Alons Big Spring refinery in Texas to its customers in Texas and Oklahoma; |
|
|
|
three 65-mile pipelines that transport intermediate feedstocks and crude oil from our
Navajo Refinery crude oil distillation and vacuum facilities in Lovington, New Mexico to
our petroleum refinery facilities in Artesia, New Mexico; |
|
|
|
approximately 960 miles of crude oil trunk, gathering and connection pipelines located
in west Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma that deliver crude oil to our Navajo Refinery; |
|
|
|
approximately 10 miles of crude oil and refined product pipelines that support our Woods
Cross Refinery located near Salt Lake City, Utah; and |
|
|
|
gasoline and diesel connecting pipelines that support our Tulsa Refinery east facility. |
Refined Product Terminals and Refinery Tankage
|
|
|
four refined product terminals located in El Paso, Texas; Moriarty and Bloomfield, New
Mexico; and Tucson, Arizona, with an aggregate capacity of approximately 1,000,000 barrels,
that are integrated with HEPs refined product pipeline system that serves our Navajo
Refinery; |
|
|
|
three refined product terminals (two of which are 50% owned), located in Burley and
Boise, Idaho and Spokane, Washington, with an aggregate capacity of approximately 500,000
barrels, that serve third-party common carrier pipelines; |
|
|
|
one refined product terminal near Mountain Home, Idaho with a capacity of 120,000
barrels, that serves a nearby United States Air Force Base; |
|
|
|
two refined product terminals, located in Wichita Falls and Abilene, Texas, and one tank
farm in Orla, Texas with aggregate capacity of 480,000 barrels, that are integrated with
HEPs refined product pipelines that serve Alons Big Spring, Texas refinery; |
|
|
|
a refined product truck loading rack facility at each of our Navajo and Woods Cross
Refineries, refined product and lube oil rail loading racks and a lube oil truck loading
rack at our Tulsa Refinery west facility and a refined product, asphalt and LPG truck
loading rack at our Tulsa Refinery east facility; |
|
|
|
a Roswell, New Mexico jet fuel terminal leased through September 2011; |
|
|
|
on-site crude oil tankage at our Navajo, Woods Cross and Tulsa Refineries having an
aggregate storage capacity of approximately 600,000 barrels; and |
|
|
|
on-site refined product tankage at our Tulsa Refinery having an aggregate storage
capacity of approximately 1,400,000 barrels. |
-24-
HEP also owns a 25% joint venture interest in the SLC Pipeline, a new 95-mile intrastate crude oil
pipeline system that serves refineries in the Salt Lake City area.
Capital Improvement Projects
HEPs capital budget for 2010 is comprised of $4.8 million for maintenance capital expenditures and
$6 million for expansion capital expenditures.
ADDITIONAL OPERATIONS AND OTHER INFORMATION
Corporate Offices
We lease our principal corporate offices in Dallas, Texas. The lease for our principal corporate
offices, expiring in June 2011, requires lease payments of approximately $115,000 per month plus
certain operating expenses and provides for one five-year renewal period. Functions performed in
the Dallas office include overall corporate management, refinery and HEP management, planning and
strategy, corporate finance, crude acquisition, logistics, contract administration, marketing,
investor relations, governmental affairs, accounting, tax, treasury, information technology, legal
and human resources support functions.
Employees and Labor Relations
As of December 31, 2009, we had 1,632 employees, of which 347 are currently covered by collective
bargaining agreements. We consider our employee relations to be good. We are currently
negotiating the collective bargaining agreement for certain of our Navajo Refinery Lovington
facility employees, which agreement expires in April 2010. We also have a collective bargaining
agreement for certain of our Woods Cross Refinery employees that expires in 2012.
Regulation
Refinery and pipeline operations are subject to federal, state and local laws regulating the
discharge of matter into the environment or otherwise relating to the protection of the
environment. Permits are required under these laws for the operation of our refineries, pipelines
and related operations, and these permits are subject to revocation, modification and renewal.
Over the years, there have been and continue to be ongoing communications, including notices of
violations, and discussions about environmental matters between us and federal and state
authorities, some of which have resulted or will result in changes to operating procedures and in
capital expenditures.
Compliance with applicable environmental laws, regulations and permits will continue to have an
impact on our operations, results of operations and capital requirements. We believe that our
current operations are in substantial compliance with existing environmental laws, regulations and
permits.
Our operations and many of the products we manufacture are subject to certain specific requirements
of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and related state and local regulations. The CAA contains
provisions that require capital expenditures for the installation of certain air pollution control
devices at our refineries. Subsequent rule making authorized by the CAA or similar laws or new
agency interpretations of existing rules, may necessitate additional expenditures in future years.
Under the CAA, the EPA has the authority to modify the formulation of the refined transportation
fuel products we manufacture in order to limit the emissions associated with their final use. In
June 2004, the EPA issued new regulations limiting emissions from diesel fuel powered engines used
in non-road activities such as mining, construction, agriculture, railroad and marine and
simultaneously limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel used in these engines to facilitate
compliance with the new emission standards. Our Navajo and Woods Cross Refineries as well as our
Tulsa Refinery east facility meet the ultimate 15 PPM standard for both our non-road and highway
diesel. Currently, our Tulsa Refinery west facility does not meet these regulations. Under our
Tulsa Refinery integration project, we will be expanding our Tulsa Refinery east facilitys diesel
hydrotreater unit, enabling it to process all diesel fuel produced at the Tulsa Refinery.
-25-
Additionally, we will be required to meet another EPA regulation limiting the average concentration
of sulfur in gasoline to 30 PPM by January 1, 2011. Our Tulsa Refinery east facility meets this
new LSG standard. Products produced at our Tulsa Refinery west facility will also meet this
standard, once the interconnecting lines that connect the two Tulsa facilities are in service.
Additionally, we are proceeding with capital projects at our Navajo and Woods Cross Refineries in
order to meet this requirement.
We are currently making plans to comply with the EPAs new MSAT2 regulations on gasoline that will
impose further reductions in the benzene content of our produced gasoline beginning January 1,
2011. In addition , the renewable fuel standards will mandate the blending of prescribed
percentages of renewable fuels (e.g. ethanol and biofuels) into our produced gasoline. These new
requirements, other requirements of the CAA, and other presently existing or future environmental
regulations may cause us to make substantial capital expenditures to enable our refineries to
produce products that meet applicable requirements.
Our operations are also subject to the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the Federal Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) and comparable state and local requirements. The CWA, the SDWA and analogous
laws prohibit any discharge into surface waters, ground waters, injection wells and publicly-owned
treatment works except in strict conformance with permits, such as pre-treatment permits and
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, issued by federal, state and
local governmental agencies. NPDES permits and analogous water discharge permits are valid for a
maximum of five years and must be renewed.
We generate wastes that may be subject to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and
comparable state and local requirements. The EPA and various state agencies have limited the
approved methods of disposal for certain hazardous and non-hazardous wastes.
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known as
Superfund, imposes liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original conduct, on
certain classes of persons who are considered to be responsible for the release of a hazardous
substance into the environment. These persons include the owner or operator of the disposal site
or sites where the release occurred and companies that disposed of or arranged for the disposal of
the hazardous substances. Under CERCLA, such persons may be subject to joint and several liability
for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances that have been released into the environment,
for damages to natural resources and for the costs of certain health studies. It is not uncommon
for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property
damage allegedly caused by hazardous substances or other pollutants released into the environment.
Analogous state laws impose similar responsibilities and liabilities on responsible parties. In
the course of our historical operations, as well as in our current normal operations, we have generated waste, some of which falls within the
statutory definition of a hazardous substance and some of which may have been disposed of at
sites that may require cleanup under Superfund.
As is the case with all companies engaged in industries similar to ours, we face potential exposure
to future claims and lawsuits involving environmental matters. These matters include soil and
water contamination, air pollution, personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by
substances which we manufactured, handled, used, released or disposed of.
We currently have environmental remediation projects that relate to recovery, treatment and
monitoring activities resulting from past releases of refined product and crude oil into the
environment. As of December 31, 2009 we had an accrual of $30.4 million related to such
environmental liabilities of which $24.2 million was classified as long-term.
We are and have been the subject of various state, federal and private proceedings relating to
environmental regulations, conditions and inquiries, including those discussed above. Current and
future environmental regulations are expected to require additional expenditures, including
expenditures for investigation and remediation, which may be significant, at our refineries and at
pipeline transportation facilities. To the extent that future expenditures for these purposes are
material and can be reasonably determined, these costs are disclosed and accrued.
Our operations are also subject to various laws and regulations relating to occupational health and
safety. We maintain safety, training and maintenance programs as part of our ongoing efforts to
ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Compliance with applicable health and
safety laws and regulations has required and continues to require substantial expenditures.
-26-
We cannot predict what additional health and environmental legislation or regulations will be
enacted or become effective in the future or how existing or future laws or regulations will be
administered or interpreted with respect to our operations. Compliance with more stringent laws or
regulations or adverse changes in the interpretation of existing regulations by government agencies
could have an adverse effect on the financial position and the results of our operations and could
require substantial expenditures for the installation and operation of systems and equipment that
we do not currently possess.
Insurance
Our operations are subject to normal hazards of operations, including fire, explosion and
weather-related perils. We maintain various insurance coverages, including business interruption
insurance, subject to certain deductibles. We are not fully insured against certain risks because
such risks are not fully insurable, coverage is unavailable, or premium costs, in our judgment, do
not justify such expenditures.
We have a risk management oversight committee that is made up of members from our senior
management. This committee oversees our risk enterprise program, monitors our risk environment and
provides direction for activities to mitigate identified risks that may adversely affect the
achievement of our goals.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Investing in us involves a degree of risk, including the risks described below. Our operating
results have been, and will continue to be, affected by a wide variety of risk factors, many of
which are beyond our control, that could have adverse effects on profitability during any
particular period. You should carefully consider the following risk factors together with all of
the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the financial
statements and related notes, when deciding to invest in us. Additional risks and uncertainties not
currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially and adversely
affect our business operations. If any of the following risks were to actually occur, our business,
financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
The prices of crude oil and refined products materially affect our profitability, and are dependent
upon many factors that are beyond our control, including general market demand and economic
conditions, seasonal and weather-related factors and governmental regulations and policies.
Among these factors is the demand for crude oil and refined products, which is largely driven by
the conditions of local and worldwide economies as well as by weather patterns and the taxation of
these products relative to other energy sources. Governmental regulations and policies,
particularly in the areas of taxation, energy and the environment, also have a significant impact
on our activities. Operating results can be affected by these industry factors, product and crude
pipeline capacities, changes in transportation costs, accidents or interruptions in transportation,
competition in the particular geographic areas that we serve, and factors that are specific to us,
such as the success of particular marketing programs and the efficiency of our refinery operations.
The demand for crude oil and refined products can also be reduced due to a local or national
recession or other adverse economic condition that results in lower spending by businesses and
consumers on gasoline and diesel fuel, higher gasoline prices due to higher crude oil prices, a
shift by consumers to more fuel-efficient vehicles or alternative fuel vehicles (such as ethanol or
wider adoption of gas/electric hybrid vehicles), or an increase in vehicle fuel economy, whether as
a result of technological advances by manufacturers, legislation mandating or encouraging higher
fuel economy or the use of alternative fuel.
We do not produce crude oil and must purchase all our crude oil, the price of which fluctuates
based upon worldwide and local market conditions. Our profitability depends largely on the spread
between market prices for refined petroleum products and crude oil prices. This margin is
continually changing and may fluctuate significantly from time to time. Crude oil and refined
products are commodities whose price levels are determined by market forces beyond our control.
Additionally, due to the seasonality of refined products markets and refinery maintenance
schedules, results of operations for any particular quarter of a fiscal year are not necessarily
indicative of results for the full year. In general, prices for refined products are influenced by
the price of crude oil. Although an increase or decrease in the price for crude oil may result in a
similar increase or decrease in prices
-27-
for refined products, there may be a time lag in the
realization of the similar increase or decrease in prices for refined products. The effect of
changes in crude oil prices on operating results therefore depends in part on how quickly refined
product prices adjust to reflect these changes. A substantial or prolonged increase in crude oil
prices without a corresponding increase in refined product prices, a substantial or prolonged
decrease in refined product prices without a corresponding decrease in crude oil prices, or a
substantial or prolonged decrease in demand for refined products could have a significant negative
effect on our earnings and cash flows. Also, crude oil supply contracts are generally short-term
contracts with market-responsive pricing provisions. We purchase our refinery feedstocks weeks
before manufacturing and selling the refined products. Price level changes during the period
between purchasing feedstocks and selling the manufactured refined products from these feedstocks
could have a significant effect on our financial results.
We may not be able to successfully execute our business strategies to grow our business.
One of the ways we may grow our business is through the construction of new refinery processing
units (or the purchase and refurbishment of used units from another refinery) and the expansion of
existing ones. Projects are generally initiated to increase the yields of higher-value products,
increase the amount of lower cost crude oils that can be processed, increase refinery production
capacity, meet new governmental requirements, or maintain the operations of our existing assets.
Additionally, our growth strategy includes projects that permit access to new and/or more
profitable markets such as our UNEV Pipeline joint venture, a 12-inch refined products pipeline
running from Salt Lake City, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada that is currently under construction and in
which our subsidiary owns a 75% interest. The construction process involves numerous regulatory,
environmental, political, and legal uncertainties, most of which are not fully within our control,
including: denial or delay in issuing requisite regulatory approvals and/or permits; compliance
with or liability under environmental regulations; unplanned increases in the cost of construction
materials or labor; disruptions in transportation of modular components and/or construction
materials; severe adverse weather conditions, natural disasters or other events (such as equipment
malfunctions, explosions, fires or spills) affecting our facilities, or those of vendors and
suppliers; shortages of sufficiently skilled labor, or labor disagreements resulting in unplanned
work stoppages; and/or nonperformance or force majeure by, or disputes with, vendors, suppliers,
contractors or sub-contractors involved with a project. These
projects may not be completed on schedule or at all or at the budgeted cost. Delays in making
required changes or upgrades to our facilities could subject us to fines or penalties as well as
affect our ability to supply certain products we make. In addition, our revenues may not increase
immediately upon the expenditure of funds on a particular project. For instance, if we build a new
refinery processing unit, the construction will occur over an extended period of time and we will
not receive any material increases in revenues until after completion of the project. Moreover, we
may construct facilities to capture anticipated future growth in demand for refined products in a
region in which such growth does not materialize. As a result, new capital investments may not
achieve our expected investment return, which could adversely affect our results of operations and
financial condition.
Our forecasted internal rates of return are also based upon our projections of future market
fundamentals which are not within our control, including changes in general economic conditions,
available alternative supply and customer demand.
In addition, a component of our growth strategy is to selectively acquire complementary assets for
our refining operations in order to increase earnings and cash flow. Our ability to do so will be
dependent upon a number of factors, including our ability to identify attractive acquisition
candidates, consummate acquisitions on favorable terms, successfully integrate acquired assets and
obtain financing to fund acquisitions and to support our growth, and other factors beyond our
control. Risks associated with acquisitions include those relating to:
|
|
diversion of management time and attention from our existing business; |
|
|
|
challenges in managing the increased scope, geographic diversity and complexity of operations; |
|
|
|
difficulties in integrating the financial, technological and management standards, processes,
procedures and controls of an acquired business with those of our existing operations; |
|
|
|
liability for known or unknown environmental conditions or other contingent liabilities not
covered by indemnification or insurance; |
|
|
|
greater than anticipated expenditures required for compliance with environmental or other
regulatory standards or for investments to improve operating results; |
|
|
|
difficulties in achieving anticipated operational improvements; |
|
|
|
incurrence of additional indebtedness to finance acquisitions or capital expenditures
relating to acquired assets; and |
|
|
|
issuance of additional equity, which could result in further dilution of the ownership
interest of existing stockholders. |
-28-
We may not be successful in acquiring additional assets, and any acquisitions that we do consummate
may not produce the anticipated benefits or may have adverse effects on our business and operating
results.
To successfully operate our petroleum refining facilities, we are required to expend significant
amounts for capital outlays and operating expenditures.
The refining business is characterized by high fixed costs resulting from the significant capital
outlays associated with refineries, terminals, pipelines and related facilities. We are dependent
on the production and sale of quantities of refined products at refined product margins sufficient
to cover operating costs, including any increases in costs resulting from future inflationary
pressures or market conditions and increases in costs of fuel and power necessary in operating our
facilities. Furthermore, future regulatory requirements or competitive pressures could result in
additional capital expenditures, which may not produce a return on investment. Such capital
expenditures may require significant financial resources that may be contingent on our access to
capital markets and commercial bank loans. Additionally, other matters, such as regulatory
requirements or legal actions, may restrict our access to funds for capital expenditures.
Our refineries consist of many processing units, a number of which have been in operation for many
years. One or more of the units may require unscheduled downtime for unanticipated maintenance or
repairs that are more frequent than our scheduled turnaround for such units. Scheduled and
unscheduled maintenance could reduce our revenues during the period of time that the units are not
operating. We have taken significant measures to expand and upgrade units in our refineries by
installing new equipment and redesigning older equipment to improve refinery
capacity. The installation and redesign of key equipment at our refineries involves significant
uncertainties, including the following: our upgraded equipment may not perform at expected
throughput levels; the yield and product quality of new equipment may differ from design and/or
specifications and redesign or modification of the equipment may be required to correct equipment
that does not perform as expected, which could require facility shutdowns until the equipment has
been redesigned or modified. Any of these risks associated with new equipment, redesigned older
equipment, or repaired equipment could lead to lower revenues or higher costs or otherwise have a
negative impact on our future results of operations and financial condition.
In addition, we expect to execute turnarounds at our refineries every three to five years, which
involve numerous risks and uncertainties. These risks include delays and incurrence of additional
and unforeseen costs. The turnarounds allow us to perform maintenance, upgrades, overhaul and
repair of process equipment and materials, during which time all or a portion of the refinery will
be under scheduled downtime. The Woods Cross refinery turnaround occurred in August/September,
2008, and the Navajo refinery turnaround occurred in January/February, 2009.
We may incur significant costs to comply with new or changing environmental, energy, health and
safety laws and regulations, and face potential exposure for environmental matters.
Refinery and pipeline operations are subject to federal, state and local laws regulating, among
other things, the generation, storage, handling, use and transportation of petroleum and hazardous
substances, the emission and discharge of materials into the environment, waste management, and
characteristics and composition of gasoline and diesel fuels, and other matters otherwise relating
to the protection of the environment. Permits are required under these laws for the operation of
our refineries, pipelines and related operations, and these permits are subject to revocation,
modification and renewal or may require operational changes, which may involve significant costs.
Furthermore, a violation of permit conditions or other legal or regulatory requirements could
result in substantial fines, criminal sanctions, permit revocations, injunctions, and/or refinery
shutdowns. In addition, major modifications of our operations due to changes in the law could
require changes to our existing permits or expensive upgrades to our existing pollution control
equipment, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or
results of operations. Over the years, there have been and continue to be ongoing communications,
including notices of violations, and discussions about environmental matters between us and federal
and state authorities, some of which have resulted or will result in changes to operating
procedures and in capital expenditures. Compliance with applicable environmental laws, regulations
and permits will continue to have an impact on our operations, results of operations and capital
requirements.
-29-
As is the case with all companies engaged in industries similar to ours, we face potential exposure
to future claims and lawsuits involving environmental matters. The matters include soil and water
contamination, air pollution, personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by substances
which we manufactured, handled, used, released or disposed.
We are and have been the subject of various state, federal and private proceedings relating to
environmental regulations, conditions and inquiries. Current and future environmental regulations
are expected to require additional expenditures, including expenditures for investigation and
remediation, which may be significant, at our facilities. To the extent that future expenditures
for these purposes are material and can be reasonably determined, these costs are disclosed and
accrued.
Our operations are also subject to various laws and regulations relating to occupational health and
safety. We maintain safety, training and maintenance programs as part of our ongoing efforts to
ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Compliance with applicable health and
safety laws and regulations has required and continues to require substantial expenditures.
We cannot predict what additional health and environmental legislation or regulations will be
enacted or become effective in the future or how existing or future laws or regulations will be
administered or interpreted with respect to our operations. However, new environmental laws and
regulations, including new regulations relating to alternative energy sources and the risk of
global climate change, new interpretations of existing laws and
regulations, increased governmental enforcement or other developments could require us to make
additional unforeseen expenditures. There is growing consensus that some form of regulation will be
forthcoming at the federal level in the United States with respect to emissions of greenhouse
gases, or GHGs, (including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxides). Also, new federal or
state legislation or regulatory programs that restrict emissions of GHGs in areas where we conduct
business could adversely affect our operations and demand for our products.
The costs of environmental and safety regulations are already significant and compliance with more
stringent laws or regulations or adverse changes in the interpretation of existing regulations by
government agencies could have an adverse effect on the financial position and the results of our
operations and could require substantial expenditures for the installation and operation of systems
and equipment that we do not currently possess.
From time to time, new federal energy policy legislation is enacted by the U.S. Congress. For
example, in December 2007, the U.S. Congress passed the Energy Independence and Security Act,
which, among other provisions, mandates annually increasing levels for the use of renewable fuels
such as ethanol, commencing in 2008 and escalating for 15 years, as well as increasing energy
efficiency goals, including higher fuel economy standards for motor vehicles, among other steps.
These statutory mandates may have the impact over time of offsetting projected increases in the
demand for refined petroleum products in certain markets, particularly gasoline. In the near term,
the new renewable fuel standard presents ethanol production and logistics challenges for both the
ethanol and refining industries and may require additional capital expenditures or expenses by us
to accommodate increased ethanol use. Other legislative changes may similarly alter the expected
demand and supply projections for refined petroleum products in ways that cannot be predicted.
For additional information on regulations and related liabilities or potential liabilities
affecting our business, see Regulation under Items 1 and 2, Business and Properties, and Item
3, Legal Proceedings.
-30-
The adoption of climate change legislation by Congress could result in increased operating costs
and reduced demand for the refined products we produce.
On December 15, 2009, the EPA officially published its findings that emissions of carbon dioxide,
methane and other GHGs present an endangerment to human health and the environment because
emissions of such gases are, according to the EPA, contributing to warming of the Earths
atmosphere and other climatic changes. These findings by the EPA allow the agency to proceed with
the adoption and implementation of regulations that would restrict emissions of GHGs under existing
provisions of the federal CAA. In late September 2009, the EPA had proposed two sets of regulations
in anticipation of finalizing its findings that would require a reduction in emissions of GHGs from
motor vehicles and that could also lead to the imposition of GHG emission limitations in CAA
permits for certain stationary sources. In addition, on September 22, 2009, the EPA issued a final
rule requiring the reporting of GHG emissions from specified large GHG emission sources in the
United States beginning in 2011 for emissions occurring in 2010. The adoption and implementation of
any regulations imposing reporting obligations on, or limiting emissions of GHGs from, our
equipment and operations could require us to incur costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated
with our operations or could adversely affect demand for the refined products that we produce.
Also, on June 26, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives approved adoption of the American Clean
Energy and Security Act of 2009, (ACESA), also known as the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade
legislation. The purpose of ACESA is to control and reduce emissions of GHGs in the United States.
ACESA would establish an economy-wide cap on emissions of GHGs in the United States and would
require an overall reduction in GHG emissions of 17% (from 2005 levels) by 2020, and by over 80% by
2050. Under ACESA, most sources of GHG emissions would be required to obtain GHG emission
allowances corresponding to their annual emissions of GHGs. The number of emission allowances
issued each year would decline as necessary to meet ACESAs overall emission reduction goals. As
the number of GHG emission allowances permitted by ACESA declines each year, the cost or value of
allowances would be expected to escalate significantly. The net effect of ACESA would be to impose
increasing costs on the combustion of carbon-based fuels such as oil, refined petroleum products,
and gas. The U.S. Senate has begun work on its own legislation for controlling and reducing
emissions of GHGs in the United States. If the Senate adopts GHG legislation that is different from
ACESA, the Senate legislation would need to be reconciled with ACESA and both chambers would be
required to approve identical legislation before it could become law.
It is not possible at this time to predict whether climate change legislation will be enacted, but
any laws or regulations that may be adopted to restrict or reduce emissions of GHGs would likely
require us to incur increased operating costs and could have an adverse effect on demand for
refined products we produce.
Finally, it should be noted that some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of
GHGs in the Earths atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects,
such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts, and floods and other climatic events;
if any such effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our assets and operations
Insufficient ethanol supplies or disruption in ethanol supply may disrupt our ability to market
ethanol blended fuels.
If we are unable to obtain or maintain sufficient quantities of ethanol to support our blending
needs, our sale of ethanol blended gasoline could be interrupted or suspended which could result in
lower profits.
Competition in the refining and marketing industry is intense, and an increase in competition in
the markets in which we sell our products could adversely affect our earnings and profitability.
We compete with a broad range of refining and marketing companies, including certain multinational
oil companies. Because of their geographic diversity, larger and more complex refineries,
integrated operations and greater resources, some of our competitors may be better able to
withstand volatile market conditions, to obtain crude oil in times of shortage and to bear the
economic risks inherent in all areas of the refining industry.
We are not engaged in petroleum exploration and production activities and do not produce any of the
crude oil feedstocks used at our refineries. We do not have a retail business and therefore are
dependent upon others for outlets for our refined products. Certain of our competitors, however,
obtain a portion of their feedstocks from company-owned production and have retail outlets.
Competitors that have their own production or extensive retail outlets, with brand-name
recognition, are at times able to offset losses from refining operations with profits from
producing or retailing operations, and may be better positioned to withstand periods of depressed
refining margins or feedstock shortages. In addition, we compete with other industries that provide
alternative means to satisfy the energy and fuel requirements of our industrial, commercial and
individual consumers. If we are unable to compete effectively with these competitors, both within
and outside of our industry, there could be material adverse effects on our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
-31-
In recent years there have been several refining and marketing consolidations or acquisitions
between entities competing in our geographic market. These transactions could increase the future
competitive pressures on us.
Portions of our operations in the areas we operate may be impacted by competitors plans for
expansion projects and refinery improvements that could increase the production of refined products
in our areas of operation and significantly affect our profitability.
In addition, we compete with other industries that provide alternative means to satisfy the energy
and fuel requirements of our industrial, commercial and individual consumers. The more successful
these alternatives become as a result of governmental regulations, technological advances, consumer
demand, improved pricing or otherwise, the greater the impact on pricing and demand for our
products and our profitability. There are presently significant governmental and consumer
pressures to increase the use of alternative fuels in the United States.
We may be unsuccessful in integrating the operations of the assets we have recently acquired or of
any future acquisitions with our operations, and in realizing all or any part of the anticipated
benefits of any such acquisitions.
From time to time, we evaluate and acquire assets and businesses that we believe complement our
existing assets and businesses. For example, in 2009, we completed the acquisition of two
refineries in Tulsa, Oklahoma. We will
face certain challenges as we continue to integrate the operations of the Tulsa facilities into our
business. In particular, the acquisition of the Tulsa facilities has significantly expanded our
geographic scope, the types of business in which we are engaged, the number of our employees and
the number of refineries we operate, thereby presenting us with significant challenges as we work
to manage the substantial increases in scale resulting from the acquisition. We must integrate a
large number of systems, both operational and administrative. Delays in this process could have a
material adverse effect on our revenues, expenses, operating results and financial condition. In
addition, events outside of our control, including changes in state and federal regulations and
laws and/or delays or failure to obtain environmental permits needed for integrating projects,
could adversely affect our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from the acquisition of the
Tulsa facilities. We can give no assurance that our acquisition of the Tulsa facilities will
perform in accordance with our expectations. We can give no assurance that our expectations with
regards to integration and synergies will materialize. Our failure to successfully integrate and
operate the Tulsa facilities and to realize the anticipated benefits of the acquisition, could
adversely affect our operating, performing and financial results.
Acquisitions may require substantial capital or the incurrence of substantial indebtedness. Our
capitalization and results of operations may change significantly as a result of the acquisitions
we recently completed or as a result of future acquisitions. Acquisitions and business expansions
involve numerous risks, including difficulties in the assimilation of the assets and operations of
the acquired businesses, inefficiencies and difficulties that arise because of unfamiliarity with
new assets and the businesses associated with them and new geographic areas and the diversion of
managements attention from other business concerns. Further, unexpected costs and challenges may
arise whenever businesses with different operations or management are combined, and we may
experience unanticipated delays in realizing the benefits of an acquisition, including the assets
and businesses we acquired in 2009. Also, following an acquisition, we may discover previously
unknown liabilities associated with the acquired business or assets for which we have no recourse
under applicable indemnification provisions.
We may not be able to retain existing customers or acquire new customers.
The renewal or replacement of existing contracts with our customers at rates sufficient to maintain
current revenues and cash flows depends on a number of factors outside our control, including
competition from other refiners and the demand for refined products in the markets that we serve.
Loss of, or reduction in amounts purchased by our major customers could have an adverse effect on
us to the extent that, because of market limitations or transportation constraints, we are not able
to correspondingly increase sales to other purchasers.
-32-
A material decrease in the supply of crude oil available to our refineries could significantly
reduce our production levels.
In order to maintain or increase production levels at our refineries, we must continually contract
for new crude oil supplies from third parties. A material decrease in crude oil production from the
fields that supply our refineries, as a result of depressed commodity prices, lack of drilling
activity, natural production declines or otherwise, could result in a decline in the volume of
crude oil available to our refineries. In addition, any prolonged disruption of a significant
pipeline that is used in supplying crude oil to our refineries could result in a decline in the
volume of crude oil available to our refineries. Such an event could result in an overall decline
in volumes of refined products processed at our refineries and therefore a corresponding reduction
in our cash flow. In addition, the future growth of our operations will depend in part upon whether
we can contract for additional supplies of crude oil at a greater rate than the rate of natural
decline in our currently connected supplies. If we are unable to secure additional crude oil
supplies of sufficient quality or crude pipeline expansion to our refineries, we will be unable to
take full advantage of current and future expansion of our refineries production capacities.
The disruption or proration of the refined product distribution systems we utilize could negatively
impact our profitability.
We utilize various common carrier or other third party pipeline systems to deliver our products to
market. The key systems utilized by Navajo, Woods Cross, and Tulsa are SFPP and Plains, Chevron,
and Magellan, respectively. All three refineries also utilize systems owned by HEP. If these key
pipelines or their associated tanks and terminals
become inoperative or decrease the capacity available to us, we may not be able to sell our product
or we may be required to hold our product in inventory or supply products to our customers through
an alternative pipeline or by rail or additional tanker trucks from the refinery all of which could
increase our costs and result in a decline in profitability.
The potential operation of new or expanded refined product transportation pipelines could impact
the supply of refined products to our existing markets.
Other refined product transportation pipelines currently supply our existing markets or could
potentially supply our existing markets in the future.
The refined product transportation pipelines that also supply the markets supplied by the Navajo
Refinery include Longhorn, Kinder Morgan, Plains, HEP, and NuStar Energy. The Longhorn Pipeline is
a common carrier pipeline that supplies the El Paso market with refined products from refineries as
distant as the Texas Gulf Coast. The Longhorn Pipeline is a converted crude oil pipeline with an
approximate capacity of 72,000 BPD of refined products. Magellan purchased the Longhorn Pipeline
out of bankruptcy in 2009. Flying J formerly owned the Longhorn Pipeline prior to its bankruptcy
in 2008. In addition to supplying Arizona markets from El Paso, Kinder Morgan also supplies
Arizona markets from the West Coast. The Plains pipeline currently supplies New Mexico markets
from El Paso. In addition, NuStar Energy LP and HEP own pipelines into the El Paso and New Mexico
markets.
The refined product transportation pipelines that also supply the markets supplied by the Woods
Cross Refinery include Chevron, Pioneer, and Yellowstone Pipelines. The Chevron system transports
products from Salt Lake City to Idaho and eastern Washington. The Pioneer Pipeline transports
products from Wyoming and Montana refineries into Salt Lake City. The Yellowstone Pipeline
transports products from Montana refineries into eastern Washington.
The refined product transportation pipelines that also supply the markets supplied by the Tulsa
Refinery include Magellan, Explorer, and Kaneb Pipelines. The Explorer Pipeline transports refined
products from Gulf Coast refineries to Tulsa where it interconnects with Magellan prior to
proceeding to the Chicago area. The Kaneb Pipeline transports refined products from northern
Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas refineries to markets in Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, North Dakota, and
South Dakota. These markets are in close proximity to markets supplied by the Magellan system.
-33-
The expansion of any of these pipelines, the conversion of existing pipelines into refined
products, or the construction of a new pipeline into our markets could negatively impact the supply
of refined products in our markets and our profitability.
We depend upon HEP for a substantial portion of the crude supply and distribution network that
serve our refineries and we own a significant equity interest in HEP.
We currently own a 34% interest in HEP, including the 2% general partner interest. HEP operates a
system of crude oil and petroleum product pipelines, distribution terminals and refinery tankage in
Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Arizona, Idaho, Washington and Oklahoma. HEP generates revenues by
charging tariffs for transporting petroleum products and crude oil through its pipelines, by
leasing certain pipeline capacity to Alon, by charging fees for terminalling refined products and
other hydrocarbons and storing and providing other services at its terminals. HEP serves our
refineries in New Mexico, Utah and Oklahoma under several long-term pipeline and terminal, tankage
and throughput agreements expiring in 2019 through 2024. Furthermore, our financial statements
include the consolidated results of HEP. HEP is subject to its own operating and regulatory risks,
including, but not limited to:
|
|
|
its reliance on its significant customers, including us, |
|
|
|
|
competition from other pipelines, |
|
|
|
|
environmental regulations affecting pipeline operations, |
|
|
|
|
operational hazards and risks, |
|
|
|
|
pipeline tariff regulations affecting the rates HEP can charge, |
|
|
|
|
limitations on additional borrowings and other restrictions due to HEPs debt covenants, and |
|
|
|
|
other financial, operational and legal risks. |
The occurrence of any of these risks could directly or indirectly affect HEPs as well as our
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows as HEP is a consolidated subsidiary.
Additionally, these risks could affect HEPs ability to continue operations which could affect
their ability to serve our supply and distribution network needs.
For additional information about HEP, see Holly Energy Partners, L.P. under Items 1 and 2,
Business and Properties.
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions for which we may not
be adequately insured.
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions such as natural
disasters, adverse weather, accidents, fires, explosions, hazardous materials releases, power
failures, mechanical failures and other events beyond our control. These events might result in a
loss of equipment or life, injury, or extensive property damage, as well as an interruption in our
operations and may affect our ability to meet marketing commitments. Furthermore, we may not be
able to maintain or obtain insurance of the type and amount we desire at reasonable rates. As a
result of market conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain of our insurance policies could
increase. In some instances, certain insurance could become unavailable or available only for
reduced amounts of coverage. If we were to incur a significant liability for which we were not
fully insured, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial position. If any refinery
were to experience an interruption in operations, earnings from the refinery could be materially
adversely affected (to the extent not recoverable through insurance) because of lost production and
repair costs.
We maintain significant insurance coverage, but it does not cover all potential losses, costs or
liabilities, and our business interruption insurance coverage generally does not apply unless a
business interruption exceeds 45 days. We could suffer losses for uninsurable or uninsured risks or
in amounts in excess of our existing insurance coverage. Our ability to obtain and maintain
adequate insurance may be affected by conditions in the insurance market over which we have no
control. The occurrence of an event that is not fully covered by insurance could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
-34-
The energy industry is highly capital intensive, and the entire or partial loss of individual
facilities can result in significant costs to both industry companies, such as us, and their
insurance carriers. In recent years, several large energy industry claims have resulted in
significant increases in the level of premium costs and deductible periods for participants in the
energy industry. As a result of large energy industry claims, insurance companies that have
historically participated in underwriting energy-related facilities may discontinue that practice,
or demand significantly higher premiums or deductible periods to cover these facilities. If
significant changes in the number or financial solvency of insurance underwriters for the energy
industry occur, or if other adverse conditions over which we have no control prevail in the
insurance market, we may be unable to obtain and maintain adequate insurance at reasonable cost.
In addition, we cannot assure you that our insurers will renew our insurance coverage on acceptable
terms, if at all, or that we will be able to arrange for adequate alternative coverage in the event
of non-renewal. Further, our underwriters could have credit issues that affect their ability to
pay claims. The unavailability of full insurance coverage to cover events in which we suffer
significant losses could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
If we lose any of our key personnel, our ability to manage our business and continue our growth
could be negatively impacted.
Our future performance depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of our
senior management team and key technical personnel. We do not currently maintain key man life
insurance, non-compete agreements, or employment agreements with respect to any member of our
senior management team. The loss or unavailability to
us of any member of our senior management team or a key technical employee could significantly harm
us. We face competition for these professionals from our competitors, our customers and other
companies operating in our industry. To the extent that the services of members of our senior
management team and key technical personnel would be unavailable to us for any reason, we may be
required to hire other personnel to manage and operate our company. We may not be able to locate or
employ such qualified personnel on acceptable terms, or at all.
Furthermore, our operations require skilled and experienced laborers with proficiency in multiple
tasks. A shortage of trained workers due to retirements or otherwise could have an adverse impact
on our labor productivity and costs and our ability to expand production in the event there is an
increase in the demand for our products and services, which could adversely affect our operations.
As of December 31, 2009, approximately 21% of our employees were represented by labor unions under
collective bargaining agreements with various expiration dates. Effective February 1, 2009, a new
agreement was reached with the United Steelworkers which applies to approximately 7% of our
employees, which agreement will now expire on January 31, 2012. As of December 31, 2009,
approximately 14% of our employees were represented by labor unions under a collective bargaining
agreement that expires in 2010. We may not be able to renegotiate our collective bargaining
agreements when they expire on satisfactory terms or at all. A failure to do so may increase our
costs. In addition, our existing labor agreements may not prevent a strike or work stoppage at any
of our facilities in the future, and any work stoppage could negatively affect our results of
operations and financial condition.
We are exposed to the credit risks of our key customers.
We are subject to risks of loss resulting from nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers. If
any of our key customers default on their obligations to us, our financial results could be
adversely affected. Furthermore, some of our customers may be highly leveraged and subject to their
own operating and regulatory risks.
Terrorist attacks, and the threat of terrorist attacks or domestic vandalism, have resulted in
increased costs to our business. Continued hostilities in the Middle East or other sustained
military campaigns may adversely impact our results of operations.
The long-term impacts of terrorist attacks, such as the attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001, and the threat of future terrorist attacks on the energy transportation industry in general,
and on us in particular, are not known at this time. Increased security measures taken by us as a
precaution against possible terrorist attacks or vandalism have resulted in increased costs to our
business. Future terrorist attacks could lead to even stronger, more costly initiatives or
regulatory requirements. Uncertainty surrounding continued hostilities in the Middle East or other
sustained military campaigns may affect our operations in unpredictable ways, including disruptions
of crude oil supplies and markets for refined products, and the possibility that infrastructure
facilities could be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror. In addition,
disruption or significant increases in energy prices could result in government-imposed price
controls. Any one of, or a combination of, these occurrences could have a material adverse effect
on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
-35-
Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist attacks could make certain types of
insurance more difficult for us to obtain. Moreover, the insurance that may be available to us may
be significantly more expensive than our existing insurance coverage. Instability in the financial
markets as a result of terrorism or war could also affect our ability to raise capital including
our ability to repay or refinance debt.
Our petroleum business financial results are seasonal and generally lower in the first and fourth
quarters of the year, which may cause volatility in the price of our common stock.
Demand for gasoline products is generally higher during the summer months than during the winter
months due to seasonal increases in highway traffic and road construction work. As a result, our
results of operations for the first and fourth calendar quarters are generally lower than for those
for the second and third quarters. The effects of seasonal demand for gasoline are partially
offset by seasonality in demand for diesel fuel, which in the Southwest
region of the United States is generally higher in winter months as east-west trucking traffic
moves south to avoid winter conditions on northern routes. However, unseasonably cool weather in
the summer months and/or unseasonably warm weather in the winter months in the markets in which we
sell our petroleum products could have the effect of reducing demand for gasoline and diesel fuel
which could result in lower prices and reduce operating margins.
We may be unable to pay future dividends.
We will only be able to pay dividends from our available cash on hand, cash from operations or
borrowings under our credit agreement. The declaration of future dividends on our common stock will
be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend upon many factors, including our
results of operations, financial condition, earnings, capital requirements, restrictions in our
debt agreements and legal requirements. We cannot assure you that any dividends will be paid or the
frequency of such payments.
Ongoing maintenance of effective internal controls in accordance with Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act could cause us to incur additional expenditures of time and financial resources.
We regularly document and test our internal control procedures in order to satisfy the requirements
of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires annual management assessments of the
effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting and a report by our independent
registered public accounting firm on our controls over financial reporting. If, in the future, we
fail to maintain the adequacy of our internal controls and, as such standards are modified,
supplemented or amended from time to time, we may not be able to ensure that we can conclude on an
ongoing basis that we have effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Failure to achieve and maintain an effective internal
control environment could cause us to incur substantial expenditures of management time and
financial resources to identify and correct any such failure.
Additionally, the failure to comply with Section 404 or the report by us of a material weakness
may cause investors to lose confidence in our financial statements and our stock price may be
adversely affected. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in
internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of the companys annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented
or detected on a timely basis. If we fail to remedy any material weakness, our financial
statements may be inaccurate, we may face restricted access to the capital markets, and our stock
price may decline.
Product liability claims and litigation could adversely affect our business and results of
operations.
Product liability is a significant commercial risk. Substantial damage awards have been made in
certain jurisdictions against manufacturers and resellers based upon claims for injuries caused by
the use of or exposure to various products. There can be no assurance that product liability
claims against us would not have a material adverse effect on our business or results of
operations. Failure of our products to meet required specifications could result in product
liability claims from our shippers and customers arising from contaminated or off-specification
commingled pipelines and storage tanks and/or defective quality fuels.
-36-
If the market value of our inventory declines to an amount less than our LIFO basis, we would
record a write-down of inventory and a non-cash charge to cost of sales, which would adversely
affect our earnings.
The nature of our business requires us to maintain substantial quantities of crude oil, refined
petroleum product and blendstock inventories. Because crude oil and refined petroleum products are
commodities, we have no control over the changing market value of these inventories. Because
certain of our refining inventory is valued at the lower of cost or market value under the last-in,
first-out (LIFO) inventory valuation methodology, we would record a write-down of inventory and a
non-cash charge to cost of sales if the market value of our inventory were to decline to an amount
less than our LIFO basis. A material write-down could affect our operating income and
profitability.
From time to time, our cash needs may exceed our internally generated cash flow, and our business
could be materially and adversely affected if we are not able to obtain the necessary funds from
financing activities.
We have significant short-term cash needs to satisfy working capital requirements such as crude oil
purchases which fluctuate with the pricing and sourcing of crude oil.
We generally purchase crude oil for our refineries with cash generated from our operations. If the
price of crude oil increases significantly, we may not have sufficient cash flow or borrowing
capacity, and may not be able to sufficiently increase borrowing capacity, under our existing
credit facilities to purchase enough crude oil to operate our refineries at desired capacity. Our
failure to operate our refineries at desired capacity could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations. We also have significant long-term needs
for cash, including those to support our expansion and upgrade plans, as well as for regulatory
compliance. If credit markets tighten, it may become more difficult to obtain cash from third party
sources. If we cannot generate cash flow or otherwise secure sufficient liquidity to support our
short-term and long-term capital requirements, we may not be able to comply with regulatory
deadlines or pursue our business strategies, in which case our operations may not perform as well
as we currently expect and we could be subject to regulatory action.
Changes in our credit profile may affect our relationship with our suppliers, which could have a
material adverse effect on our liquidity and limit our ability to purchase enough crude oil to
operate our refineries at desired capacity.
An unfavorable credit profile could affect the way crude oil suppliers view our ability to make
payments and induce them to shorten the payment terms of their invoices with us or require credit
enhancement. Due to the large dollar amounts and volume of our crude oil and other feedstock
purchases, any imposition by our suppliers of more burdensome payment terms or credit enhancement
requirements on us may have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and our ability to make
payments to our suppliers. This in turn could cause us to be unable to operate our refineries at
desired capacity. A failure to operate our refineries at desired capacity could adversely affect
our profitability and cash flow.
We may not be able to obtain funding on acceptable terms or at all because of volatility and
uncertainty in the credit and capital markets. This may hinder or prevent us from meeting our
future capital needs.
Although the domestic capital markets have shown signs of improvement in recent months, global
financial markets and economic conditions have been, and continue to be, disrupted and volatile due
to a variety of factors, including uncertainty in the financial services sector, low consumer
confidence, increased unemployment, geopolitical issues and the current weak economic conditions.
In addition, the fixed-income markets have experienced periods of extreme volatility that have
negatively impacted market liquidity conditions. As a result, the cost of raising money in the
debt and equity capital markets has increased substantially at times while the availability of
funds from those markets diminished significantly. In particular, as a result of concerns about the
stability of financial markets generally and the solvency of lending counterparties specifically,
the cost of obtaining money from the credit markets may increase as many lenders and institutional
investors increase interest rates, enact tighter lending standards, refuse to refinance existing
debt on similar terms or at all and reduce, or in some cases cease, to provide funding to
borrowers. In addition, lending counterparties under existing revolving credit facilities and other
debt instruments may be unwilling or unable to meet their funding obligations. Due to these
factors, we cannot be certain that new debt or equity financing will be available on acceptable
terms. If funding is not available when needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, we may
be unable to meet our obligations as they come due. Moreover, without adequate funding, we may be
unable to execute our growth strategy, complete future acquisitions, take advantage of other
business opportunities or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could have a material
adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations.
-37-
Our leverage may limit our ability to borrow additional funds, comply with the terms of our
indebtedness or capitalize on business opportunities.
As of December 31, 2009, the principal amount of our total outstanding debt was $300 million.
Our leverage could have important consequences. We require substantial cash flow to meet our
payment obligations with respect to our indebtedness. Our ability to make scheduled payments, to
refinance our obligations with respect to our indebtedness or our ability to obtain additional
financing in the future will depend on our financial and operating performance, which, in turn, is
subject to prevailing economic conditions and to financial, business and other factors. We believe
that we will have sufficient cash flow from operations and available borrowings under our Credit
Agreement to service our indebtedness. However, a significant downturn in our business or other
development adversely affecting our cash flow could materially impair our ability to service our
indebtedness. If our cash flow and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service
obligations, we may be forced to refinance all or a portion of our debt or sell assets. We cannot
assure you that we would be able to refinance our existing indebtedness at maturity or otherwise or
sell assets on terms that are commercially reasonable.
Our debt agreements contain operating and financial restrictions that might constrain our business
and financing activities.
The operating and financial restrictions and covenants in our credit facilities and any future
financing agreements could adversely affect our ability to finance future operations or capital
needs or to engage, expand or pursue our business activities. For example, our revolving credit
facility imposes usual and customary requirements for this type of credit facility, including: (i)
maintenance of certain levels of interest coverage and leverage ratios; (ii) limitations on liens,
investments, indebtedness and dividends; (iii) a prohibition on changes in control and (iv)
restrictions on engaging in mergers, consolidations and sales of assets, entering into certain
lease obligations, and making certain investments or capital expenditures. If we fail to satisfy
the covenants set forth in the credit facility or another event of default occurs under the
facility, the maturity of the loan could be accelerated or we could be prohibited from borrowing
for our future working capital needs and issuing letters of credit. We might not have, or be able
to obtain, sufficient funds to make these immediate payments. Should we desire to undertake a
transaction that is prohibited by the covenants in our credit facilities, we will need to obtain
consent under our credit facilities. Such refinancing may not be possible or may not be available
on commercially acceptable terms. In addition, our obligations under our credit facilities are
secured by inventory, receivables and pledged cash assets. If we are unable to repay our
indebtedness under our credit facilities when due, the lenders could seek to foreclose on the
assets or we may be required to contribute additional capital to our subsidiaries. Any of these
outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
We may need to use current cash flow to fund our pension and postretirement health care
obligations, which could have a significant adverse effect on our financial position.
We have benefit obligations in connection with our noncontributory defined benefit pension plans
that provided retirement benefits for substantially all of our employees. However, effective
January 1, 2007, the retirement plan was frozen to new employees not covered by collective
bargaining agreements with labor unions. To the extent an employee not covered by a collective
bargaining agreement was hired prior to January 1, 2007, and elected to participate in automatic
contributions features under our defined contribution plan, their participation in future benefits
of the retirement plan was frozen. We expect to contribute between $10 million to $20 million to
the retirement plan in 2010. Future adverse changes in the financial markets could result in
significant charges to stockholders equity and additional significant increases in future pension
expense and funding requirements.
-38-
We also have benefit obligations in connection with our unfunded postretirement health care plans
that provide health care benefits as part of the voluntary early retirement program offered to
eligible employees. As part of the early retirement program, we allow qualified retiring employees
to continue coverage at a reduced cost under our group medical plans until normal retirement age.
Additionally, we maintain an unfunded postretirement medical plan whereby certain retirees between
the ages of 62 and 65 can receive benefits paid by us. As of December 31, 2009, the total
accumulated postretirement benefit obligation under our postretirement medical plans was $6.7
million. Increased participation in this program and/or increasing medical costs may affect our
ability to pay required health care benefits causing us to have to divert funds away from other
areas of the business to pay their costs.
The new and revamped equipment in our facilities may not perform according to expectations which
may cause unexpected maintenance and downtime and could have a negative effect on our future
results of operations and financial condition.
We are completing major capital investment programs at both our Navajo and Woods Cross Refineries.
At the Tulsa Refinery we have various projects planned to integrate the two facilities to fully
utilize their capabilities. All three refineries also have various environmental compliance
related projects.
The installation of new equipment and the revamp of key existing equipment involve significant
risks and uncertainties, including the following:
|
|
|
Equipment may not perform at expected throughput levels, |
|
|
|
Actual yields or product quality may differ from design, |
|
|
|
Actual operating costs may be higher than expected, |
|
|
|
Equipment may need to be redesigned, revamped, or replaced for the new units to perform
as expected |
|
|
|
Item 1B. |
|
Unresolved Staff Comments |
We do not have any unresolved staff comments.
|
|
|
Item 3. |
|
Legal Proceedings |
Commitment and Contingency Reserves
When deemed necessary, we establish reserves for certain legal proceedings. The establishment of a
reserve involves an estimation process that includes the advice of legal counsel and subjective
judgment of management. While management believes these reserves to be adequate, future changes in
the facts and circumstances could result in the actual liability exceeding the estimated ranges of
loss and amounts accrued.
While the outcome and impact on us cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes that the
resolution of these proceedings through settlement or adverse judgment will not have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or cash flow. Operating results, however,
could be significantly impacted in the reporting periods in which such matters are resolved.
-39-
SFPP Litigation
a. The Early Complaint Cases
In May 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Court of
Appeals) issued its decision on petitions for review, brought by us and other parties, concerning
rulings by the FERC in proceedings brought by us and other parties against SFPP, L.P. These
proceedings relate to tariffs of common carrier pipelines, which are owned and operated by SFPP,
for shipments of refined products from El Paso, Texas to Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona and from
points in California to points in Arizona. We are one of several refiners that regularly utilize
the SFPP pipeline to ship refined products from El Paso, Texas to Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona on
SFPPs East Line. The Court of Appeals in its May 2007 decision approved a FERC position, which is
adverse to us, on the treatment of income taxes in the calculation of allowable rates for pipelines
operated by partnerships and ruled in our favor on an issue relating to our rights to reparations
when it is determined that certain tariffs we paid to SFPP in the past were too high. The income
tax issue and the other remaining issues relating to SFPPs obligations to shippers are being
handled by the FERC in a single compliance proceeding covering the period from 1992 through May
2006. We currently estimate that, as a result of the May 2007 Court of Appeals decision and prior
rulings by the Court of Appeals and the FERC in these proceedings, a net amount will be due from
SFPP to us for the period January 1992 through May 2006 in addition to the $15.3 million we
received in 2003 from SFPP as reparations for the period from 1992 through July 2000. Because
proceedings in the FERC following the Court of Appeals decision
have not been completed and final action by the FERC could be subject to further court proceedings,
it is not possible at this time to determine what will be the net amount payable to us at the
conclusion of these proceedings.
b. Settlements
We and other shippers have been engaged in settlement discussions with SFPP on remaining issues
relating to East Line service in the FERC proceedings. A partial settlement covering the period
June 2006 through November 2007, which became final in February 2008, resulted in a payment from
SFPP to us of approximately $1.3 million in April 2008. On October 22, 2008, we and other shippers
jointly filed at the FERC with SFPP a settlement covering the period from December 2008 through
November 2010. The FERC approved the settlement on January 29, 2009. The settlement reduced SFPPs
current rates and required SFPP to make additional payments to us of approximately $2.9 million,
which was received on May 18, 2009.
c. The Latest Rate Proceeding
On June 2, 2009, SFPP notified us that it would terminate the October 2008 settlement, as provided
under the settlement, effective August 31, 2009. On July 31, 2009, SFPP filed substantial rate
increases for East Line service to become effective September 1, 2009. We and several other
shippers filed protests at the FERC challenging the rate increase and asking the FERC to suspend
the effectiveness of the increased rates. On August 31, 2009, the FERC issued an order suspending
the effective date of the rate increase until January 1, 2010, on which date the rate increase was
placed into effect, and setting the rate increase for a full evidentiary hearing to be held in
2010. We are not in a position to predict the ultimate outcome of the rate proceeding.
MTBE Litigation
Our Navajo Refining Company subsidiary was named as a defendant, along with approximately 40 other
companies involved in oil refining and marketing and related businesses, in a lawsuit originally
filed in May 2006 by the State of New Mexico in the U.S. District Court for the District of New
Mexico and subsequently transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New
York under multidistrict procedures along with approximately 100 similar cases, in which Navajo was
not named, brought by other governmental entities and private parties in other states. The lawsuit,
in which Navajo is named, as amended in October 2006 through the filing of a second amended
complaint, alleges that the defendants are liable for contaminating the waters of New Mexico
through producing and/or supplying MTBE or gasoline or other products containing MTBE. The lawsuit
asserts claims for defective design or product, failure to warn, negligence, public nuisance,
statutory public nuisance, private nuisance, trespass, and civil conspiracy, and seeks compensatory
damages unspecified in amount, injunctive relief, exemplary and punitive damages, costs, attorneys
fees allowed by law, and interest allowed by law. The second amended complaint also contains a
claim, asserted against certain other defendants but not against Navajo, alleging violations of
certain provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act, which appears to be similar to a claim
previously threatened in a mailing to Navajo and other defendants by law firms representing the
plaintiffs. Most other defendants have been dismissed from this lawsuit as a result of settlements.
Pursuant to an agreement dated December 30, 2009, Navajo has been released with respect to the
claims asserted against it in this lawsuit, and the lawsuit against it has been dismissed with
prejudice.
-40-
NMED NOV
In October 2008, the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) issued an Amended Notice of
Violation and Proposed Penalties (Amended NOV) to Navajo Refining Company, amending an NOV issued
in February 2007. The NOV is a preliminary enforcement document issued by NMED and usually is the
predicate to formal administrative or judicial enforcement. The February 2007 NOV was issued
following two hazardous waste compliance evaluation inspections at the Artesia, New Mexico refinery
that were conducted in April and November 2006 and alleged violations of the New Mexico Hazardous
Waste Management Regulations and Navajos Hazardous Waste Permit. NMED proposed a civil penalty of
approximately $0.1 million for the February 2007 NOV. The Amended NOV includes additional alleged
violations concerning post-closure care of a hazardous waste land treatment unit and the
construction of a tank on the land treatment area. The Amended NOV also proposes an additional
civil penalty of $0.3 million. Navajo has submitted responses to the February 2007 NOV and the
Amended NOV, challenging certain alleged violations and proposed penalty amounts and is continuing
negotiations with the NMED to resolve these matters expeditiously.
Woods Cross Construction Dispute 1
Our Holly Refining & Marketing Company Woods Cross and Woods Cross Refining Company, LLC
subsidiaries were named, along with other parties, as defendants in a lawsuit filed in December
2008 by Brahma Group, Inc. in the State District Court in Davis County, Utah, involving a
construction dispute regarding the installation of improvements known as a crude desalter, crude
unloader, and west tank farm at our Woods Cross, Utah refinery. This matter has been resolved
through mutual agreement of the parties. All actions have been settled for an immaterial amount
and dismissed with prejudice by the court.
Woods Cross Construction Dispute 2
Our Holly Refining & Marketing Company Woods Cross and Woods Cross Refining Company, LLC
subsidiaries were named, along with other parties, as defendants in a lawsuit filed on April 22,
2009 by Brahma Group, Inc. in the State District Court in Davis County, Utah, involving a
construction dispute over the installation of an oil gas hydrocracker at the Woods Cross, Utah
refinery. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants caused delays, additional work and increased
costs in the installation of the oil gas hydrocracker for which the plaintiff was not paid. The
claims made against our subsidiaries are for lien foreclosure, failure to obtain a payment bond,
and implied contract. The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages in the approximate amount of $12.0
million, costs, attorneys fees allowed by law, and interest allowed by law. A lien has also been
filed in the county records against the refinery property in that amount. Our subsidiaries have
tendered defense of the complaint to the general contractor, Benham Constructors. Our subsidiaries
have answered the complaint and denied any liability. The plaintiff and the general contractor
have agreed to arbitrate their dispute, and the claims against our subsidiaries have been stayed
pending the outcome of that arbitration. At the date of this report, it is not possible to predict
the likely course or outcome of this litigation.
Cut Bank Hill Environmental Claims
Prior to the sale by Holly Corporation of the Montana Refining Company (MRC) assets in 2006, MRC,
along with other companies was the subject of several environmental claims at the Cut Bank Hill
site in Montana. These claims include: (1) a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrative
order requiring MRC and other companies to undertake cleanup actions; (2) a U.S. Coast Guard claim
against MRC and other companies for response costs of $298,500 in connection with its cleanup
efforts at the Cut Bank Hill site; and (3) a unilateral order by the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ) directing MRC and other companies to complete a remedial
investigation and a request by the MDEQ that MRC and other companies pay approximately $150,000 to
reimburse the States costs for remedial actions. MRC has denied responsibility for the requested
EPA and the MDEQ cleanup actions and the MDEQ and Coast Guard response costs.
OSHA Inspection Woods Cross
In June 2007, the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced a
national emphasis program (NEP) for inspecting approximately 80 refineries within its
jurisdiction. As a part of the NEP, OSHA encouraged the State Plan States such as Utah to initiate
their own version of the NEP. Beginning on May 1, 2008, the Utah Labor Commission, Occupational
Safety and Health Division (UOSH) began an inspection of the refinery which is operated by Holly
Refining and Marketing Company Woods Cross and is located in Woods Cross, Utah. The inspection
ended on September 18 and on October 23, 2008, UOSH issued one citation alleging 33 violations of
various safety standards including the Process Safety Management Standard and proposing a penalty
of $91,750. We filed a notice of contest with the Adjudicative Division, Utah Labor Commission, in
Salt Lake City, Utah. On February 18, 2009, the initial status conference for this matter was held
and a scheduling order was issued. Our answer was filed and served on March 4, 2009 and discovery
ended on January 6, 2010. The hearing date has been set for July 6, 2010. We intend to vigorously
defend this citation and believe that we have strong defenses on the merits.
-41-
OSHA Inspection Tulsa Refinery east facility
In June 2007, OSHA announced a NEP for inspecting approximately 80 refineries within its
jurisdiction. As part of the NEP, OSHA conducted an inspection of Sinclair Tulsa Refining
Companys (Sinclair Tulsa) refinery in Tulsa, Oklahoma (our Tulsa Refinery east facility) from
February 4, 2009 through August 3, 2009. On August 4, 2009, OSHA issued two citations to Sinclair
Tulsa, alleging 51 serious violations and 1 willful violation of various safety standards including
the Process Safety Management Standard (PSM) and the General Duty Clause. OSHA proposed
penalties totaling $240,750. Sinclair filed a notice of contest, challenging the citations.
Because the proposed penalties exceed $100,000, the matter was referred for mandatory settlement
before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. The settlement conference is
scheduled to take place March 16 17, 2010 in Dallas, Texas.
Our subsidiary, Holly Refining & Marketing Tulsa LLC (HRM-Tulsa), entered into an Asset Sale &
Purchase Agreement (the Agreement) with Sinclair Tulsa dated October 19, 2009 to acquire the
Tulsa Refinery east facility, and the sale closed on December 1, 2009. HRM-Tulsa intervened in the
case against Sinclair Tulsa pending before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
shortly after the sale closed. Under the terms of the Agreement, Sinclair retains responsibility
for defending the OSHA citations and paying any penalties, and HRM-Tulsa has the discretion to
select the means and methods of improving the PSM program. HRM-Tulsa is in the initial stages of
evaluating the feasibility and range of options to make such PSM program improvements at the Tulsa
Refinery east facility.
Discharge Permit Appeal Tulsa Refinery west facility
Our subsidiary, HRM-Tulsa is party to parallel Oklahoma administrative and state district court
proceedings involving a challenge, originally filed by Sunoco, Inc. (R&M), to the terms of the
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) permit that governs the discharge of
industrial wastewater from what is now our Tulsa Refinery west facility. After our acquisition of
the Tulsa Refinery west facility, we were substituted for Sunoco in both proceedings. On February
1, 2010, we entered into a settlement agreement with the Oklahoma Department of Environmental
Quality. The agreement provided, among other things, for the amendment of the permit to require
that the Tulsa Refinery west facility make certain modifications in its system for handling storm
flows. These modifications are required to be complete within three years of the issuance of the
revised permit. Both the administrative and the state district court proceedings have been stayed
to permit this settlement agreement to be effectuated. Once the agreed-upon changes become
effective, both proceedings will be dismissed. Preliminary engineering is underway to develop a
final scope and capital estimate, and any process modification is subject to regulatory review and
approval. Accordingly, it is not possible to estimate the costs of compliance with the new permit
provision at this time.
Unclaimed Property Audit
A multi-state audit of our unclaimed property compliance and reporting is being conducted by Kelmar
Associates, LLC on behalf of twelve states. We expect this audit process to take several years to
be resolved due to the lengthy period covered by the audit (1981 2004). It is not yet possible
to accurately estimate the amount, if any, that is owed to each of the states since only
preliminary investigation has occurred to date.
Other
We are a party to various other litigation and proceedings that we believe, based on advice of
counsel, will not either individually or in the aggregate have a materially adverse impact on our
financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
|
|
|
Item 4. |
|
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
No matter was submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2009.
-42-
PART II
|
|
|
Item 5. |
|
Market for the Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities |
Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading symbol HOC. The
following table sets forth the range of the daily high and low sales prices per share of common
stock, dividends declared per share and the trading volume of common stock for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading |
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
|
Dividends |
|
|
Volume |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth quarter |
|
$ |
33.53 |
|
|
$ |
23.57 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
52,039,700 |
|
Third quarter |
|
$ |
26.22 |
|
|
$ |
16.71 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
50,535,600 |
|
Second quarter |
|
$ |
31.63 |
|
|
$ |
17.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
73,542,100 |
|
First quarter |
|
$ |
27.42 |
|
|
$ |
18.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
85,489,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth quarter |
|
$ |
28.83 |
|
|
$ |
10.84 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
81,694,000 |
|
Third quarter |
|
$ |
37.47 |
|
|
$ |
25.88 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
88,195,700 |
|
Second quarter |
|
$ |
49.62 |
|
|
$ |
36.13 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
79,585,500 |
|
First quarter |
|
$ |
56.81 |
|
|
$ |
38.84 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
79,892,000 |
|
As of February 8, 2010, we had approximately 23,200 stockholders, including beneficial owners
holding shares in street name.
We intend to consider the declaration of a dividend on a quarterly basis, although there is no
assurance as to future dividends since they are dependent upon future earnings, capital
requirements, our financial condition and other factors. Our credit agreement limits the payment
of dividends. See Note 12 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under Item 8,
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
Under our common stock repurchase program, repurchases are made from time to time in the open
market or privately negotiated transactions based on market conditions, securities law limitations
and other factors. There were no common stock repurchases during the fourth quarter of 2009.
-43-
|
|
|
Item 6. |
|
Selected Financial Data |
The following table shows our selected financial information as of the dates or for the periods
indicated. This table should be read in conjunction with Item 7, Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and our consolidated financial
statements and related notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009(1)(4) |
|
|
2008(1)(4) |
|
|
2007(1)(4) |
|
|
2006(1)(3)(4) |
|
|
2005(1)(2)(3)(4) |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
|
FINANCIAL DATA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
|
$ |
4,023,217 |
|
|
$ |
3,046,313 |
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
|
43,803 |
|
|
|
187,746 |
|
|
|
499,444 |
|
|
|
383,501 |
|
|
|
270,373 |
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
7,460 |
|
|
|
64,028 |
|
|
|
165,316 |
|
|
|
136,603 |
|
|
|
99,626 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
36,343 |
|
|
|
123,718 |
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
|
|
246,898 |
|
|
|
170,747 |
|
Income from discontinued operations, net of taxes |
|
|
16,926 |
|
|
|
2,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,668 |
|
|
|
2,963 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income before cumulative effect of change in accounting
principle |
|
|
53,269 |
|
|
|
126,636 |
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
|
|
266,566 |
|
|
|
173,710 |
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change (net of income tax
expense of $426) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
669 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income(5) |
|
|
53,269 |
|
|
|
126,636 |
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
|
|
266,566 |
|
|
|
174,379 |
|
Less net income attributable to noncontrolling interest(5) |
|
|
33,736 |
|
|
|
6,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,721 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Holly Corporation Stockholders(5) |
|
$ |
19,533 |
|
|
$ |
120,558 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
$ |
266,566 |
|
|
$ |
167,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders basic |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.40 |
|
|
$ |
6.09 |
|
|
$ |
4.68 |
|
|
$ |
2.72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders diluted |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.38 |
|
|
$ |
5.98 |
|
|
$ |
4.58 |
|
|
$ |
2.65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.29 |
|
|
$ |
0.19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
50,418 |
|
|
|
50,202 |
|
|
|
54,852 |
|
|
|
56,976 |
|
|
|
61,728 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
50,595 |
|
|
|
50,549 |
|
|
|
55,850 |
|
|
|
58,210 |
|
|
|
63,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
214,058 |
|
|
$ |
155,490 155,490 |
|
|
$ |
422,737 |
|
|
$ |
245,183 |
|
|
$ |
251,234 |
|
Net cash provided by (used for) investing activities |
|
$ |
(537,116 |
) |
|
$ |
(57,777 |
) |
|
$ |
(293,057 |
) |
|
$ |
35,805 |
|
|
$ |
(320,135 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities |
|
$ |
406,849 |
|
|
$ |
(151,277 |
) |
|
$ |
(189,428 |
) |
|
$ |
(175,935 |
) |
|
$ |
50,505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At end of period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and investments in marketable
securities |
|
$ |
125,819 |
|
|
$ |
94,447 |
|
|
$ |
329,784 |
|
|
$ |
255,953 |
|
|
$ |
254,842 |
|
Working capital(6) |
|
$ |
257,899 |
|
|
$ |
68,465 |
|
|
$ |
216,541 |
|
|
$ |
240,181 |
|
|
$ |
210,103 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
3,145,939 |
|
|
$ |
1,874,225 |
|
|
$ |
1,663,945 |
|
|
$ |
1,237,869 |
|
|
$ |
1,142,900 |
|
Total debt, including short-term |
|
$ |
667,649 |
|
|
$ |
370,914 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Total equity(5) |
|
$ |
1,207,871 |
|
|
$ |
936,332 |
|
|
$ |
593,794 |
|
|
$ |
466,094 |
|
|
$ |
377,351 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We reconsolidated HEP effective March 1, 2008 and include the consolidated results of
HEP in our financial statements. For the period from July 1, 2005 through February 29,
2008, we accounted for our investment in HEP under the equity method of accounting whereby
we recorded our pro-rata share of earnings in HEP. Contributions to and distributions from
HEP were recorded as adjustments to our investment balance. Prior to July 1, 2005, HEP was
a consolidated entity. See Company Overview under Items 1 and 2, Business and
Properties for information regarding our reconsolidation of HEP effective March 1, 2008. |
|
(2) |
|
The average number of shares of common stock and per share amounts have been adjusted
to reflect the two-for-one stock split effective June 1, 2006. |
|
(3) |
|
On March 31, 2006, we sold our Montana refinery. Results of operations of the Montana
refinery that were previously reported in operations are presented in discontinued
operations. |
|
(4) |
|
On December 1, 2009, HEP sold its 70% interest in Rio Grande. Accordingly, results of
operations of Rio Grande that were previously reported in operations are presented in
discontinued operations. |
|
(5) |
|
Accounting standards became effective January 1, 2009 that change the classification of
noncontrolling interests, also referred to as minority interests, in the Consolidated
Financial Statements. As a result, all previous references to minority interest within
these financial statements have been replaced noncontrolling interest. Also, net income
attributable to the noncontrolling interest in our HEP subsidiary is now presented as an
adjustment to net income to arrive at Net income attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders in our Consolidated Statements of Income. Prior to our adoption of these
standards, this amount was presented as Minority interest in earnings of HEP, a
non-operating expense item before Income before income taxes. Additionally, equity
attributable to noncontrolling interests is now presented as a separate component of total
equity in the Consolidated Financial Statements. We have adopted these standards on a
retrospective basis. While this presentation differs from previous requirements under GAAP,
it did not affect our net income and equity attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders. |
|
(6) |
|
At December 31, 2008, HEP classified $29 million in credit agreement borrowings as
short-term debt. |
-44-
|
|
|
Item 7. |
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
This Item 7 contains forward-looking statements. See Forward-Looking Statements at the
beginning of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In this document, the words we, our, ours and
us refer only to Holly Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries or to Holly Corporation or
an individual subsidiary and not to any other person with certain exceptions. For periods prior to
our reconsolidation of HEP effective March 1, 2008, the words we, our, ours and us exclude
HEP and its subsidiaries as consolidated subsidiaries of Holly Corporation. This document contains
certain disclosures of agreements that are specific to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries and do
not necessarily represent obligations of Holly Corporation. When used in descriptions of
agreements and transactions, HEP refers to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries.
OVERVIEW
We are principally an independent petroleum refiner operating three refineries in Artesia and
Lovington, New Mexico (operated as one refinery), Woods Cross, Utah and Tulsa, Oklahoma. As of
December 31, 2009, our refineries had a combined crude capacity of 256,000 BPSD. Our profitability
depends largely on the spread between market prices for refined petroleum products and crude oil
prices. At December 31, 2009, we also owned a 34% interest in HEP, a consolidated subsidiary,
which owns and operates pipeline and terminalling assets.
Our principal source of revenue is from the sale of high value light products such as gasoline,
diesel fuel, jet fuel, specialty lubricant products, and specialty and modified asphalt in markets
in the Southwestern, Rocky Mountain and Mid-Continent regions of the United States. Our sales and
other revenues and net income attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders for the year ended
December 31, 2009 were $4,834.3 million and $19.5 million, respectively. Our sales and other
revenues and net income attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders for the year ended December
31, 2008 were $5,860.4 million and $120.6 million, respectively. Our principal expenses are costs
of products sold and operating expenses. Our total operating costs and expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2009 were $4,754 million, a decrease from $5,664.7 million for the year ended December
31, 2008.
On June 1, 2009, we acquired the Tulsa Refinery west facility, an 85,000 BPSD refinery located in
Tulsa, Oklahoma from Sunoco for $157.8 million in cash, including crude oil, refined product and
other inventories valued at $92.8 million. The refinery produces fuel products including gasoline,
diesel fuel and jet fuel and serves markets in the Mid-Continent region of the United States and
also produces specialty lubricant products that are marketed throughout North America and are
distributed in Central and South America. On October 20, 2009, we sold to Plains a portion of the
crude oil petroleum storage tanks and certain refining-related crude oil receiving pipeline
facilities, that were acquired as part of the refinery assets for $40 million.
On December 1, 2009, we acquired the Tulsa Refinery east facility, a 75,000 BPSD refinery from
Sinclair also located in Tulsa, Oklahoma for $183.3 million, including crude oil, refined product
and other inventories valued at $46.4 million. The total purchase price consisted of $109.3
million in cash and 2,789,155 shares of our common stock having a value of $74 million.
Additionally, we will reimburse Sinclair approximately $8 million upon their satisfactory
completion of certain environmental projects at the refinery. The refinery also produces gasoline,
diesel fuel and jet fuel products and also serves markets in the Mid-Continent region of the United
States. We are in the process of integrating the operations of both Tulsa Refinery facilities.
Upon completion, the Tulsa Refinery will have an integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BPSD.
Seperately, HEP, also a party to the December 1, 2009 transaction with Sinclair, acquired certain
logistics and storage assets located at our Tulsa Refinery east facility. See Holly Energy
Partners, L.P. 2009 Acquisitions under Items 1 and 2, Business and Properties for additional
information on this transaction as well as HEPs other 2009 asset acquisitions from us.
Also on December 1, 2009, HEP sold its 70% interest in Rio Grande to a subsidiary of Enterprise
Products Partners LP for $35 million. Accordingly, the results of operations of Rio Grande and the
$14.5 million gain on the sale are presented in discontinued operations.
-45-
On February 29, 2008, we sold the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets to HEP for $180 million. The
assets consisted of crude oil trunk lines that deliver crude oil to our refinery in southeast New
Mexico, gathering and connection pipelines located in west Texas and New Mexico, on-site crude
tankage located within both of our refinery complexes, a jet fuel products pipeline and leased
terminal between Artesia and Roswell, New Mexico and crude oil and product pipelines that support
our refinery in Woods Cross, Utah. HEP is a VIE as defined under GAAP. Under GAAP, HEPs purchase
of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets qualified as a reconsideration event whereby we
reassessed our beneficial interest in HEP. Following this transaction, we determined that our
beneficial interest in HEP exceeded 50%. Accordingly, we reconsolidated HEP effective March 1,
2008. Therefore, intercompany transactions with HEP are eliminated in our consolidated financial
statements.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Financial Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) |
|
|
4,238,008 |
|
|
|
5,280,699 |
|
|
|
4,003,488 |
|
Operating expenses (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) |
|
|
356,855 |
|
|
|
265,705 |
|
|
|
209,281 |
|
General and administrative expenses (exclusive of depreciation
and amortization) |
|
|
60,343 |
|
|
|
55,278 |
|
|
|
69,185 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
98,751 |
|
|
|
62,995 |
|
|
|
43,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
4,753,957 |
|
|
|
5,664,677 |
|
|
|
4,325,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations |
|
|
80,311 |
|
|
|
195,680 |
|
|
|
466,332 |
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of SLC Pipeline |
|
|
1,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
5,045 |
|
|
|
10,797 |
|
|
|
15,089 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(40,346 |
) |
|
|
(23,955 |
) |
|
|
(1,086 |
) |
Acquisition costs Tulsa Refineries |
|
|
(3,126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,724 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of Holly Petroleum, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of HEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,990 |
|
|
|
19,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36,508 |
) |
|
|
(7,934 |
) |
|
|
33,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
|
43,803 |
|
|
|
187,746 |
|
|
|
499,444 |
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
7,460 |
|
|
|
64,028 |
|
|
|
165,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
36,343 |
|
|
|
123,718 |
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
Income from discontinued operations, net of taxes(1) |
|
|
16,926 |
|
|
|
2,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income(2) |
|
|
53,269 |
|
|
|
126,636 |
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
Less noncontrolling interest in net income(2) |
|
|
33,736 |
|
|
|
6,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders(2) |
|
$ |
19,533 |
|
|
$ |
120,558 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
15,209 |
|
|
$ |
119,206 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
4,324 |
|
|
|
1,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
19,533 |
|
|
$ |
120,558 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders basic: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.37 |
|
|
$ |
6.09 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.40 |
|
|
$ |
6.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.36 |
|
|
$ |
5.98 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.38 |
|
|
$ |
5.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
50,418 |
|
|
|
50,202 |
|
|
|
54,852 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
50,603 |
|
|
|
50,549 |
|
|
|
55,850 |
|
-46-
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and investments in marketable securities |
|
$ |
125,819 |
|
|
$ |
94,447 |
|
Working capital(3) |
|
$ |
257,899 |
|
|
$ |
68,465 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
3,145,939 |
|
|
$ |
1,874,225 |
|
Long-term debt Holly Corporation |
|
$ |
328,260 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Long-term debt Holly Energy Partners |
|
$ |
379,198 |
|
|
$ |
341,914 |
|
Total equity(2) |
|
$ |
1,207,871 |
|
|
$ |
936,332 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On December 1, 2009, HEP sold its 70% interest in Rio Grande. Accordingly, results of
operations of Rio Grande are presented in discontinued operations. |
|
(2) |
|
Accounting standards became effective January 1, 2009 that change the classification of
noncontrolling interests, also referred to as minority interests, in the Consolidated
Financial Statements. As a result, all previous references to minority interest within
these financial statements have been replaced with noncontrolling interest. Also, net
income attributable to the noncontrolling interest in our HEP subsidiary is now presented
as an adjustment to net income to arrive at Net income attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders in our Consolidated Statements of Income. Prior to our adoption of these
standards, this amount was presented as Minority interest in earnings of HEP, a
non-operating expense item before Income before income taxes. Additionally, equity
attributable to noncontrolling interests is now presented as a separate component of total
equity in the Consolidated Financial Statements. We have adopted these standards on a
retrospective basis. While this presentation differs from previous requirements under GAAP,
it did not affect our net income and equity attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders. |
|
(3) |
|
At December 31, 2008, HEP classified $29 million in credit agreement borrowings as
short-term debt. |
Other Financial Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
211,545 |
|
|
$ |
155,490 |
|
|
$ |
422,737 |
|
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
$ |
(534,603 |
) |
|
$ |
(57,777 |
) |
|
$ |
(293,057 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities |
|
$ |
406,849 |
|
|
$ |
(151,277 |
) |
|
$ |
(189,428 |
) |
Capital expenditures |
|
$ |
302,551 |
|
|
$ |
418,059 |
|
|
$ |
161,258 |
|
EBITDA from continuing operations(1) |
|
$ |
156,721 |
|
|
$ |
259,387 |
|
|
$ |
528,897 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, which we refer to as
(EBITDA), is calculated as net income plus (i) interest expense, net of interest income,
(ii) income tax provision, and (iii) depreciation and amortization. EBITDA is not a
calculation provided for under GAAP; however, the amounts included in the EBITDA
calculation are derived from amounts included in our consolidated financial statements.
EBITDA should not be considered as an alternative to net income or operating income as an
indication of our operating performance or as an alternative to operating cash flow as a
measure of liquidity. EBITDA is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures of
other companies. EBITDA is presented here because it is a widely used financial indicator
used by investors and analysts to measure performance. EBITDA is also used by our
management for internal analysis and as a basis for financial covenants. EBITDA presented
above is reconciled to net income under Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K. |
-47-
Our operations are currently organized into two reportable segments, Refining and HEP. Our
operations that are not included in the Refining and HEP segments are included in Corporate and
Other. Intersegment transactions are eliminated in our consolidated financial statements and are
included in Eliminations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining(1) |
|
$ |
4,786,937 |
|
|
$ |
5,837,449 |
|
|
$ |
4,790,164 |
|
HEP(2) |
|
|
146,561 |
|
|
|
94,439 |
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate and other |
|
|
2,248 |
|
|
|
2,641 |
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
Eliminations |
|
|
(101,478 |
) |
|
|
(74,172 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining(1) |
|
$ |
68,397 |
|
|
$ |
210,252 |
|
|
$ |
537,118 |
|
HEP(2) |
|
|
70,373 |
|
|
|
37,082 |
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate and other |
|
|
(57,355 |
) |
|
|
(51,654 |
) |
|
|
(70,786 |
) |
Eliminations |
|
|
(1,104 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
$ |
80,311 |
|
|
$ |
195,680 |
|
|
$ |
466,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Refining segment includes the operations of our Navajo, Woods Cross and Tulsa
Refineries and Holly Asphalt. The Refining segment involves the purchase and refining of
crude oil and wholesale and branded marketing of refined products, such as gasoline, diesel
fuel, jet fuel, specialty lubricant products, and specialty and modified asphalt. The
petroleum products produced by the Refining segment are primarily marketed in the
Southwest, Rocky Mountain and Mid-Continent regions of the United States and northern
Mexico. Additionally, specialty lubricant products produced at our Tulsa Refinery are
marketed throughout North America and are distributed in Central and South America. Holly
Asphalt manufactures and markets asphalt and asphalt products in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas
and northern Mexico. |
|
(2) |
|
The HEP segment involves all of the operations of HEP effective March 1, 2008 (date of
reconsolidation). HEP owns and operates a system of petroleum product and crude gathering
pipelines and refinery tankage in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Utah, and distribution
terminals in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Oklahoma and Washington. Revenues
are generated by charging tariffs for transporting petroleum products and crude oil through
its pipelines and by charging fees for terminalling petroleum products and other
hydrocarbons, and storing and providing other services at its storage tanks and terminals.
Additionally, HEP owns a 25% interest in the SLC Pipeline that services refineries in the
Salt Lake City, Utah area. Revenues from the HEP segment are earned through transactions
for pipeline transportation, rental and terminalling operations as well as revenues
relating to pipeline transportation services provided for our refining operations and from
HEPs interest the SLC Pipeline. |
Refining Operating Data
Our refinery operations include the Navajo, Woods Cross and Tulsa Refineries. The following tables
set forth information, including non-GAAP performance measures about our consolidated refinery
operations. The cost of products and refinery gross margin do not include the effect of
depreciation and amortization. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles following Item
7A of Part II of this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude charge (BPD)(1) |
|
|
142,430 |
|
|
|
100,680 |
|
|
|
103,490 |
|
Refinery production (BPD)(2) |
|
|
151,420 |
|
|
|
110,850 |
|
|
|
113,270 |
|
Sales of produced refined products (BPD) |
|
|
151,580 |
|
|
|
111,950 |
|
|
|
115,050 |
|
Sales of refined products (BPD)(3) |
|
|
155,820 |
|
|
|
120,750 |
|
|
|
126,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery utilization(4) |
|
|
78.9 |
% |
|
|
89.7 |
% |
|
|
94.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average per produced barrel(5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
74.06 |
|
|
$ |
108.83 |
|
|
$ |
89.77 |
|
Cost of products(6) |
|
|
66.85 |
|
|
|
97.87 |
|
|
|
73.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
|
7.21 |
|
|
|
10.96 |
|
|
|
16.74 |
|
Refinery operating expenses(7) |
|
|
5.24 |
|
|
|
5.14 |
|
|
|
4.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
1.97 |
|
|
$ |
5.82 |
|
|
$ |
12.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Crude charge represents the barrels per day of crude oil processed at our refineries. |
|
(2) |
|
Refinery production represents the barrels per day of refined products yielded from
processing crude and other refinery feedstocks through the crude units and other conversion
units at our refineries. |
-48-
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Includes refined products purchased for resale. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents crude charge divided by total crude capacity (BPSD). Our consolidated crude
capacity was increased from 109,000 BPSD to 111,000 BPSD in mid-year 2007 (our 2007 Navajo
Refinery expansion) and by an additional 5,000 BPSD in the fourth quarter of 2008 (our 2008
Woods Cross Refinery expansion). During 2009, we increased our consolidated crude capacity
by 15,000 BPSD in the first quarter of 2009 (our 2009 Navajo Refinery expansion), by 85,000
BPSD in the second quarter of 2009 (our June 2009 Tulsa Refinery west facility acquisition)
and by 40,000 BPSD in the fourth quarter of 2009 (our December 2009 Tulsa Refinery east
facility acquisition), increasing our consolidated crude capacity to 256,000 BPSD. |
|
(5) |
|
Represents average per barrel amount for produced refined products sold, which is a
non-GAAP measure. Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K. |
|
(6) |
|
Transportation costs billed from HEP are included in cost of products. |
|
(7) |
|
Represents operating expenses of the refineries, exclusive of depreciation and
amortization. |
Results of Operations Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2008
Summary
Income from continuing operations attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders for the year ended
December 31, 2009 was $15.2 million ($0.30 per basic and diluted share) a $104 million decrease
compared to $119.2 million ($2.37 per basic and $2.36 per diluted share) for the year ended
December 31, 2008. Income from continuing operations decreased due principally to an overall
decrease in refined gross margins in the second half of 2009. Overall refinery gross margins for
the year ended December 31, 2009 were $7.21 per produced barrel compared to $10.96 for the year
ended December 31, 2008.
Overall production levels for the year ended December 31, 2009 increased by 37% over 2008 due to
production attributable to the operations of our recently acquired Tulsa Refinery facilities and
production gains resulting from our recent Navajo and Woods Cross Refinery capacity expansions.
Also impacting production levels was scheduled downtime for major maintenance turnarounds at the
Navajo Refinery in the first quarter of 2009 and the Woods Cross Refinery in the third quarter of
2008. During the first quarter of 2009, we timed our Navajo Refinery turnaround to coincide with
the completion of its 15,000 BPSD capacity expansion, increasing refining capacity to 100,000 BPSD.
Sales and Other Revenues
Sales and other revenues from continuing operations decreased 18% from $5,860.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2008 to $4,834.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, due
principally to significantly lower refined product sales prices, partially offset by the effects of
a 29% increase in volumes of refined products sold. The volume increase was primarily due to
volumes attributable to our Tulsa Refinery operations. The average sales price we received per
produced barrel sold decreased 32% from $108.83 for the year ended December 31, 2008 to $74.06 for
the year ended December 31, 2009. Additionally, direct sales of excess crude oil also decreased in
the current year. Sales and other revenues for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, include
$45.5 million and $19.3 million, respectively, in HEP revenues attributable to pipeline and
transportation services provided to unaffiliated parties.
Cost of Products Sold
Cost of products sold decreased 20% from $5,280.7 million in 2008 to $4,238 million in 2009, due
principally to the effects of significantly lower crude oil costs, partially offset by the effects
of a 29% increase in volumes of refined products sold. The average price we paid per barrel of
crude oil and feedstocks used in production and the transportation costs of moving the finished
products to the market place decreased 32% from $97.87 in 2008 to $66.85 in 2009.
Gross Refinery Margins
Gross refining margin per produced barrel decreased 34% from $10.96 in 2008 to $7.21 in 2009, due
to a decrease in the average sales price we received per produced barrel sold, partially offset by the effects of
a decrease in the average price we paid per produced barrel of crude oil and feedstocks. Gross
refining margin does not include the effects of depreciation or amortization. See Reconciliations
to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles following Item 7A of Part II of
this Form 10-K for a reconciliation to the income statement of prices of refined products sold and
costs of products purchased.
-49-
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses, exclusive of depreciation and amortization increased 34% from $265.7 million in
2008 to $356.9 million in 2009, due principally to costs attributable to the operations of our
Tulsa Refinery commencing June 1, 2009 and the inclusion of HEP operating expense for a full
twelve-month period in 2009 compared to ten months in 2008 due to our reconsolidation of HEP
effective March 1, 2008. Additionally, there were certain increased costs at our existing
facilities following the recently completed expansions, which were partially offset by lower
utility costs. For the years ended December 2009 and 2008, operating expenses included $43.5
million and $33.4 million, respectively, in costs attributable to HEP operations.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses increased 9% from $55.3 million in 2008 to $60.3 million in
2009, due principally to costs associated with the support and integration of our Tulsa Refinery,
increased payroll costs and increased professional fees and services. Additionally, general and
administrative expenses for 2009 and 2008 include $5.3 million and $3.7 million, respectively, in
costs attributable to HEP operations.
Depreciation and Amortization Expenses
Depreciation and amortization increased 57% from $63 million in 2008 to $98.8 million in 2009. The
increase was due principally to depreciation and amortization attributable to our Tulsa Refinery
and capitalized refinery improvement projects in 2008 and 2009, and the inclusion of HEP
depreciation expense for a full twelve-month period during 2009 compared to ten months in 2008.
For the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, depreciation and amortization expenses included
$26.5 million and $18.4 million, respectively, in costs attributable to HEP operations.
Equity in Earnings of SLC Pipeline
HEP has a 25% joint venture interest in the SLC Pipeline that commenced pipeline operations
effective March 2009. HEPs equity in earnings of the SLC the SLC Pipeline was $1.9 million for
the year ended December 31, 2009.
Interest Income
Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2009 was $5 million compared to $10.8 million for
the year ended December 31, 2008, due principally to a decrease in investments in marketable debt
securities.
Interest Expense
Interest expense was $40.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $24 million for
the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase was due principally to interest attributable to
increased long-term debt, including our 9.875% senior notes due 2017 (the Holly Senior Notes),
and the inclusion of HEP interest expense for a full twelve-month period during 2009 compared to
ten months in 2008. For the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, interest expense included $23.8
million and $21.5 million, respectively, in costs attributable to HEP operations. Additionally for
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, fair value adjustments attributable to HEPs interest
rate swaps resulted in non-cash interest expense of $.2 million and $2.3 million, respectively.
Acquisition Costs Tulsa Refineries
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we incurred $3.1 million in acquisition costs related to
our June 1, 2009 Tulsa Refinery west facility and our December 1, 2009 Tulsa Refinery east facility
acquisitions.
Impairment of Equity Securities
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded an impairment loss of $3.7 million that related
to our 1,000,000 shares of Connacher common stock that we received in connection with our sale of
the Montana refinery in 2006. This loss represents an other-than-temporary decline in the fair
value of these equity securities during 2008.
Gain on Sale of HPI
We sold substantially all of the oil and gas properties of Holly Petroleum, Inc. (HPI), a
subsidiary that previously conducted a small-scale oil and gas exploration and production program,
in 2008 for $6 million, resulting in a gain of $6 million.
-50-
Equity in Earnings of HEP
Effective March 1, 2008, we reconsolidated HEP and no longer account for our investment in HEP
under the equity method of accounting. Our equity in earnings of HEP for the year ended December
31, 2008 was $3 million representing our pro-rata share of earnings in HEP from January 1 through
February 29, 2008.
Income Taxes
Income taxes decreased 88% from $64 million in 2008 to $7.5 million in 2009 due to significantly
lower pre-tax earnings in 2009 compared to 2008. Our effective tax rate, before consideration of
earnings attributable to noncontrolling interests was 17% compared to 34.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2008. Our effective tax rate calculation was
affected by how the noncontrolling interest is classified on the
income statement. Our actual effective tax rate did not decline.
Discontinued Operations
On December 1, 2009, HEP sold its 70% interest in Rio Grande resulting in a $14.5 million gain.
Rio Grande operations generated net earnings of $4.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
compared to $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. This is presented before taking
effect of HEPs noncontrolling interest in the discontinued operations.
Noncontrolling Interest in Net Income
Noncontrolling interest holders share in earnings of HEP was $33.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2009 compared to $6.1 million in 2008. This increase was due principally to higher
HEP earnings in 2009 compared to 2008 including HEPs gain on the sale of Rio Grande, our decreased
ownership in HEP and the inclusion of HEP consolidated results for a full twelve-month period in
2009 compared to ten months in 2008 due to our reconsolidation of HEP effective March 1, 2008.
Results of Operations Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2007
Summary
Income from continuing operations attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders for the year ended
December 31, 2008 was $119.2 million ($2.37 per basic and $2.36 per diluted share), a $214.9
decrease compared to $334.1 million ($6.09 per basic and $5.98 per diluted share) for the year
ended December 31, 2007. Income from continuing operations decreased due principally to reduced
refined product margins during the first half of 2008. Overall refinery gross margins for the year
ended December 31, 2008 were $10.96 per produced barrel compared to $16.74 for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
Sales and Other Revenues
Sales and other revenues from continuing operations increased 22% from $4,791.7 million for the
year ended December 31, 2007 to $5,860.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2008, due
principally to higher refined product sales prices, partially offset by a 5% decrease in volumes of
refined products sold. The average sales price we received per produced barrel sold increased 21%
from $89.77 for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $108.83 for the year ended December 31, 2008.
The decrease in volumes of refined products sold was principally due to the effects of downtime at
our refineries during the second quarter of 2008 and a scheduled major maintenance turnaround at
our Woods Cross Refinery during the third quarter of 2008. Additionally, sales and other revenues
for the year ended December 31, 2008 include $19.3 million in HEP revenues attributable to pipeline
and transportation services provided to unaffiliated parties due to our reconsolidation of HEP
effective March 1, 2008. Sales and other revenues for 2007 include $23 million in sulfur credit
sales.
Cost of Products Sold
Cost of products sold increased 32% from $4,003.5 million in 2007 to $5,280.7 million in 2008, due
principally to significantly higher crude oil costs in the first half of 2008. The average price
we paid per barrel of crude oil and feedstocks used in production and the transportation costs of
moving the finished products to the market place increased 34% from $73.03 in 2007 to $97.87 in
2008. This increase was partially offset by the effects of a 5% decrease in year-over-year volumes
of refined products sold.
-51-
Gross Refinery Margins
Gross refining margin per produced barrel decreased 35% from $16.74 in 2007 to $10.96 in 2008 due
to an increase in the average price we paid per produced barrel of crude oil and feedstocks,
partially offset by the effects of an increase in the average sales price we received per produced
barrel sold. Gross refining margin does not include the effects of depreciation or amortization.
See Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles following
Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K for a reconciliation to the income statements of prices of
refined products sold and costs of products purchased.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses, exclusive of depreciation and amortization increased 27% from $209.3 million in
2007 to $265.7 million in 2008, due principally to the inclusion of $33.4 million in operating
costs attributable to HEP as a result of our reconsolidation effective March 1, 2008.
Additionally, higher refinery utility and payroll costs along with increased maintenance costs
associated with unplanned downtime contributed to this increase.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses decreased 20% from $69.2 million in 2007 to $55.3 million in
2008, due principally to a decrease in equity-based compensation expense which is to some extent
affected by our stock price. Additionally, general and administrative expenses for 2008 include
$3.7 million in expenses related to HEP operations following our reconsolidation of HEP effective
March 1, 2008.
Depreciation and Amortization Expenses
Depreciation and amortization increased 45% from $43.5 million in 2007 to $63 million in 2008, due
principally to the inclusion of $18.4 million in depreciation and amortization related to HEP
operations following our reconsolidation of HEP effective March 1, 2008 and depreciation
attributable to capitalized refinery improvement projects in 2008 and 2007.
Equity in Earnings of HEP
Effective March 1, 2008, we reconsolidated HEP and no longer account for our investment in HEP
under the equity method of accounting. Our equity in earnings of HEP was $3 million and $19.1
million for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Impairment of Equity Securities
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded an impairment loss of $3.7 million that relates
to our 1,000,000 shares of Connacher common stock that we received in connection with our sale of
the Montana refinery in 2006. This loss represents an other-than-temporary decline in the fair
value of these equity securities during 2008.
Gain on Sale of HPI
We sold substantially all of the oil and gas properties of HPI, a subsidiary that previously
conducted a small-scale oil and gas exploration and production program, in 2008 for $6 million,
resulting in a gain of $6 million.
Interest Income
Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2008 was $10.8 million compared to $15.1 million
for the year ended December 31, 2007, due principally to the effects of a lower interest rate
environment combined with a decrease in investments in marketable debt securities.
Interest Expense
Interest expense was $24 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to $1.1 million for
the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase in interest expense was due principally to the
inclusion of $21.5 million in interest expense related to HEP operations following our
reconsolidation of HEP effective March 1, 2008.
Income Taxes
Income taxes decreased 61% from $165.3 million in 2007 to $64 million in 2008 due to lower pre-tax
earnings in 2008 compared to 2007. Our effective tax rate, before consideration of earnings
attributable to noncontrolling interests was 34.1% compared to 33.1% for the years ended December
31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. We realized a lower effective tax rate during 2007, due
principally to a higher utilization of ULSD tax credits in 2007 that were fully utilized in 2008.
-52-
Discontinued Operations
Rio Grande operations generated net earnings of $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Noncontrolling Interest in Net Income
Noncontrolling interest holders share in earnings of HEP was $6.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008, representing their pro-rata share of HEP earnings for the period from March 1,
2009 (date of HEP reconsolidation) through December 31, 2008.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Holly Credit Agreement
We have a $370 million senior secured credit agreement expiring in March 2013. In April 2009, we
entered into a second amended and restated $300 million senior secured revolving credit agreement
that amended and restated our previous credit agreement in its entirety with Bank of America, N.A.
as administrative agent and one of a syndicate of lenders (the Holly Credit Agreement).
Additionally, we upsized the credit agreement by $50 million in November 2009 and by an additional
$20 million in December 2009 pursuant to the accordion feature. The credit agreement may be used
to fund working capital requirements, capital expenditures, permitted acquisitions or other general
corporate purposes. We were in compliance with all covenants at December 31, 2009. At December
31, 2009, we had no outstanding borrowings and letters of credit totaling $56.3 million. At that
level of usage, the unused commitment under the Holly Credit Agreement was $313.7 million at
December 31, 2009.
Refinery gross margins were substantially reduced in the 2009 fourth quarter, which resulted in a
fourth quarter loss. We expect to be in compliance with the Holly Credit Agreement covenant
requirements as long as refinery margins show marked improvement over 2009 fourth quarter levels to
be more in line with historical norms. If a situation were to arise in which margins stayed
depressed for a prolonged period of time, we could potentially need to renegotiate certain
covenants in the Credit Agreement.
There are currently a total of fourteen lenders under the Holly Credit Agreement with individual
commitments ranging from $15 million to $47.5 million. If any particular lender could not honor
its commitment, we believe the unused capacity that would be available from the remaining lenders
would be sufficient to meet our borrowing needs. Additionally, we have reviewed publicly available
information on our lenders in order to review and monitor their financial stability and assess
their ongoing ability to honor their commitments under the Holly Credit Agreement. We have not
experienced, nor do we expect to experience, any difficulty in the lenders ability to honor their
respective commitments, and if it were to become necessary, we believe there would be alternative
lenders or options available.
HEP Credit Agreement
HEP has a $300 million senior secured revolving credit agreement expiring in August 2011 (the HEP
Credit Agreement). The HEP Credit Agreement is available to fund capital expenditures,
acquisitions and working capital and / or other general partnership purposes. At December 31, 2009,
HEP had outstanding borrowings totaling $206 million under the HEP Credit Agreement, with unused
borrowing capacity of $94 million. HEPs obligations under the HEP Credit Agreement are
collateralized by substantially all of HEPs assets. HEP assets that are included in our
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009 consist of $2.5 million in cash and cash
equivalents, $6.9 million in trade accounts receivable and other current assets, $458.5 million in properties, plants
and equipment, net and $125.2 million in intangible and other assets. Indebtedness under the HEP
Credit Agreement is recourse to HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., its general partner, and guaranteed
by HEPs wholly-owned subsidiaries. Any recourse to the general partner would be limited to the
extent of HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P.s assets, which other than its investment in HEP, are not
significant. Navajo Pipeline Co., L.P., Navajo Refining Company, L.L.C. and Woods Cross Refining
Company, L.L.C., three of our subsidiaries, have agreed to indemnify HEPs controlling partner to
the extent it makes any payment in satisfaction of debt service due on up to a $171 million
aggregate principal amount of borrowings under the HEP Credit Agreement.
There are currently a total of thirteen lenders under the HEP Credit Agreement with individual
commitments ranging from $15 million to $40 million. If any particular lender could not honor its
commitment, HEP believes the unused capacity that would be available from the remaining lenders
would be sufficient to meet its borrowing needs. Additionally, publicly available information on
these lenders is reviewed in order to monitor their financial stability and assess their ongoing
ability to honor their commitments under the HEP Credit Agreement. HEP has not experienced, nor do
they expect to experience, any difficulty in the lenders ability to honor their respective
commitments, and if it were to become necessary, HEP believes there would be alternative lenders or
options available.
-53-
Holly Senior Notes
In June 2009, we issued $200 million in aggregate principal amount of Holly Senior Notes. A
portion of the $188 million in net proceeds received was used for post-closing payments for
inventories of crude oil and refined products acquired from Sunoco following the closing of the
Tulsa Refinery west facility purchase on June 1, 2009. In October 2009, we issued an additional
$100 million aggregate principal amount as an add-on offering to the Holly Senior Notes that was
used to fund the cash portion of our acquisition of Sinclairs 75,000 BPSD refinery also located in
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
The $300 million aggregate principal amount of Holly Senior Notes mature on June 15, 2017 and bear
interest at 9.875%. The Holly Senior Notes are unsecured and impose certain restrictive covenants,
including limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, incur liens, enter into
sale-and-leaseback transactions, pay dividends, enter into mergers, sell assets and enter into
certain transactions with affiliates. At any time when the Holly Senior Notes are rated investment
grade by both Moodys and Standard & Poors and no default or event of default exists, we will not
be subject to many of the foregoing covenants. Additionally, we have certain redemption rights
under the Holly Senior Notes.
HEP Senior Notes
The HEP senior notes maturing March 1, 2015 are registered with the SEC and bear interest at 6.25%
(the HEP Senior Notes). The HEP Senior Notes are unsecured and impose certain restrictive
covenants, including limitations on HEPs ability to incur additional indebtedness, make
investments, sell assets, incur certain liens, pay distributions, enter into transactions with
affiliates, and enter into mergers. At any time when the HEP Senior Notes are rated investment
grade by both Moodys and Standard & Poors and no default or event of default exists, HEP will not
be subject to many of the foregoing covenants. Additionally, HEP has certain redemption rights
under the HEP Senior Notes. Indebtedness under the HEP Senior Notes is recourse to HEP Logistics
Holdings, L.P., its general partner, and guaranteed by HEPs wholly-owned subsidiaries. Any
recourse to the general partner would be limited to the extent of HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P.s
assets, which other than its investment in HEP, are not significant. Navajo Pipeline Co., L.P.,
one of our subsidiaries, has agreed to indemnify HEPs controlling partner to the extent it makes
any payment in satisfaction of debt service on up to $35 million of the principal amount of the HEP
Senior Notes.
Holly Financing Obligation
On October 20, 2009, we sold approximately 400,000 barrels of crude oil tankage at our Tulsa
Refinery west facility as well as certain crude oil pipeline receiving facilities to Plains for $40
million in cash. In connection with this transaction, we entered into a 15-year lease agreement
with Plains, whereby we agreed to pay a fixed monthly fee for the exclusive use of this tankage as
well as a fee for volumes received at the receiving facilities purchased by Plains. Additionally,
we have a margin sharing agreement with Plains under which we will equally share contango
profits with Plains for crude oil purchased by them and delivered to our Tulsa Refinery west
facility for storage. Due to our continuing involvement in these assets, this transaction has been
accounted for as a financing obligation. As a result, we retained our assets on our books and
established a liability representing the $40 million in proceeds received. Lease payments under
the agreement are applied as a reduction to principal with the remaining portion as interest
expense.
HEP Equity Offerings
In November 2009, HEP closed on a public offering of 2,185,000 of its common units including
285,000 common units issued pursuant to the underwriters exercise of their over-allotment option.
Aggregate net proceeds of $74.9 million were used to fund the cash portion of HEPs December 1,
2009 asset acquisitions, to repay outstanding borrowings under the HEP Credit Agreement and for
general partnership purposes.
Additionally in May 2009, HEP closed a public offering of 2,192,400 of its common units including
192,400 common units issued pursuant to the underwriters exercise of their over-allotment option.
Net proceeds of $58.4 million were used to repay outstanding borrowings under the HEP Credit
Agreement and for general partnership purposes.
-54-
We believe our current cash and cash equivalents, along with future internally generated cash flow
and funds available under our credit facilities will provide sufficient resources to fund currently
planned capital projects and our planned integration of the Tulsa Refinery facilities, and our
liquidity needs for the foreseeable future. In addition, components of our growth strategy may
include construction of new refinery processing units and the expansion of existing units at our
facilities and selective acquisition of complementary assets for our refining operations intended
to increase earnings and cash flow. Our ability to acquire complementary assets will be dependent
upon several factors, including our ability to identify attractive acquisition candidates,
consummate acquisitions on favorable terms, successfully integrate acquired assets and obtain
financing to fund acquisitions and to support our growth, and many other factors beyond our
control.
We consider all highly-liquid instruments with a maturity of three months or less at the time of
purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are stated at cost, which approximates market
value, and are invested primarily in conservative, highly-rated instruments issued by financial
institutions or government entities with strong credit standings. As of December 31, 2009, we had
cash and cash equivalents of $124.6 million and short-term investments in marketable securities of
$1.2 million.
Cash and cash equivalents increased by $83.8 million during 2009. Net cash provided by operating
activities and financing activities of $211.5 million and $406.8 million, respectively, exceeded
cash used for investing activities of $534.6 million. Working capital increased by $189.4 million
during 2009.
Cash Flows Operating Activities
Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2008
Net cash flows provided by operating activities were $211.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2009 compared to $155.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008, an increase of $56 million.
Net income for 2009 was $53.3 million, a decrease of $73.3 million from $126.6 million for 2008.
Non-cash adjustments consisting of depreciation and amortization, interest rate swap adjustments,
deferred income taxes, equity-based compensation, gain on the sale of assets and impairment of
equity securities resulted in an increase to operating cash flows of $130.4 million for the year
ended December 31, 2009 compared to $104.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Additionally, SLC Pipeline earnings in excess of distributions decreased operating cash flows by
$0.4 million in 2009 while distributions in excess of equity in earnings of HEP increased 2008
operating cash flows by $3.1 million. Changes in working capital items increased cash flows by $44
million in 2009 compared to a decrease of $37 million in 2008. For the year ended December 31,
2009, inventories decreased by $17.9 million compared to an increase of $15 million for 2008. Also
for 2009, accounts receivable increased by $474.2 million compared to a decrease of $332 million
for 2008 and accounts payable increased by $583.6 million compared to a decrease of $393.2 million
for 2008. Additionally, for 2009, turnaround expenditures were $33.5 million compared to $34.8
million for 2008.
Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2007
Net cash flows provided by operating activities were $155.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2008 compared to $422.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, a decrease of $267.2 million.
Net income for 2008 was $126.6 million, a decrease of $207.5 million from $334.1 million for 2007.
Additionally, the non-cash items of depreciation and amortization, deferred taxes, equity-based
compensation, gain on the sale of HPI and non-cash interest resulting from changes in the fair
value of two of HEPs interest rate swaps, resulted in an increase to operating cash flows of
$104.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to $76.5 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007. Distributions in excess of equity in earnings of HEP decreased to $3.1 million
for the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to $3.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007.
Changes in working capital items decreased cash flows by $37 million in 2008 compared to an
increase of $15 million in 2007. For the year ended December 31, 2008, inventories decreased by
$15 million compared to an increase of $11 million for 2007. Also for 2008, accounts receivable
decreased by $332 million compared to an increase of $216.3 million for 2007 and accounts payable
decreased by $393.2 million compared to an increase of $264.2 million for 2007. Additionally, for
2008, turnaround expenditures were $34.8 million compared to $2.7 million for 2007.
-55-
Cash Flows Investing Activities and Planned Capital Expenditures
Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2008
Net cash flows used for investing activities were $534.6 million for 2009 compared to $57.8 million
for 2008, an increase of $476.8 million. Cash expenditures for property, plant and equipment for
2009 totaled $302.6 million compared to $418.1 million for 2008. These include HEP capital
expenditures of $33 million and $34.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we paid cash consideration of $267.1
million in connection with our Tulsa Refinery west and east facility acquisitions. Additionally,
HEP paid cash consideration of $25.7 million upon its acquisition of logistics and storage assets
from Sinclair and made a $25.5 million joint venture contribution to the SLC Pipeline. In December
2009, HEP sold its 70% interest in Rio Grande for $35 million. The cash proceeds received are
presented net of Rio Grandes December 1, 2009 cash balance of $3.1 million. Also in 2009, we
invested $175.9 million in marketable securities and received proceeds of $230.3 million from sales
and maturities of marketable securities. For the year ended December 31, 2008, we invested $769.1
million in marketable securities and received proceeds of $945.5 million from sales and maturities
of marketable securities. Additionally, we received $171 million in proceeds from our sale of the
Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets to HEP on February 29, 2008 and have presented HEPs March 1,
2008 cash balance of $7.3 million as an inflow as a result of our reconsolidation of HEP effective
March 1, 2008.
Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2007
Net cash flows used for investing activities were $57.8 million for 2008 compared to $293.1 million
for 2007, a decrease of $235.3 million. Cash expenditures for property, plant and equipment for
2008 totaled $418.1 million compared to $161.3 million for 2007. Capital expenditures for the year
ended December 31, 2008 include $34.3 million attributable to HEP. Also in 2008, we invested
$769.1 million in marketable securities and received proceeds of $945.5 million from sales and
maturities of marketable securities. Additionally for the year ended December 31, 2008, we
received $171 million in proceeds from our sale of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets to HEP on
February 29, 2008. We are also presenting HEPs March 1, 2008 cash balance of $7.3 million as an
inflow as a result of our reconsolidation of HEP effective March 1, 2008. For the year ended
December 31, 2007, we invested $641.1 million in marketable securities and received proceeds of
$509.3 million from sales and maturities of marketable securities.
Planned Capital Expenditures
Holly Corporation
Each year our Board of Directors approves in our annual capital budget projects that our management
is authorized to undertake. Additionally, at times when conditions warrant or as new opportunities
arise, other or special projects may be approved. The funds allocated for a particular capital
project may be expended over a period of several years, depending on the time required to complete
the project. Therefore, our planned capital expenditures for a given year consist of expenditures
approved for capital projects included in the current years capital budget as well as, in certain
cases, expenditures approved for capital projects in capital budgets for prior years. Our total
approved capital budget for 2010 is $159.6 million. Additionally, capital costs of $38.8 million
have been approved for refinery turnarounds and tank work. We expect to spend approximately $200
million in capital costs in 2010, including capital projects approved in prior years. Our capital
spending for 2010 is comprised of $58.5 million for projects at the Navajo Refinery, $12.6 million
for projects at the Woods Cross Refinery, $63.2 for projects at the Tulsa Refinery, $60 million for
our portion of the UNEV pipeline project, $2.1 million for asphalt plant projects and $3.6 million
for marketing-related and miscellaneous projects. The following summarizes our key capital
projects.
-56-
We are proceeding with the integration project of our Tulsa Refinery west and east facilities.
Upon completion, the Tulsa Refinery will have an integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BPSD.
The integration project involves the installation of interconnect pipelines that will permit us to
transfer various intermediate streams between the two facilities. We have also signed a 10-year
agreement with a third party for the use of an additional line for the transfer of gasoline blend
stocks which is currently in service. These interconnect lines will allow us to eliminate the sale
of gas oil at a discount to WTI under our 5-year gas oil off take agreement with a third party,
optimize gasoline blending, increase our utilization of better process technology, and reduce
operating costs. Also, as part of the integration, we are planning to expand the diesel
hydrotreater unit at the east facility to permit the processing of all high sulfur diesel produced
to ULSD, eliminating the need to construct a new diesel hydrotreater at our west facility as
previously planned. This expansion is expected to cost approximately $20 million and will use the
reactor that we acquired as part of the Tulsa Refinery west facility acquisition. We are currently
planning to complete the integration projects by the end of the 2010.
The combined Tulsa Refinery facilities also will be required to comply with MSAT2 regulations in
order to meet new benzene reduction requirements for gasoline. We have elected to largely use
existing equipment at the Tulsa Refinery east facility to split reformate from reformers at both
west and east facilities and install a new benzene saturation unit to achieve the required benzene
reduction at an estimated cost of approximately $15 million. Our Tulsa Refinery is required to meet
MSAT2 1.3% benzene levels in gasoline beginning in July 2012 and we expect complete this project
well before then. We will be required to buy credits until this project is complete, as required by
law, beginning in 2011.
Our consent decree with the EPA requires recovery of sulfur from the refinery fuel gas system at
the Tulsa Refinery west facility by the end of 2013. We estimate our investment to comply with the
requirements will be approximately
$20 million. The consent decree also requires shutdown, replacement, or installation of low NOx
burners in three low pressure boilers by the end of 2013. We are still evaluating the best
solution to this issue.
We believe that the synergy of the Tulsa Refinery west and east facilities operated as a single
integrated facility will result in savings of approximately $110 million of expected capital
expenditures related to ULSD compliance. Also as a result of the integrated facility, we expect to
be able to reduce capital expenditures for the forthcoming benzene in gasoline requirements from
approximately $30 million for the Tulsa Refinery west facility alone to approximately $15 million
for the integrated complex. Even if we are able to realize the operating synergies of the
integrated facility, our Tulsa Refinery will still require sulfur recovery investment, but we
estimate combining the two refineries will reduce our net near-term capital expenditure
requirements by approximately $125 million, excluding the cost to construct the pipelines that will
integrate the west and east facilities.
Phase I of our Navajo Refinery major capital projects was mechanically completed in March 2009
increasing refinery capacity to 100,000 BPSD effective April 1, 2009. Phase I required the
installation of a new 15,000 BPSD mild hydrocracker, 28 MMSCFSD hydrogen plant and the expansion of
our Lovington crude and vacuum units at a cost of approximately $190 million.
We are nearing completion of phase II of the major capital projects at the Navajo Refinery. These
improvements will provide the capability to process up to 40,000 BPSD of heavy type crudes. Phase
II involves the installation of a new 18,000 BPSD solvent deasphalter and the revamp of our Artesia
crude and vacuum units. The solvent deasphalter unit was complete in the fourth quarter of 2009
and is in operation. The crude / vacuum unit revamp is expected to be to be completed in the first
quarter of 2010. We expect the phase II project to cost approximately $100 million.
We are also proceeding with a project to add asphalt tankage at the Navajo Refinery and at the
Holly Asphalt facility in Artesia, New Mexico to enhance asphalt economics by storing asphalt
during the winter months when asphalt prices are generally lower. These asphalt tank additions and
an approved upgrade of our rail loading facilities at the Artesia refinery are estimated to cost
$21 million and are expected to be completed about the same time as the phase II projects.
The Navajo Refinery currently plans to comply with the new MSAT2 regulations by the fractionation
of raw naphtha with existing equipment to achieve benzene in gasoline levels below 1.3%. The
Navajo Refinery will purchase credits from the Woods Cross and Tulsa Refineries in order reduce
benzene down to the required 0.62%. Due to our acquisition of the Tulsa Refinery facilities from
Sunoco and Sinclair, our Navajo Refinery has until the end of 2012 to comply with the MSAT2
regulation because we have lost our small refiners exemption and as a large refiner we have 30
months to comply.
-57-
At the Woods Cross Refinery, we increased the refinerys capacity from 26,000 BPSD to 31,000 BPSD
while increasing its ability to process lower cost crude. The project involved installing a new
15,000 BPSD mild hydrocracker, sulfur recovery facilities, black wax desalting equipment and black
wax unloading systems. The total cost of this project was approximately $122 million. The projects
were mechanically complete in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Our Woods Cross refinery is required to install a wet gas scrubber on its FCC unit by the end of
2012. We estimate the total cost to be $12 million. The MSAT2 solution for Woods Cross involves
installing a new reformate splitter and a benzene saturation unit at an estimated cost of $18
million. Like our Navajo Refinery, our Woods Cross Refinery has until the end of 2012 to comply
with the MSAT2 regulations.
Under a definitive agreement with Sinclair, we are jointly building the UNEV Pipeline, a 12-inch
refined products pipeline from Salt Lake City, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada, together with terminal
facilities in the Cedar City, Utah and North Las Vegas areas. Under the agreement, we own a 75%
interest in the joint venture pipeline with Sinclair, our joint venture partner, owning the
remaining 25% interest. The initial capacity of the pipeline will be 62,000 BPD, with the capacity
for further expansion to 120,000 BPD. The total cost of the pipeline is expected to be $275
million, with our share of the cost totaling $206 million.
In connection with this project, we have entered into a 10-year commitment to ship an annual
average of 15,000 barrels per day of refined products on the UNEV Pipeline at an agreed tariff.
Our commitment for each year is subject to reduction by up to 5,000 barrels per day in specified
circumstances relating to shipments by other shippers. We have an option agreement with
HEP granting them an option to purchase all of our equity interests in this joint venture pipeline
effective for a 180-day period commencing when the UNEV Pipeline becomes operational, at a purchase
price equal to our investment in this joint venture pipeline plus interest at 7% per annum.
We currently anticipate that all regulatory approvals required to commence the construction of the
UNEV Pipeline will be received by the end of the second quarter of 2010. Once such approvals are
received, construction of the pipeline will take approximately nine months. Under this schedule,
the pipeline would become operational during the first quarter of 2011.
In August 2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (2005 Act) was signed into law. Among other
things, the 2005 Act created tax incentives for refiners by providing for an immediate deduction of
50% of certain refinery capacity expansion costs when the expansion assets are placed in service.
We believe that our 2009 Navajo Refinery capacity expansion project will qualify for this
deduction.
Regulatory compliance items, such as the ULSD and LSG requirements mentioned above, or other
presently existing or future environmental regulations / consent decrees could cause us to make
additional capital investments beyond those described above and incur additional operating costs to
meet applicable requirements.
HEP
Each year the Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. board of directors approves HEPs annual capital
budget, which specifies capital projects that HEP management is authorized to undertake.
Additionally, at times when conditions warrant or as new opportunities arise, special projects may
be approved. The funds allocated for a particular capital project may be expended over a period of
several years, depending on the time required to complete the project. Therefore, HEPs planned
capital expenditures for a given year consist of expenditures approved for capital projects
included in their current years capital budget as well as, in certain cases, expenditures approved
for capital projects in capital budgets for prior years. The 2010 HEP capital budget is comprised
of $4.8 million for maintenance capital expenditures and $6 million for expansion capital
expenditures.
-58-
Cash Flows Financing Activities
Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2008
Net cash flows provided by financing activities were $406.8 million for 2009 compared to net cash
flows used for financing activities of $151.3 million for 2008, an increase of $558.1 million.
During 2009, we received $287.9 million in net proceeds upon the issuance of the Holly Senior
Notes, received and repaid $94 million in advances under the Holly Credit Agreement, received $40
million under a financing transaction with Plains, paid $30.1 million in dividends, purchased $1.2
million in common stock from employees to provide funds for the payment of payroll and income taxes
due upon the vesting of certain share-based incentive awards, received a $15.2 million contribution
from our UNEV Pipeline joint venture partner and recognized $1.2 million in excess taxes on our
equity based compensation. Also during this period, HEP received proceeds of $133 million upon the
issuance of additional common units, received $239 million and repaid $233 million in advances
under the HEP Credit Agreement and paid distributions of $33.2 million to noncontrolling interest
holders. Additionally, we paid $8.8 million in deferred financing costs during the year ended
December 31, 2009 that relate to the Holly Senior Notes issued in June 2009. For the period from
March 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008, HEP had net short-term borrowings of $29 million under the
HEP Credit Agreement and purchased $0.8 million in HEP common units in the open market for
restricted unit grants. Additionally in 2008, we paid an aggregate of $0.9 million in deferred
financing costs related to the amendment and restatement of the Holly Credit Agreement and the HEP
Credit Agreement. Under our common stock repurchase program, we purchased treasury stock of $151.1
million in 2008. We also paid $29.1 million in dividends, received a $17 million contribution from
our UNEV Pipeline joint venture partner, received $1 million for common stock issued upon exercise
of stock options and recognized $5.7 million in
excess tax benefits on our equity based compensation during 2008. Also during this period, HEP
paid $22.1 million in distributions to its noncontrolling interest holders.
Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2007
Net cash flows used for financing activities were $151.3 million for 2008 compared to $189.4
million for 2007, a decrease of $38.1 million. For the period from March 1, 2008 through December
31, 2008, HEP had net short-term borrowings of $29 million under the HEP Credit Agreement and
purchased $0.8 million in HEP common units in the open market for restricted unit grants.
Additionally in 2008, we paid an aggregate of $0.9 million in deferred financing costs related to
the amendment and restatement of the Holly Credit Agreement and the HEP Credit Agreement. Under
our common stock repurchase program, we purchased treasury stock of $151.1 million in 2008. We
also paid $29.1 million in dividends, received a $17 million contribution from our UNEV Pipeline
joint venture partner, received $1 million for common stock issued upon exercise of stock options
and recognized $5.7 million in excess tax benefits on our equity based compensation during 2008.
Also during this period, HEP paid $22.1 million in distributions to its noncontrolling interest
holders. During 2007, we purchased treasury stock of $207.2 million under our stock repurchase
program, paid $23.2 million in dividends, received $2.3 million for common stock issued upon
exercise of stock options and recognized $30.4 million in excess tax benefits on our equity based
compensation. During 2007, we also received an $8.3 million contribution from our UNEV Pipeline
joint venture partner.
-59-
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
The following table presents our long-term contractual obligations as of December 31, 2009 in total
and by period due beginning in 2010. The table below does not include our contractual obligations
to HEP under our long-term transportation agreements as these related-party transactions are
eliminated in the Consolidated Financial Statements. A description of these agreements is provided
under Holly Energy Partners, L.P. under Items 1 and 2, Business and Properties. Also, the
table below does not reflect renewal options on our operating leases that are likely to be
exercised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Over |
|
Contractual Obligations and Commitments |
|
Total |
|
|
1 Year |
|
|
1-3 Years |
|
|
3-5 Years |
|
|
5 Years |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Holly Corporation(1)(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt principal(3) |
|
$ |
339,809 |
|
|
$ |
1,029 |
|
|
$ |
2,469 |
|
|
$ |
3,143 |
|
|
$ |
333,168 |
|
Long-term debt interest(4) |
|
|
267,398 |
|
|
|
34,397 |
|
|
|
68,381 |
|
|
|
67,707 |
|
|
|
96,913 |
|
Operating leases |
|
|
40,116 |
|
|
|
10,448 |
|
|
|
14,130 |
|
|
|
6,827 |
|
|
|
8,711 |
|
Hydrogen supply agreement(5) |
|
|
82,866 |
|
|
|
6,138 |
|
|
|
12,276 |
|
|
|
12,276 |
|
|
|
52,176 |
|
Other service agreements(6) |
|
|
131,293 |
|
|
|
12,672 |
|
|
|
25,121 |
|
|
|
25,121 |
|
|
|
68,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
861,482 |
|
|
|
64,684 |
|
|
|
122,377 |
|
|
|
115,074 |
|
|
|
559,347 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt principal(7) |
|
|
391,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
206,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
185,000 |
|
Long-term debt interest(8) |
|
|
71,415 |
|
|
|
15,643 |
|
|
|
26,866 |
|
|
|
23,125 |
|
|
|
5,781 |
|
Pipeline operating and right of way leases |
|
|
47,646 |
|
|
|
6,264 |
|
|
|
12,516 |
|
|
|
12,451 |
|
|
|
16,415 |
|
Other agreements |
|
|
7,626 |
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
1,149 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
4,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
517,687 |
|
|
|
22,744 |
|
|
|
246,531 |
|
|
|
36,536 |
|
|
|
211,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,379,169 |
|
|
$ |
87,428 |
|
|
$ |
368,908 |
|
|
$ |
151,610 |
|
|
$ |
771,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts shown do not include obligations under a 10-year crude oil transportation
agreement. Our obligations under the agreement are subject to certain conditions
including completion of construction projects by the transportation company. We expect
the shipping commitment to begin in the first quarter of 2011 upon the expected
completion date of the projects. |
|
(2) |
|
We may be required to make cash outlays related to our unrecognized tax benefits.
However, due to the uncertainty of the timing of future cash flows associated with our
unrecognized tax benefits, we are unable to make reasonably reliable estimates of the
period of cash settlement, if any, with the respective taxing authorities. Accordingly,
unrecognized tax benefits of $2 million as of December 31, 2009 have been excluded from
the contractual obligations table above. For further information related to unrecognized
tax benefits, see Note 13 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. |
|
(3) |
|
Our long-term debt consists of the $300 million principal balance on the Holly
Senior Notes and a long-term financing obligation having principal balance of $39.8
million at December 31, 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
Interest payments consist of interest on the 9.875% Holly Senior Notes and on our
long-term financing obligation. |
|
(5) |
|
We have entered into a long-term supply agreement to secure a hydrogen supply
source for our Woods Cross hydrotreater unit. The contract commits us to purchase a
minimum of 5 million standard cubic feet of hydrogen per day at market prices through
2023. The contract also requires the payment of a base facility charge for use of the
suppliers facility over the supply term. We have estimated the future payments in the
table above using current market rates. Therefore, actual amounts expended for this
obligation in the future could vary significantly from the amounts presented above. |
|
(6) |
|
Includes: $131.2 million for transportation of natural gas and feedstocks to our
refineries under contracts expiring between 2016 and 2024; and various service contracts
with expiration dates through 2011. |
|
(7) |
|
HEPs long-term debt consists of the $185 million principal balance on the HEP
Senior Notes and $206 million of outstanding principal under the HEP Credit Agreement. |
|
(8) |
|
Interest payments consist of interest on the 6.25% HEP Senior Notes and interest on
long-term debt under the HEP Credit Agreement. Interest under the credit agreement debt
is based on an effective interest rate of 1.98% at December 31, 2009. |
-60-
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our
consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. The
preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect
the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements. Actual results may
differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. We consider the following
policies to be the most critical to understanding the judgments that are involved and the
uncertainties that could impact our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. For
additional information, see Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements Description of
Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.
Inventory Valuation
Our crude oil and refined product inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is
determined using the LIFO inventory valuation methodology and market is determined using current
estimated selling prices. Under the LIFO method, the most recently incurred costs are charged to
cost of sales and inventories are valued at the earliest acquisition costs. In periods of rapidly
declining prices, LIFO inventories may have to be written down to market due to the higher costs
assigned to LIFO layers in prior periods. In addition, the use of the LIFO inventory method may
result in increases or decreases to cost of sales in years when inventory volumes decline and
result in charging cost of sales with LIFO inventory costs generated in prior periods. As of
December 31, 2009, many of our LIFO inventory layers were valued at historical costs that were
established in years when price levels were generally lower; therefore, our results of operation
are less sensitive to current market price reductions. As of December 31, 2009, the excess of
current cost over the LIFO inventory value of our crude oil and refined product inventories was
$207 million. An actual valuation of inventory under the LIFO method can be made only at the end
of each year based on the inventory levels at that time. Accordingly, interim LIFO calculations
are based on managements estimates of expected year-end inventory levels and are subject to the
final year-end LIFO inventory valuation.
Deferred Maintenance Costs
Our refinery units require regular major maintenance and repairs that are commonly referred to as
turnarounds. Catalysts used in certain refinery processes also require routine change-outs.
The required frequency of the maintenance varies by unit and by catalyst, but generally is every
two to five years. In order to minimize downtime during turnarounds, we utilize contract labor as
well as our maintenance personnel on a continuous 24 hour basis. Whenever possible, turnarounds
are scheduled so that some units continue to operate while others are down for maintenance. We
record the costs of turnarounds as deferred charges and amortize the deferred costs over the
expected periods of benefit.
Long-lived Assets
We calculate depreciation and amortization based on estimated useful lives and salvage values of
our assets. When assets are placed into service, we make estimates with respect to their useful
lives that we believe are reasonable. However, factors such as competition, regulation or
environmental matters could cause us to change our estimates, thus impacting the future calculation
of depreciation and amortization. We evaluate long-lived assets for potential impairment by
identifying whether indicators of impairment exist and, if so, assessing whether the long-lived
assets are recoverable from estimated future undiscounted cash flows. The actual amount of
impairment loss, if any, to be recorded is equal to the amount by which a long-lived assets
carrying value exceeds its fair value. Estimates of future discounted cash flows and fair values
of assets require subjective assumptions with regard to future operating results and actual results
could differ from those estimates. No impairments of long-lived assets were recorded during the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
Variable Interest Entity
HEP is a VIE which under GAAP is defined as a legal entity whose equity owners do not have
sufficient equity at risk or a controlling interest in the entity, or have voting rights that are
not proportionate to their economic interest. Under GAAP, HEPs acquisition of the Crude Pipelines
and Tankage Assets in 2008 qualified as a reconsideration event whereby we reassessed our
beneficial interest in HEP and determined that HEP continued to qualify as a VIE, and furthermore,
determined that our beneficial interest in HEP exceeded 50%. Accordingly, we reconsolidated HEP
effective March 1, 2008 and no longer account for our investment in HEP under the equity method of
accounting. As a result, our consolidated financial statements include the results of HEP.
-61-
Additionally, HEPs 2009 asset acquisitions and the HEP May and November 2009 equity offerings
qualified as reconsideration events. Following each of these transactions, we reassessed our
beneficial interest in HEP and determined that HEP continued to qualify as a VIE and that our
beneficial interest exceeds 50%.
Contingencies
We are subject to proceedings, lawsuits and other claims related to environmental, labor, product
and other matters. We are required to assess the likelihood of any adverse judgments or outcomes
to these matters as well as potential ranges of probable losses. A determination of the amount of
reserves required, if any, for these contingencies is made after careful analysis of each
individual issue. The required reserves may change in the future due to new developments in each
matter or changes in approach such as a change in settlement strategy in dealing with these
matters.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2009, new accounting standards were issued that replace the previous quantitative-based
risk and rewards calculation provided under GAAP with a qualitative approach in determining whether
an entity is the primary beneficiary of a VIE. Additionally, these standards require an entity to
assess on an ongoing basis whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE and enhances disclosure
requirements with respect to an entitys involvement in a VIE. These standards are effective
January 1, 2010 and will not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows.
RISK MANAGEMENT
We use certain strategies to reduce some commodity price and operational risks. We do not attempt
to eliminate all market risk exposures when we believe that the exposure relating to such risk
would not be significant to our future earnings, financial position, capital resources or
liquidity or that the cost of eliminating the exposure would outweigh the benefit.
HEP uses interest rate swaps (derivative instruments) to manage its exposure to interest rate risk.
As of December 31, 2009, HEP has three interest rate swap contracts.
HEP has an interest rate swap to hedge its exposure to the cash flow risk caused by the effects of
London Interbank Borrowed Rate (LIBOR) changes on the $171 million HEP Credit Agreement advance
that was used to finance HEPs purchase of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets from us. This
interest rate swap effectively converts the $171 million LIBOR based debt to fixed rate debt having
an interest rate of 3.74% plus an applicable margin, currently 1.75%, which equaled an effective
interest rate of 5.49% as of December 31, 2009. This swap contract matures in February 2013.
HEP designated this interest rate swap as a cash flow hedge. Based on its assessment of
effectiveness using the change in variable cash flows method, HEP determined that this interest
rate swap is effective in offsetting the variability in interest payments on the $171 million
variable rate debt resulting from changes in LIBOR. Under hedge accounting, HEP adjusts the cash
flow hedge on a quarterly basis to its fair value with the offsetting fair value adjustment to
accumulated other comprehensive income. Also on a quarterly basis, HEP measures hedge
effectiveness by comparing the present value of the cumulative change in the expected future
interest to be paid or received on the variable leg of the swap against the expected future
interest payments on the $171 million variable rate debt. Any ineffectiveness is reclassified from
accumulated other comprehensive income to interest expense. As of December 31, 2009, HEP had no
ineffectiveness on its cash flow hedge.
HEP also has an interest rate swap contract that effectively converts interest expense associated
with $60 million of the HEP Senior Notes from fixed to variable rate debt (Variable Rate Swap).
Under this swap contract, interest on the $60 million notional amount is computed using the
three-month LIBOR plus a spread of 1.1575%, which equaled an effective interest rate of 1.41% as of
December 31, 2009. The maturity date of this swap contract is March 1, 2015, matching the maturity
of the HEP Senior Notes.
-62-
In October 2008, HEP entered into an additional interest rate swap contract, effective December 1,
2008, that effectively unwinds the effects of the Variable Rate Swap discussed above, converting
$60 million of its hedged long-term debt back to fixed rate debt (Fixed Rate Swap). Under the
Fixed Rate Swap, interest on a notional amount of $60 million is computed at a fixed rate of 3.59%
versus three-month LIBOR which when added to the 1.1575% spread on the Variable Rate Swap results
in an effective fixed interest rate of 4.75%. The maturity date of this swap contract is December
1, 2013.
Prior to the execution of HEPs Fixed Rate Swap, the Variable Rate Swap was designated as a fair
value hedge of $60 million in outstanding principal under the HEP Senior Notes. HEP dedesignated
this hedge in October 2008. At that time, the carrying balance of the HEP Senior Notes included a
$2.2 million premium due to the application of hedge accounting until the dedesignation date. This
premium is being amortized as a reduction to interest expense over the remaining term of the
Variable Rate Swap.
HEPs interest rate swaps not having a hedge designation are measured quarterly at fair value
either as an asset or a liability in the consolidated balance sheets with the offsetting fair value
adjustment to interest expense. For the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2008, HEP recognized an increase of $0.2 million and $2.3 million, respectively, in interest
expense as a result of fair value adjustments to its interest rate swaps.
HEP records interest expense equal to the variable rate payments under the swaps. Receipts under
the swap agreements are recorded as a reduction of interest expense.
Additional information on HEPs interest rate swaps as of December 31, 2009 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Offsetting |
|
|
|
Interest Rate Swaps |
|
Location |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Balance |
|
Offsetting Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
Asset |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-to-variable interest rate swap |
|
Other assets |
|
$ |
2,294 |
|
|
Long-term debt HEP |
|
$ |
(1,791 |
)(1) |
$60 million of 6.25% HEP Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity |
|
|
(1,942 |
)(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
1,439 |
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,294 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(2,294 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flow hedge $171 million
LIBOR based debt |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
$ |
(9,141 |
) |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
9,141 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable-to-fixed interest rate swap |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
Equity |
|
|
4,166 |
(2) |
$60 million |
|
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(1,611 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(11,696 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
11,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents unamortized balance of dedesignated hedge premium. |
|
(2) |
|
Represents prior year charges to interest expense. |
|
(3) |
|
Net of amortization of premium attributable to dedesignated hedge. |
On January 29, 2010, HEP received notice from the counterparty that it is exercising its
option to cancel the Variable Rate Swap on March 1, 2010, pursuant to the terms of the swap
contract. HEP will receive a cancellation premium of $1.9 million.
HEP reviews publicly available information on its counterparties in order to review and monitor
their financial stability and assess their ongoing ability to honor their commitments under the
interest rate swap contracts. These counterparties consist of large financial institutions. HEP
has not experienced, nor does it expect to experience, any difficulty in the counterparties
honoring their respective commitments.
The market risk inherent in our fixed-rate debt and positions is the potential change arising from
increases or decreases in interest rates as discussed below.
-63-
At December 31, 2009, outstanding principal under the Holly and HEP Senior Notes were $300 million
and $185 million, respectively. By means of HEPs interest rate swap contracts, HEP has
effectively converted the 6.25% fixed rate on $60 million of the HEP Senior Notes to a fixed rate
of 4.75%. For the fixed rate Holly and HEP Senior Notes, changes in interest rates would generally
affect fair value of the debt, but not our earnings or cash flows. At December 31, 2009, the
estimated fair value of the Holly Senior Notes and the HEP Senior Notes were $318 million and
$177.6 million, respectively. We estimate that a hypothetical 10% change in the yield-to-maturity
rates applicable to the senior notes would result in an approximate fair value change of $9.9
million to the Holly Senior Notes and a $5.5 million change to the HEP Senior Notes.
For the variable rate HEP Credit Agreement, changes in interest rates would affect cash flows, but
not the fair value. At December 31, 2009, borrowings outstanding under the HEP Credit Agreement
were $206 million. By means of its cash flow hedge, HEP has effectively converted the variable
rate on $171 million of outstanding principal to a fixed rate of 5.49%. For the unhedged $35
million portion, a hypothetical 10% change in interest rates applicable to the HEP Credit Agreement
would not materially affect cash flows.
At December 31, 2009, cash and cash equivalents included investments in investment grade, highly
liquid investments with maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase and hence the
interest rate market risk implicit in these cash investments is low. Due to the short-term nature
of our cash and cash equivalents, a hypothetical 10% increase in interest rates would not have a
material effect on the fair market value of our portfolio. Since we have the ability to liquidate
this portfolio, we do not expect our operating results or cash flows to be materially affected by
the effect of a sudden change in market interest rates on our investment portfolio.
Our operations are subject to normal hazards of operations, including fire, explosion and
weather-related perils. We maintain various insurance coverages, including business interruption
insurance, subject to certain deductibles. We are not fully insured against certain risks because
such risks are not fully insurable, coverage is unavailable, or premium costs, in our judgment, do
not justify such expenditures.
We have a risk management oversight committee that is made up of members from our senior
management. This committee oversees our risk enterprise program, monitors our risk environment and
provides direction for activities to mitigate identified risks that may adversely affect the
achievement of our goals.
-64-
|
|
|
Item 7A. |
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
See Risk Management under Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations.
Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
Reconciliations of EBITDA to amounts reported under generally accepted accounting principles in
financial statements.
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, which we refer to as EBITDA, is
calculated as net income plus (i) interest expense, net of interest income, (ii) income tax
provision, and (iii) depreciation and amortization. EBITDA is not a calculation provided for under
GAAP; however, the amounts included in the EBITDA calculation are derived from amounts included in
our consolidated financial statements, with the exception of EBITDA from discontinued operations.
EBITDA should not be considered as an alternative to net income or operating income as an
indication of our operating performance or as an alternative to operating cash flow as a measure of
liquidity. EBITDA is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies.
EBITDA is presented here because it is a widely used financial indicator used by investors and
analysts to measure performance. EBITDA is also used by our management for internal analysis and
as a basis for financial covenants.
Set forth below is our calculation of EBITDA from continuing operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
36,343 |
|
|
$ |
123,718 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
Subtract noncontrolling interest in income from continuing operations |
|
|
(21,134 |
) |
|
|
(4,512 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Add income tax provision |
|
|
7,460 |
|
|
|
64,028 |
|
|
|
165,316 |
|
Add interest expense |
|
|
40,346 |
|
|
|
23,955 |
|
|
|
1,086 |
|
Subtract interest income |
|
|
(5,045 |
) |
|
|
(10,797 |
) |
|
|
(15,089 |
) |
Add depreciation and amortization |
|
|
98,751 |
|
|
|
62,995 |
|
|
|
43,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA from continuing operations |
|
$ |
156,721 |
|
|
$ |
259,387 |
|
|
$ |
528,897 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliations of refinery operating information (non-GAAP performance measures) to amounts
reported under generally accepted accounting principles in financial statements.
Refinery gross margin and net operating margin are non-GAAP performance measures that are used by
our management and others to compare our refining performance to that of other companies in our
industry. We believe these margin measures are helpful to investors in evaluating our refining
performance on a relative and absolute basis.
We calculate refinery gross margin and net operating margin using net sales, cost of products and
operating expenses, in each case averaged per produced barrel sold. These two margins do not
include the effect of depreciation and amortization. Each of these component performance measures
can be reconciled directly to our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Other companies in our industry may not calculate these performance measures in the same manner.
-65-
Refinery Gross Margin
Refinery gross margin per barrel is the difference between average net sales price and average cost
of products per barrel of produced refined products. Refinery gross margin for each of our
refineries and for our three refineries on a consolidated basis is calculated as shown below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Average per produced barrel: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
73.15 |
|
|
$ |
108.52 |
|
|
$ |
89.68 |
|
Less cost of products |
|
|
65.95 |
|
|
|
98.97 |
|
|
|
74.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
7.20 |
|
|
$ |
9.55 |
|
|
$ |
15.58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
70.25 |
|
|
$ |
110.07 |
|
|
$ |
90.09 |
|
Less cost of products |
|
|
58.98 |
|
|
|
93.47 |
|
|
|
69.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
11.27 |
|
|
$ |
16.60 |
|
|
$ |
20.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
78.89 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Less cost of products |
|
|
74.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
4.33 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
74.06 |
|
|
$ |
108.83 |
|
|
$ |
89.77 |
|
Less cost of products |
|
|
66.85 |
|
|
|
97.87 |
|
|
|
73.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
7.21 |
|
|
$ |
10.96 |
|
|
$ |
16.74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Operating Margin
Net operating margin per barrel is the difference between refinery gross margin and refinery
operating expenses per barrel of produced refined products. Net operating margin for each of our
refineries and for our three refineries on a consolidated basis is calculated as shown below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Average per produced barrel: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
7.20 |
|
|
$ |
9.55 |
|
|
$ |
15.58 |
|
Less refinery operating expenses |
|
|
4.81 |
|
|
|
4.58 |
|
|
|
4.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
4.97 |
|
|
$ |
11.28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
11.27 |
|
|
$ |
16.60 |
|
|
$ |
20.69 |
|
Less refinery operating expenses |
|
|
6.60 |
|
|
|
7.42 |
|
|
|
4.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
4.67 |
|
|
$ |
9.18 |
|
|
$ |
15.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
4.33 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Less refinery operating expenses |
|
|
5.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
(0.92 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin |
|
$ |
7.21 |
|
|
$ |
10.96 |
|
|
$ |
16.74 |
|
Less refinery operating expenses |
|
|
5.24 |
|
|
|
5.14 |
|
|
|
4.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin |
|
$ |
1.97 |
|
|
$ |
5.82 |
|
|
$ |
12.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-66-
Below are reconciliations to our Consolidated Statements of Income for (i) net sales, cost of
products and operating expenses, in each case averaged per produced barrel sold, and (ii) net
operating margin and refinery gross margin. Due to rounding of reported numbers, some amounts may
not calculate exactly.
Reconciliations of refined product sales from produced products sold to total sales and other
revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
73.15 |
|
|
$ |
108.52 |
|
|
$ |
89.68 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
87,140 |
|
|
|
89,580 |
|
|
|
88,920 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
2,326,616 |
|
|
$ |
3,557,967 |
|
|
$ |
2,910,636 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
70.25 |
|
|
$ |
110.07 |
|
|
$ |
90.09 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
26,870 |
|
|
|
22,370 |
|
|
|
26,130 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
688,980 |
|
|
$ |
901,189 |
|
|
$ |
859,229 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
78.89 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
37,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
1,081,823 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sum of refined product sales from produced products sold from our
three refineries (4) |
|
$ |
4,097,419 |
|
|
$ |
4,459,156 |
|
|
$ |
3,769,865 |
|
Add refined product sales from purchased products and rounding (1) |
|
|
106,969 |
|
|
|
384,073 |
|
|
|
383,396 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total refined products sales |
|
|
4,204,388 |
|
|
|
4,843,229 |
|
|
|
4,153,261 |
|
Add direct sales of excess crude oil(2) |
|
|
453,958 |
|
|
|
860,642 |
|
|
|
491,150 |
|
Add other refining segment revenue (3) |
|
|
128,591 |
|
|
|
133,578 |
|
|
|
145,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total refining segment revenue |
|
|
4,786,937 |
|
|
|
5,837,449 |
|
|
|
4,790,164 |
|
Add HEP segment sales and other revenues |
|
|
146,561 |
|
|
|
94,439 |
|
|
|
|
|
Add corporate and other revenues |
|
|
2,248 |
|
|
|
2,641 |
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
Subtract consolidations and eliminations |
|
|
(101,478 |
) |
|
|
(74,172 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We purchase finished products when opportunities arise that provide a profit on the
sale of such products, or to meet delivery commitments. |
|
(2) |
|
We purchase crude oil that at times exceeds the supply needs of our refineries.
Quantities in excess of our needs are sold at market prices to purchasers of crude oil that
are recorded on a gross basis with the sales price recorded as revenues and the
corresponding acquisition cost as inventory and then upon sale as cost of products sold.
Additionally, we enter into buy/sell exchanges of crude oil with certain parties to
facilitate the delivery of quantities to certain locations that are netted at carryover
cost. |
|
(3) |
|
Other refining segment revenue includes revenues associated with Holly Asphalt and
revenue derived from feedstock and sulfur credit sales. |
|
(4) |
|
The above calculations of refined product sales from produced products sold can also be
computed on a consolidated basis. These amounts may not calculate exactly due to rounding
of reported numbers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
74.06 |
|
|
$ |
108.83 |
|
|
$ |
89.77 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
151,580 |
|
|
|
111,950 |
|
|
|
115,050 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
4,097,419 |
|
|
$ |
4,459,156 |
|
|
$ |
3,769,865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-67-
Reconciliation of average cost of products per produced barrel sold to total cost of
products sold
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
65.95 |
|
|
$ |
98.97 |
|
|
$ |
74.10 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
87,140 |
|
|
|
89,580 |
|
|
|
88,920 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products for produced products sold |
|
$ |
2,097,612 |
|
|
$ |
3,244,858 |
|
|
$ |
2,404,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
58.98 |
|
|
$ |
93.47 |
|
|
$ |
69.40 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
26,870 |
|
|
|
22,370 |
|
|
|
26,130 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products for produced products sold |
|
$ |
578,449 |
|
|
$ |
765,278 |
|
|
$ |
661,899 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
74.56 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
37,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products for produced products sold |
|
$ |
1,022,445 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sum of cost of products for produced products sold from our
three refineries (4) |
|
$ |
3,698,506 |
|
|
$ |
4,010,136 |
|
|
$ |
3,066,874 |
|
Add refined product costs from purchased products sold and rounding (1) |
|
|
114,650 |
|
|
|
389,944 |
|
|
|
374,432 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total refined cost of products sold |
|
|
3,813,156 |
|
|
|
4,400,080 |
|
|
|
3,441,306 |
|
Add crude oil cost of direct sales of excess crude oil(2) |
|
|
449,488 |
|
|
|
853,360 |
|
|
|
492,222 |
|
Add other refining segment cost of products sold (3) |
|
|
75,229 |
|
|
|
101,144 |
|
|
|
69,960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total refining segment cost of products sold |
|
|
4,337,873 |
|
|
|
5,354,584 |
|
|
|
4,003,488 |
|
Subtract consolidations and eliminations |
|
|
(99,865 |
) |
|
|
(73,885 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) |
|
$ |
4,238,008 |
|
|
$ |
5,280,699 |
|
|
$ |
4,003,488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We purchase finished products when opportunities arise that provide a profit on the
sale of such products, or to meet delivery commitments. |
|
(2) |
|
We purchase crude oil that at times exceeds the supply needs of our refineries.
Quantities in excess of our needs are sold at market prices to purchasers of crude oil that
are recorded on a gross basis with the sales price recorded as revenues and the
corresponding acquisition cost as inventory and then upon sale as cost of products sold.
Additionally, we enter into buy/sell exchanges of crude oil with certain parties to
facilitate the delivery of quantities to certain locations that are netted at carryover
cost. |
|
(3) |
|
Other refining segment cost of products sold includes the cost of products for Holly
Asphalt and costs attributable to feedstock and sulfur credit sales. |
|
(4) |
|
The above calculations of cost of products for produced products sold can also be
computed on a consolidated basis. These amounts may not calculate exactly due to rounding
of reported numbers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
66.85 |
|
|
$ |
97.87 |
|
|
$ |
73.03 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
151,580 |
|
|
|
111,950 |
|
|
|
115,050 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products for produced products sold |
|
$ |
3,698,506 |
|
|
$ |
4,010,136 |
|
|
$ |
3,066,874 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-68-
Reconciliation of average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel sold to total
operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
4.81 |
|
|
$ |
4.58 |
|
|
$ |
4.30 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
87,140 |
|
|
|
89,580 |
|
|
|
88,920 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery operating expenses for produced products sold |
|
$ |
152,987 |
|
|
$ |
150,161 |
|
|
$ |
139,560 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
6.60 |
|
|
$ |
7.42 |
|
|
$ |
4.86 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
26,870 |
|
|
|
22,370 |
|
|
|
26,130 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery operating expenses for produced products sold |
|
$ |
64,730 |
|
|
$ |
60,751 |
|
|
$ |
46,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
5.25 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
37,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery operating expenses for produced products sold |
|
$ |
71,994 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sum of refinery operating expenses per produced products sold from
our three refineries (2) |
|
$ |
289,711 |
|
|
$ |
210,912 |
|
|
$ |
185,912 |
|
Add other refining segment operating expenses and rounding (1) |
|
|
23,609 |
|
|
|
21,599 |
|
|
|
23,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total refining segment operating expenses |
|
|
313,320 |
|
|
|
232,511 |
|
|
|
209,269 |
|
Add HEP segment operating expenses |
|
|
44,003 |
|
|
|
33,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
Add corporate and other costs |
|
|
(468 |
) |
|
|
(159 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) |
|
$ |
356,855 |
|
|
$ |
265,705 |
|
|
$ |
209,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Other refining segment operating expenses include the marketing costs associated with
our refining segment and the operating expenses of Holly Asphalt. |
|
(2) |
|
The above calculations of refinery operating expenses per produced products sold can
also be computed on a consolidated basis. These amounts may not calculate exactly due to
rounding of reported numbers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
5.24 |
|
|
$ |
5.14 |
|
|
$ |
4.43 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
151,580 |
|
|
|
111,950 |
|
|
|
115,050 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery operating expenses for produced products sold |
|
$ |
289,711 |
|
|
$ |
210,912 |
|
|
$ |
185,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of net operating margin per barrel to refinery gross margin per barrel to
total sales and other revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin per barrel |
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
4.97 |
|
|
$ |
11.28 |
|
Add average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel |
|
|
4.81 |
|
|
|
4.58 |
|
|
|
4.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin per barrel |
|
|
7.20 |
|
|
|
9.55 |
|
|
|
15.58 |
|
Add average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
|
65.95 |
|
|
|
98.97 |
|
|
|
74.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
73.15 |
|
|
$ |
108.52 |
|
|
$ |
89.68 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
87,140 |
|
|
|
89,580 |
|
|
|
88,920 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
2,326,616 |
|
|
$ |
3,557,967 |
|
|
$ |
2,910,636 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-69-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
Woods Cross Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin per barrel |
|
$ |
4.67 |
|
|
$ |
9.18 |
|
|
$ |
15.83 |
|
Add average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel |
|
|
6.60 |
|
|
|
7.42 |
|
|
|
4.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin per barrel |
|
|
11.27 |
|
|
|
16.60 |
|
|
|
20.69 |
|
Add average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
|
58.98 |
|
|
|
93.47 |
|
|
|
69.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
70.25 |
|
|
$ |
110.07 |
|
|
$ |
90.09 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
26,870 |
|
|
|
22,370 |
|
|
|
26,130 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
688,980 |
|
|
$ |
901,189 |
|
|
$ |
859,229 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tulsa Refinery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin per barrel |
|
$ |
(0.92 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Add average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel |
|
|
5.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin per barrel |
|
|
4.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
|
74.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
78.89 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
37,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
1,081,823 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sum of refined product sales from produced products sold from our
three refineries (4) |
|
$ |
4,097,419 |
|
|
$ |
4,459,156 |
|
|
$ |
3,769,865 |
|
Add refined product sales from purchased products and rounding (1) |
|
|
106,969 |
|
|
|
384,073 |
|
|
|
383,396 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total refined product sales |
|
|
4,204,388 |
|
|
|
4,843,229 |
|
|
|
4,153,261 |
|
Add direct sales of excess crude oil(2) |
|
|
453,958 |
|
|
|
860,642 |
|
|
|
491,150 |
|
Add other refining segment revenue (3) |
|
|
128,591 |
|
|
|
133,578 |
|
|
|
145,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total refining segment revenue |
|
|
4,786,937 |
|
|
|
5,837,449 |
|
|
|
4,790,164 |
|
Add HEP segment sales and other revenues |
|
|
146,561 |
|
|
|
94,439 |
|
|
|
|
|
Add corporate and other revenues |
|
|
2,248 |
|
|
|
2,641 |
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
Subtract consolidations and eliminations |
|
|
(101,478 |
) |
|
|
(74,172 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We purchase finished products when opportunities arise that provide a profit on the
sale of such products or to meet delivery commitments. |
|
(2) |
|
We purchase crude oil that at times exceeds the supply needs of our refineries.
Quantities in excess of our needs are sold at market prices to purchasers of crude oil that
are recorded on a gross basis with the sales price recorded as revenues and the
corresponding acquisition cost as inventory and then upon sale as cost of products sold.
Additionally, we enter into buy/sell exchanges of crude oil with certain parties to
facilitate the delivery of quantities to certain locations that are netted at carryover
cost. |
|
(3) |
|
Other refining segment revenue includes the revenues associated with Holly Asphalt and
revenue derived from feedstock and sulfur credit sales. |
|
(4) |
|
The above calculations of refined product sales from produced products sold can also be
computed on a consolidated basis. These amounts may not calculate exactly due to rounding
of reported numbers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per barrel amounts) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating margin per barrel |
|
$ |
1.97 |
|
|
$ |
5.82 |
|
|
$ |
12.31 |
|
Add average refinery operating expenses per produced barrel |
|
|
5.24 |
|
|
|
5.14 |
|
|
|
4.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinery gross margin per barrel |
|
|
7.21 |
|
|
|
10.96 |
|
|
|
16.74 |
|
Add average cost of products per produced barrel sold |
|
|
66.85 |
|
|
|
97.87 |
|
|
|
73.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per produced barrel sold |
|
$ |
74.06 |
|
|
$ |
108.83 |
|
|
$ |
89.77 |
|
Times sales of produced refined products sold (BPD) |
|
|
151,580 |
|
|
|
111,950 |
|
|
|
115,050 |
|
Times number of days in period |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined product sales from produced products sold |
|
$ |
4,097,419 |
|
|
$ |
4,459,156 |
|
|
$ |
3,769,865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-70-
|
|
|
Item 8. |
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
MANAGEMENTS REPORT ON ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE COMPANYS INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management of Holly Corporation (the Company) is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting.
All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore,
even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to
financial statement preparation and presentation.
Management assessed the Companys internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009
using the criteria for effective control over financial reporting established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. Based on this assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2009, the
Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting.
The Company acquired two refinery facilities located in Tulsa, Oklahoma during 2009, one from an
affiliate of Sunoco, Inc. on June 1, 2009 and another from an affiliate of Sinclair Oil Company on
December 1, 2009. Management has excluded the operations of these facilities from its assessment
of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009.
These facilities represent 23%, 2% and 22% of our total assets, net assets and revenues,
respectively, as of December 31, 2009. We plan to fully integrate the operations of these
facilities into our assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting in
2010.
The Companys independent registered public accounting firm has issued an attestation report on the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009.
That report appears on page 72.
-71-
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors
and Stockholders of Holly Corporation
We have audited Holly Corporations (the Company) internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by
the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Holly Corporations
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. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
effectiveness of 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 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 its 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 the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
As indicated in the accompanying, Managements Report on its Assessment of the Companys Internal
Control Over Financial Reporting, managements assessment of, and conclusion on, the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting did not include the internal controls of the two
refinery facilities located in Tulsa, Oklahoma, one acquired from an affiliate of Sunoco, Inc. and
another from an affiliate of Sinclair Oil Company which are included in the December 31, 2009
consolidated financial statements of Holly Corporation and represent 23%, 2% and 22% of total
assets, net assets and revenues, respectively, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2009. Our
audit of internal control over financial reporting of Holly Corporation also did not include an
evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting of the two acquired refinery
facilities.
In our opinion, Holly Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on the COSO criteria.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Holly Corporation as of December 31, 2009
and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows, stockholders equity and
comprehensive income for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009 and our
report dated February 26, 2010 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Dallas, Texas
February 26, 2010
-72-
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
Reference |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-74-
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors
and Stockholders of Holly Corporation
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Holly Corporation as of December
31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows, equity and
comprehensive income for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these financial statements 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, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial position of Holly Corporation at December 31, 2009 and 2008,
and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2009, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), Holly Corporations internal control over financial reporting as of December
31, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, and our report dated February 26,
2010 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Dallas, Texas
February 26, 2010
-75-
HOLLY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
124,596 |
|
|
$ |
39,244 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
1,223 |
|
|
|
49,194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product and transportation |
|
|
292,310 |
|
|
|
127,192 |
|
Crude oil resales |
|
|
470,145 |
|
|
|
161,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
762,455 |
|
|
|
288,619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude oil and refined products |
|
|
259,582 |
|
|
|
107,811 |
|
Materials and supplies |
|
|
43,931 |
|
|
|
17,924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
303,513 |
|
|
|
125,735 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes receivable |
|
|
38,072 |
|
|
|
6,350 |
|
Prepayments and other |
|
|
50,957 |
|
|
|
18,775 |
|
Current assets of discontinued operations |
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
2,706 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
1,283,011 |
|
|
|
530,623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties, plants and equipment, at cost |
|
|
2,001,855 |
|
|
|
1,462,963 |
|
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(371,885 |
) |
|
|
(290,039 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,629,970 |
|
|
|
1,172,924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketable securities (long-term) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Turnaround costs |
|
|
53,463 |
|
|
|
34,309 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
81,602 |
|
|
|
27,542 |
|
Intangibles and other |
|
|
97,893 |
|
|
|
70,420 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
232,958 |
|
|
|
132,271 |
|
Non-current assets of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,398 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
3,145,939 |
|
|
$ |
1,874,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
975,155 |
|
|
$ |
390,438 |
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
49,957 |
|
|
|
41,785 |
|
Short-term debt Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
Current liabilities of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
1,025,112 |
|
|
|
462,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt Holly Corporation |
|
|
328,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
379,198 |
|
|
|
341,914 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
124,585 |
|
|
|
69,491 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
81,003 |
|
|
|
64,330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corporation stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value 1,000,000 shares authorized; none issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock $.01 par value 160,000,000 and 100,000,000 shares authorized; 76,359,006 and
73,543,873 shares issued as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively |
|
|
764 |
|
|
|
735 |
|
Additional capital |
|
|
195,565 |
|
|
|
121,298 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
1,134,341 |
|
|
|
1,145,388 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(25,700 |
) |
|
|
(35,081 |
) |
Common stock held in treasury, at cost 23,292,737 and 23,600,653 shares as of December 31,
2009 and 2008, respectively |
|
|
(685,931 |
) |
|
|
(690,800 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Holly Corporation stockholders equity |
|
|
619,039 |
|
|
|
541,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interest |
|
|
588,742 |
|
|
|
394,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity |
|
|
1,207,781 |
|
|
|
936,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity |
|
$ |
3,145,939 |
|
|
$ |
1,874,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
-76-
HOLLY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) |
|
|
4,238,008 |
|
|
|
5,280,699 |
|
|
|
4,003,488 |
|
Operating expenses (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) |
|
|
356,855 |
|
|
|
265,705 |
|
|
|
209,281 |
|
General and administrative expenses (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) |
|
|
60,343 |
|
|
|
55,278 |
|
|
|
69,185 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
98,751 |
|
|
|
62,995 |
|
|
|
43,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
4,753,957 |
|
|
|
5,664,677 |
|
|
|
4,325,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations |
|
|
80,311 |
|
|
|
195,680 |
|
|
|
466,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of SLC Pipeline |
|
|
1,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
5,045 |
|
|
|
10,797 |
|
|
|
15,089 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(40,346 |
) |
|
|
(23,955 |
) |
|
|
(1,086 |
) |
Acquisition costs Tulsa refineries |
|
|
(3,126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,724 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of Holly Petroleum, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,990 |
|
|
|
19,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36,508 |
) |
|
|
(7,934 |
) |
|
|
33,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
|
43,803 |
|
|
|
187,746 |
|
|
|
499,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax provision: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
(30,062 |
) |
|
|
31,094 |
|
|
|
142,245 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
37,522 |
|
|
|
32,934 |
|
|
|
23,071 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,460 |
|
|
|
64,028 |
|
|
|
165,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
36,343 |
|
|
|
123,718 |
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations, net of taxes |
|
|
4,425 |
|
|
|
2,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of discontinued operations, net of taxes |
|
|
12,501 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
16,926 |
|
|
|
2,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
53,269 |
|
|
|
126,636 |
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less net income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
33,736 |
|
|
|
6,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
19,533 |
|
|
$ |
120,558 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
15,209 |
|
|
$ |
119,206 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
4,324 |
|
|
|
1,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
19,533 |
|
|
$ |
120,558 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders basic: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.37 |
|
|
$ |
6.09 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.40 |
|
|
$ |
6.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.36 |
|
|
$ |
5.98 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.38 |
|
|
$ |
5.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
50,418 |
|
|
|
50,202 |
|
|
|
54,852 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
50,603 |
|
|
|
50,549 |
|
|
|
55,850 |
|
See accompanying notes.
-77-
HOLLY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
53,269 |
|
|
$ |
126,636 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization (includes discontinued operations) |
|
|
99,633 |
|
|
|
63,789 |
|
|
|
43,456 |
|
SLC Pipeline earnings in excess of distributions |
|
|
(419 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
37,522 |
|
|
|
32,934 |
|
|
|
23,071 |
|
Distributions in excess of equity in earnings of Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,067 |
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
Equity based compensation expense |
|
|
7,549 |
|
|
|
7,467 |
|
|
|
9,993 |
|
Gain on sale of assets, before income taxes |
|
|
(14,479 |
) |
|
|
(5,958 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value interest rate swaps |
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
2,282 |
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
(474,205 |
) |
|
|
331,978 |
|
|
|
(216,295 |
) |
Inventories |
|
|
(17,904 |
) |
|
|
15,006 |
|
|
|
(10,955 |
) |
Income taxes receivable |
|
|
(33,270 |
) |
|
|
10,006 |
|
|
|
(7,301 |
) |
Prepayments and other |
|
|
(15,816 |
) |
|
|
(398 |
) |
|
|
1,817 |
|
Increase (decrease) in current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
583,550 |
|
|
|
(393,186 |
) |
|
|
264,217 |
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
1,651 |
|
|
|
(2,149 |
) |
|
|
(16,476 |
) |
Income taxes payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,781 |
|
|
|
|
|
Turnaround expenditures |
|
|
(33,541 |
) |
|
|
(34,751 |
) |
|
|
(2,669 |
) |
Other, net |
|
|
17,830 |
|
|
|
(6,738 |
) |
|
|
(3,937 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
211,545 |
|
|
|
155,490 |
|
|
|
422,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties, plants and equipment Holly Corporation |
|
|
(269,552 |
) |
|
|
(383,742 |
) |
|
|
(161,258 |
) |
Additions to properties, plants and equipment Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
(32,999 |
) |
|
|
(34,317 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of Tulsa Refinery facilities Holly Corporation |
|
|
(267,141 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of logistics assets from Sinclair Oil Company Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
(25,665 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in SLC Pipeline Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
(25,500 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company, net of transferred cash
Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
31,865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of crude pipelines and tankage assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
171,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of Holly Petroleum, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in cash due to consolidation of Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,295 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of marketable securities |
|
|
(175,892 |
) |
|
|
(769,142 |
) |
|
|
(641,144 |
) |
Sales and maturities of marketable securities |
|
|
230,281 |
|
|
|
945,461 |
|
|
|
509,345 |
|
Investment in Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
|
(534,603 |
) |
|
|
(57,777 |
) |
|
|
(293,057 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of senior notes Holly Corporation |
|
|
287,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common units Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
133,035 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings under credit agreement Holly Corporation |
|
|
94,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments under credit agreement Holly Corporation |
|
|
(94,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings under credit agreement Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
239,000 |
|
|
|
114,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments under credit agreement Holly Energy Partners |
|
|
(233,000 |
) |
|
|
(85,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from Plains financing transaction |
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred financing costs |
|
|
(8,842 |
) |
|
|
(913 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
|
|
(151,106 |
) |
|
|
(207,196 |
) |
Contribution from joint venture partner |
|
|
15,150 |
|
|
|
17,000 |
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
(30,123 |
) |
|
|
(29,064 |
) |
|
|
(23,208 |
) |
Distributions to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
(33,200 |
) |
|
|
(22,098 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of options |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
2,288 |
|
Excess tax (expense) benefit from equity based compensation |
|
|
(1,209 |
) |
|
|
5,694 |
|
|
|
30,355 |
|
Other |
|
|
(807 |
) |
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities |
|
|
406,849 |
|
|
|
(151,277 |
) |
|
|
(189,428 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) for the period |
|
|
83,791 |
|
|
|
(53,564 |
) |
|
|
(59,748 |
) |
Beginning of period |
|
|
40,805 |
(1) |
|
|
94,369 |
|
|
|
154,117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
124,596 |
|
|
$ |
40,805 |
(1) |
|
$ |
94,369 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Includes $1,561 in cash classified as current assets of discontinued
operations at December 31, 2008. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
39,995 |
|
|
$ |
14,346 |
|
|
$ |
818 |
|
Income taxes |
|
$ |
19,344 |
|
|
$ |
21,084 |
|
|
$ |
139,400 |
|
See accompanying notes.
-78-
HOLLY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corporation Stockholders Equity |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Additional |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
controlling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Income (Loss) |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Total Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006 |
|
$ |
718 |
|
|
$ |
66,500 |
|
|
$ |
745,994 |
|
|
$ |
(11,358 |
) |
|
$ |
(335,760 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
466,094 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
334,128 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,148 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,148 |
) |
Other comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,718 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,718 |
) |
Contribution from joint venture partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
2,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,288 |
|
Tax benefit from stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,017 |
|
Issuance of restricted stock, net of forfeitures |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
9,993 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,997 |
|
Other equity based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,338 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,338 |
|
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(216,202 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(216,202 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007 |
|
$ |
733 |
|
|
$ |
109,125 |
|
|
$ |
1,054,974 |
|
|
$ |
(19,076 |
) |
|
$ |
(551,962 |
) |
|
$ |
8,333 |
|
|
$ |
602,127 |
|
Reconsolidation of Holly Energy Partners (March 1, 2008) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
389,184 |
|
|
|
389,184 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120,558 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,078 |
|
|
|
126,636 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,144 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,144 |
) |
Distributions to noncontrolling interest holders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22,098 |
) |
|
|
(22,098 |
) |
Other comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16,005 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,079 |
) |
|
|
(23,084 |
) |
Contribution from joint venture partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,500 |
|
|
|
18,500 |
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
Tax benefit from stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,364 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,364 |
|
Issuance of restricted stock, net of forfeitures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,476 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,476 |
|
Other equity based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,732 |
|
|
|
4,062 |
|
Purchase of units for restricted grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
(795 |
) |
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(138,838 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(138,838 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
937 |
|
|
|
937 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
735 |
|
|
$ |
121,298 |
|
|
$ |
1,145,388 |
|
|
$ |
(35,081 |
) |
|
$ |
(690,800 |
) |
|
$ |
394,792 |
|
|
$ |
936,332 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,736 |
|
|
|
53,269 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,580 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,580 |
) |
Distributions to noncontrolling interest holders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(33,200 |
) |
|
|
(33,200 |
) |
Elimination of noncontrolling interest upon HEPs sale of Rio Grande Pipeline Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,718 |
) |
|
|
(8,718 |
) |
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,381 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,021 |
|
|
|
11,402 |
|
Issuance of common shares |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
73,972 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,000 |
|
Issuance of HEP common units, net of issuing costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
186,801 |
|
|
|
186,801 |
|
Contribution from joint venture partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,650 |
|
|
|
13,650 |
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
135 |
|
Tax benefit from stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
371 |
|
Issuance of restricted stock, net of forfeitures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,270 |
|
Other equity based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,480 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,083 |
|
|
|
699 |
|
|
|
1,302 |
|
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,039 |
) |
|
|
(1,039 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
764 |
|
|
$ |
195,565 |
|
|
$ |
1,134,341 |
|
|
$ |
(25,700 |
) |
|
$ |
(685,931 |
) |
|
$ |
588,742 |
|
|
$ |
1,207,781 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
-79-
HOLLY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
53,269 |
|
|
$ |
126,636 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available-for-sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale securities |
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
1,146 |
|
|
|
1,857 |
|
Reclassification adjustment to net income on sale of securities |
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
(1,315 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale securities |
|
|
409 |
|
|
|
(169 |
) |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement medical obligation adjustment |
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
1,433 |
|
|
|
(5,038 |
) |
Minimum pension liability adjustment |
|
|
12,497 |
|
|
|
(21,572 |
) |
|
|
(9,373 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss of Holly Energy Partners: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value of cash flow hedge |
|
|
3,726 |
|
|
|
(12,967 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
17,374 |
|
|
|
(33,275 |
) |
|
|
(12,632 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
5,972 |
|
|
|
(10,191 |
) |
|
|
(4,914 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
11,402 |
|
|
|
(23,084 |
) |
|
|
(7,718 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income |
|
|
64,671 |
|
|
|
103,552 |
|
|
|
326,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less
noncontrolling interest in comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
35,757 |
|
|
|
(1,001 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income attributable to Holly Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
28,914 |
|
|
$ |
104,553 |
|
|
$ |
326,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
-80-
HOLLY CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1: Description of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Description of Business: References herein to Holly Corporation include Holly Corporation and its
consolidated subsidiaries. In accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC)
Plain English guidelines, this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been written in the first person.
In this document, the words we, our, ours and us refer only to Holly Corporation and its
consolidated subsidiaries or to Holly Corporation or an individual subsidiary and not to any other
person. For periods after our reconsolidation of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (HEP) effective
March 1, 2008, the words we, our, ours and us generally include HEP and its subsidiaries as
consolidated subsidiaries of Holly Corporation with certain exceptions. This document contains
certain disclosures of agreements that are specific to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries and do
not necessarily represent obligations of Holly Corporation. When used in descriptions of
agreements and transactions, HEP refers to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries.
We are principally an independent petroleum refiner that produces high value light products
such as gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, specialty lubricant products, and specialty and modified
asphalt. Navajo Refining Company, L.L.C., one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, owns a petroleum
refinery in Artesia, New Mexico, which operates in conjunction with crude, vacuum distillation and
other facilities situated 65 miles away in Lovington, New Mexico (collectively, the Navajo
Refinery). The Navajo Refinery can process sour (high sulfur) crude oils and serves markets in
the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. Our refinery located just north of Salt Lake
City, Utah (the Woods Cross Refinery) is operated by Holly Refining & Marketing Company Woods
Cross, one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries. This facility is a high conversion refinery that
primarily processes regional sweet (lower sulfur) and sour Canadian crude oils. Our refinery
located in Tulsa, Oklahoma (the Tulsa Refinery) is comprised of two facilities, the Tulsa
Refinery west and east facilities. See Note 2 for additional information on the Tulsa Refinery
acquired in 2009.
At December 31, 2009, we owned a 34% interest in HEP, a consolidated subsidiary, which
includes our 2% general partner interest. HEP has logistic assets including petroleum product and
crude oil pipelines located in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Utah; ten refined product terminals;
a jet fuel terminal; loading rack facilities at each of our three refineries, a refined products
tank farm facility and on-site crude oil tankage at both our Navajo and Woods Cross Refineries.
Additionally, HEP owns a 25% interest in SLC Pipeline LLC (SLC Pipeline), a new 95-mile
intrastate pipeline system that serves refiners in the Salt Lake City area.
On June 1, 2009, we acquired an 85,000 BPSD refinery in Tulsa, Oklahoma (the Tulsa Refinery west
facility) from an affiliate of Sunoco, Inc. (Sunoco). On December 1, 2009, we acquired a 75,000
BSPD refinery that is also located in Tulsa, Oklahoma (the Tulsa Refinery east facility) from an
affiliate of Sinclair Oil Company (Sinclair). We are in the process of integrating the
operations of both Tulsa Refinery facilities. Upon completion, the Tulsa Refinery will have an
integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BSPD. See Note 2 for additional information on our
2009 Tulsa Refinery facility acquisitions.
On February 29, 2008, HEP acquired certain crude pipelines and tankage assets from us (the
Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets) that service our Navajo and Woods Cross Refineries (see Note
3).
We sold substantially all of the oil and gas properties of Holly Petroleum, Inc. (HPI), a
subsidiary that previously conducted a small-scale oil and gas exploration and production program,
in 2008 for $6 million, resulting in a gain of $6 million.
Principles of Consolidation: Our consolidated financial statements include our accounts and the
accounts of partnerships and joint ventures that we control through 50% or more ownership or
through 50% or more variable interest in entities that are considered variable interest entities.
All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.
-81-
Use of Estimates: The preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
These consolidated financial statements reflect managements evaluation of subsequent events
through the time of our filing of this annual report on Form 10-K on February 26, 2010.
Reclassifications:
There have been certain reclassifications to our December 31,
2008 deferred income tax information under Note 13, Income
Taxes to conform to current year presentation.
Cash Equivalents: We consider all highly liquid instruments with a maturity of three months or
less at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are stated at cost, which
approximates market value and are primarily invested in conservative, highly-rated instruments
issued by financial institutions or government entities with strong credit standings.
Marketable Securities: We consider all marketable debt securities with maturities greater than
three months at the date of purchase to be marketable securities. Our marketable securities are
primarily issued by government entities with the maximum maturity of any individual issue not more
than two years, while the maximum duration of the portfolio of investments is not greater than one
year. These instruments are classified as available-for-sale, and as a result, are reported at
fair value. Unrealized gains and losses, net of related income taxes, are reported as a component
of accumulated other comprehensive income.
Accounts Receivable: The majority of the accounts receivable are due from companies in the
petroleum industry. Credit is extended based on evaluation of the customers financial condition
and in certain circumstances, collateral, such as letters of credit or guarantees, is required.
Credit losses are charged to income when accounts are deemed uncollectible and historically have
been minimal. Accounts receivable attributable to crude oil resales generally represent the sell
side of excess crude oil sales to other purchasers and / or users in cases when our crude oil
supplies are in excess of our immediate needs as well as certain reciprocal buy /sell exchanges of
crude oil. At times we enter into such buy / sell exchanges to facilitate the delivery of
quantities to certain locations. In many cases, we enter into net settlement agreements relating
to the buy/sell arrangements, which may mitigate credit risk.
Inventories: Inventories are stated at the lower of cost, using the last-in, first-out (LIFO)
method for crude oil and refined products and the average cost method for materials and supplies,
or market. Cost is determined using the LIFO inventory valuation methodology and market is
determined using current estimated selling prices. Under the LIFO method, the most recently
incurred costs are charged to cost of sales and inventories are valued at the earliest acquisition
costs. In periods of rapidly declining prices, LIFO inventories may have to be written down to
market due to the higher costs assigned to LIFO layers in prior periods. In addition, the use of
the LIFO inventory method may result in increases or decreases to cost of sales in years that
inventory volumes decline as the result of charging cost of sales with LIFO inventory costs
generated in prior periods. An actual valuation of inventory under the LIFO method can be made
only at the end of each year based on the inventory levels at that time. Accordingly, interim LIFO
calculations are based on managements estimates of expected year-end inventory levels and are
subject to the final year-end LIFO inventory valuation.
Long-lived assets: We calculate depreciation and amortization based on estimated useful lives and
salvage values of our assets. We evaluate long-lived assets for potential impairment by
identifying whether indicators of impairment exist and, if so, assessing whether the long-lived
assets are recoverable from estimated future undiscounted cash flows. The actual amount of
impairment loss, if any, to be recorded is equal to the amount by which a long-lived assets
carrying value exceeds its fair value. No impairments of long-lived assets were recorded during
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
Asset Retirement Obligations: We record legal obligations associated with the retirement of
long-lived assets that result from the acquisition, construction, development and/or the normal
operation of long-lived assets. The fair value of the estimated cost to retire a tangible
long-lived asset is recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred and when a reasonable
estimate of the fair value of the liability can be made. If a reasonable estimate cannot be made at
the time the liability is incurred, we record the liability when sufficient information is
available to estimate the liabilitys fair value.
-82-
We have asset retirement obligations with respect to certain assets due to legal obligations to
clean and/or dispose of various component parts at the time they are retired. At December 31,
2009, we have an asset retirement obligation of $7.2 million, which is included in Other long-term
liabilities in our consolidated balance sheets. This includes $5.8 million in asset retirement
obligations acquired in connection with our Tulsa Refinery facility acquisitions (see Note 2).
Accretion expense was insignificant for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
Intangibles and Goodwill: Intangible assets are assets (other than financial assets) that lack
physical substance. Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquired entity over the fair
value of the assets acquired less liabilities assumed. Goodwill acquired in a business combination
and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives are not amortized and intangible assets with
finite useful lives are amortized on a straight line basis. Goodwill and intangible assets not
subject to amortization are tested for impairment annually or more frequently if events or changes
in circumstances indicate the asset might be impaired.
As of
December 31, 2009, our goodwill balance was $81.6 million. We recorded $32.5
million in goodwill due to our reconsolidation of HEP effective March 1, 2008. Additionally, HEP
recorded $49.1 million in goodwill related to its acquisition of certain logistics and storage
assets from Sinclair in December 2009 (see Note 3). Based on our impairment assessment as of
December 31, 2009, we determined that the fair value of the
reporting units goodwill exceeded the carrying value and
therefore no impairment has occurred.
In addition to goodwill, our consolidated HEP assets include a third-party transportation agreement
that currently generates minimum annual cash inflows of $21.7 and has an expected remaining term
through 2035. The transportation agreement is being amortized on a straight-line basis through
2035 that results in annual amortization expense of $2 million. At December 31, 2009, the balance
of this transportation agreement was $50.3 million, net of accumulated amortization of $9.7
million, which is included in Intangible and Others in our consolidated balance sheets.
The transportation agreement was evaluated for impairment as of December 31, 2009. Based on the
evaluation, it was determined that projected cash flows to be received under the agreement
substantially exceeded the carrying balance of the agreement.
There were no impairments of intangible assets or goodwill during the years ended December 31,
2009, 2008 and 2007.
Variable Interest Entity: HEP is a variable interest entity (VIE) as defined under GAAP. A VIE
is legal entity whose equity owners do not have sufficient equity at risk or a controlling interest
in the entity, or have voting rights that are not proportionate to their economic interest.
Under GAAP, HEPs acquisition of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets (see Note 3) qualified as a
reconsideration event whereby we reassessed whether HEP continued to qualify as a VIE. Following
this transfer, we determined that HEP continued to qualify as a VIE, and furthermore, we determined
that our beneficial interest in HEP exceeded 50%. Accordingly, we reconsolidated HEP effective
March 1, 2008 and no longer account for our investment in HEP under the equity method of
accounting. As a result, our consolidated financial statements include the results of HEP.
Additionally, HEPs 2009 asset acquisitions and its November and May 2009 equity offerings
qualified as reconsideration events whereby we determined that HEP continues to qualify as a VIE
and we remain HEPs primary beneficiary.
Under the equity method of accounting, prior to March 1, 2008, we recorded our pro-rata share of
earnings in HEP. Contributions to and distributions from HEP were recorded as adjustments to our
investment balance.
Investments in Joint Ventures: We consolidate the results of joint ventures in which we have an
ownership interest of greater than 50% and use the equity method of accounting for investments in
which we have a 50% or less ownership interest.
-83-
In March 2009, HEP acquired a 25% joint venture interest in the SLC Pipeline that is accounted for
using the equity
method of accounting. As of December 31, 2009, HEPs underlying equity in the SLC Pipeline was $63
million compared to its recorded investment balance of $25.9 million, a difference of $37.1
million. This is attributable to the difference between HEPs contributed capital and its
allocated equity at formation of the SLC Pipeline. This difference is being amortized as an
adjustment to HEPs pro-rata share of earnings.
Derivative Instruments: All derivative instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities
in the balance sheet and measured at fair value. Changes in the derivative instruments fair value
are recognized in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. See Note 12, Debt
for additional information on HEPs interest rate swap and hedging activities.
Noncontrolling Interest: Accounting standards became effective January 1, 2009 that change the
classification of noncontrolling interests, also referred to as minority interests, in the
consolidated financial statements. As a result, all previous references to minority interest in
our consolidated financial statements have been replaced with noncontrolling interest.
Therefore, net income attributable to the noncontrolling interest in our HEP subsidiary is now
presented as an adjustment to net income to arrive at Net income attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders in our Consolidated Statements of Income. Prior to 2009, this amount was presented
as Minority interest in earnings of HEP, a non-operating expense item before Income before
income taxes. Additionally, equity attributable to noncontrolling interests is now presented as a
separate component of total equity in our consolidated financial statements. We have adopted these
standards on a retrospective basis. While this presentation differs from previous requirements
under GAAP, it did not affect our net income and equity attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders.
Revenue Recognition: Refined product sales and related cost of sales are recognized when products
are shipped and title has passed to customers. Pipeline transportation revenues are recognized as
products are shipped on our pipelines. All revenues are reported inclusive of shipping and
handling costs billed and exclusive of any taxes billed to customers. Shipping and handling costs
incurred are reported in cost of products sold.
Depreciation: Depreciation is provided by the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives
of the assets, primarily 12 to 25 years for refining facilities, 10 to 25 years for pipeline and
terminal facilities, 3 to 5 years for transportation vehicles, 10 to 40 years for buildings and
improvements and 7 to 30 years for other fixed assets.
Cost Classifications: Costs of products sold include the cost of crude oil, other feedstocks,
blendstocks and purchased finished products, inclusive of transportation costs. We purchase crude
oil that at times exceeds the supply needs of our refineries. Quantities in excess of our needs are
sold at market prices to purchasers of crude oil that are recorded on a gross basis with the sales
price recorded as revenues and the corresponding acquisition cost as cost of products sold.
Additionally, we enter into buy/sell exchanges of crude oil with certain parties to facilitate the
delivery of quantities to certain locations that are netted at carryover cost. Operating expenses
include direct costs of labor, maintenance materials and services, utilities, marketing expense and
other direct operating costs. General and administrative expenses include compensation,
professional services and other support costs.
Deferred Maintenance Costs: Our refinery units require regular major maintenance and repairs which
are commonly referred to as turnarounds. Catalysts used in certain refinery processes also
require regular change-outs. The required frequency of the maintenance varies by unit and by
catalyst, but generally is every two to five years. Turnaround costs are deferred and amortized
over the period until the next scheduled turnaround. Other repairs and maintenance costs are
expensed when incurred.
Environmental Costs: Environmental costs are charged to operating expenses if they relate to an
existing condition caused by past operations and do not contribute to current or future revenue
generation. Liabilities are recorded when site restoration and environmental remediation, cleanup
and other obligations are either known or considered probable and can be reasonably estimated.
Such estimates require judgment with respect to costs, timeframe and extent of required remedial
and clean-up activities and are subject to periodic adjustments based on currently available
information. Recoveries of environmental costs through insurance, indemnification arrangements or
other sources are included in other assets to the extent such recoveries are considered probable.
Contingencies: We are subject to proceedings, lawsuits and other claims related to environmental,
labor, product and other matters. We are required to assess the likelihood of any adverse
judgments or outcomes to these matters as well as potential ranges of probable losses. A
determination of the amount of reserves required, if any, for these contingencies is made after
careful analysis of each individual issue. The required reserves may change in the future due to
new developments in each matter or changes in approach such as a change in settlement strategy in
dealing with these matters.
-84-
Income Taxes: Provisions for income taxes include deferred taxes resulting from temporary
differences in income for financial and tax purposes, using the liability method of accounting for
income taxes. The liability method requires the effect of tax rate changes on current and
accumulated deferred income taxes to be reflected in the period in which the rate change was
enacted. The liability method also requires that deferred tax assets be reduced by a valuation
allowance unless it is more likely than not that the assets will be realized.
Potential interest and penalties related to income tax matters are recognized in income tax
expense. We believe we have appropriate support for the income tax positions taken and to be taken
on our income tax returns and that our accruals for tax liabilities are adequate for all open years
based on an assessment of many factors, including past experience and interpretations of tax law
applied to the facts of each matter.
New Accounting Pronouncements:
In June 2009, new accounting standards were issued that replace the previous quantitative-based
risk and rewards calculation provided under GAAP with a qualitative approach in determining whether
an entity is the primary beneficiary of a VIE. Additionally, these standards require an entity to
assess on an ongoing basis whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE and enhances disclosure
requirements with respect to an entitys involvement in a VIE. These standards are effective
January 1, 2010 and will not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows.
NOTE 2: Tulsa Refinery Acquisition
On June 1, 2009, we acquired the Tulsa Refinery west facility, an 85,000 BPSD refinery located in
Tulsa, Oklahoma from Sunoco for $157.8 million in cash, including crude oil, refined product and
other inventories valued at $92.8 million. The refinery produces fuel products including gasoline,
diesel fuel and jet fuel and serves markets in the Mid-Continent region of the United States and
also produces specialty lubricant products that are marketed throughout North America and are
distributed in Central and South America. On October 20, 2009, we sold to an affiliate of Plains
All American Pipeline, L.P. (Plains) a portion of the crude oil petroleum storage, and certain
refining-related crude oil receiving pipeline facilities that were acquired as part of the refinery
assets for $40 million. Due to our continuing involvement in
these assets, this transaction has been accounted for as a financing transaction (see Note 12).
On December 1, 2009, we acquired the Tulsa Refinery east facility, a 75,000 BPSD refinery from
Sinclair also located in Tulsa, Oklahoma for $183.3 million, including crude oil, refined product
and other inventories valued at $46.4 million. The total purchase price consisted of $109.3
million in cash and 2,789,155 shares of our common stock having a value of $74 million.
Additionally, we will reimburse Sinclair approximately $8 million upon their satisfactory
completion of certain environmental projects at the refinery. The refinery also produces gasoline,
diesel fuel and jet fuel products and also serves markets in the Mid-Continent region of the United
States. We are integrating the operations of both Tulsa refinery facilities. This will result in
the Tulsa Refinery having an integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BPSD.
In accounting for these combined acquisitions, we recorded $20.6 million in materials and supplies,
$139.2 million in crude oil and refined products inventory, $203.8 million in property, plants and
equipment, $8.2 million in prepayments and other, $6.3 million in accrued liabilities and $24.4
million in other long-term liabilities. The acquired liabilities primarily relate to environmental
and asset retirement obligations. These amounts are based on
managements preliminary fair value estimates and are subject to change. Additionally, we incurred
$3.1 million in costs directly related to these acquisitions that were expensed as acquisition
costs.
-85-
For the period from June 1, 2009 (commencement date of our Tulsa Refinery operations) through
December 31, 2009, our Tulsa Refinery generated revenues of $1.1 billion and a net loss of $17.7
million. We have not provided disclosure of pro forma revenues and earnings as if the Tulsa
Refinery had been operating as a part of our refining business during all periods presented in
these financial statements. Pro forma financial information specific to the Tulsa Refinery
operations for periods prior to our acquisition is not available in GAAP form. The compilation of
such financial information would entail an extremely manual process of unwinding significant
volumes of intra-company transactions and obtaining a comprehensive understanding of accounting
policies as well as estimates employed by both Sunoco and Sinclair with respect to items including,
but not limited to, inventory and depreciation. We would then need to recast historical financial
information to reflect our own estimates and accounting policies. Furthermore, our operating plan
with respect to these facilities is distinctly different from the pre-acquisition operations of
these assets as we are fully integrating the operations of both facilities into a single refinery
having a reduced integrated crude processing rate of 125,000 BPSD rather than as two distinct
facilities. Therefore, we do not believe that it would be practical to produce this information,
nor do we believe it would be representative or comparable with respect to our future operating
results.
NOTE 3: Holly Energy Partners
HEP is a publicly held master limited partnership that commenced operations July 13, 2004 upon the
completion of its initial public offering. At December 31, 2009, we held 7,290,000 common units of
HEP, representing a 34% ownership interest in HEP, including our 2% general partner interest. In
August 2009, all of the conditions necessary to end the subordination period of our HEP
subordinated units were met and the units were converted into 7,000,000 HEP common units.
HEP is a variable interest entity as defined under GAAP. HEPs acquisition of the Crude Pipelines
and Tankage Assets (discussed below) qualified as a reconsideration event whereby we reassessed
whether HEP continued to qualify as a VIE. Following this transfer, we determined that HEP
continued to qualify as a VIE, and furthermore, we determined that our beneficial interest in HEP
exceeded 50%. Accordingly, we reconsolidated HEP effective March 1, 2008 and no longer account for
our investment in HEP under the equity method of accounting. As a result, our consolidated
financial statements include the results of HEP. Additionally, HEPs 2009 asset acquisitions and
its November and May 2009 equity offerings (discussed below) qualified as reconsideration events
whereby we determined that HEP continues to qualify as a VIE and we remain HEPs primary
beneficiary.
2009 Acquisitions
Sinclair Logistics and Storage Assets Transaction
On December 1, 2009, HEP acquired certain logistics and storage assets from an affiliate of
Sinclair for $79.2 million consisting of storage tanks having approximately 1.4 million barrels of
storage capacity and loading racks at Sinclairs refinery located in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The purchase
price consisted of $25.7 million in cash, including $4.2 million in taxes and 1,373,609 of HEPs
common units having a fair value of $53.5 million. Concurrent with this transaction we entered
into a 15-year pipeline, tankage and loading rack throughput agreement with HEP (the HEP PTTA),
whereby we agreed to transport, throughput and load volumes of product via HEPs Tulsa logistics
and storage assets that will initially result in minimum annual payments to HEP of $13.8 million.
Roadrunner / Beeson Pipelines Transaction
Also on December 1, 2009, HEP acquired our two newly constructed pipelines for $46.5 million,
consisting of a 65-mile, 16-inch crude oil pipeline (the Roadrunner Pipeline) that connects our
Navajo Refinery facility located in Lovington, New Mexico to a terminus of Centurion Pipeline
L.P.s pipeline extending between west Texas and Cushing, Oklahoma (the Centurion Pipeline) and
a 37-mile, 8-inch crude oil pipeline that connects HEPs New Mexico crude oil gathering system to
our Navajo Refinery Lovington facility (the Beeson Pipeline).
The Roadrunner Pipeline provides our Navajo Refinery with direct access to a wide variety of crude
oils available at Cushing, Oklahoma. In connection with this transaction, we entered into a
15-year pipeline agreement with HEP, (the HEP RPA), whereby we agreed to transport volumes of
crude oil on HEPs Roadrunner Pipeline that will initially result in minimum annual payments to HEP
of $9.2 million.
The Beeson Pipeline operates as a component of HEPs crude pipeline system and provides us with
added flexibility to move crude oil from HEPs crude oil gathering system to our Navajo Refinery
Lovington facility for processing.
-86-
Tulsa Loading Racks Transaction
On August 1, 2009, HEP acquired from us, certain truck and rail loading/unloading facilities
located at our Tulsa Refinery west facility for $17.5 million. The racks load refined products and
lube oils produced at the Tulsa Refinery onto rail cars and/or tanker trucks.
In connection with this transaction, we entered into a 15-year equipment and throughput agreement
with HEP, (the HEP ETA), whereby we agreed to throughput a minimum volume of products via HEPs
Tulsa loading racks that will initially result in minimum annual payments to HEP of $2.7 million.
Lovington-Artesia Pipeline Transaction
On June 1, 2009, HEP acquired our newly constructed, 16-inch intermediate pipeline for $34.2
million. The pipeline runs 65 miles from our Navajo Refinerys crude oil distillation and vacuum
facilities in Lovington, New Mexico to its petroleum refinery located in Artesia, New Mexico. This
pipeline was placed in service effective June 1, 2009 and operates as a component of HEPs
intermediate pipeline system that services our Navajo Refinery.
In connection with this transaction, we agreed to amend our intermediate pipeline agreement with
HEP (the HEP IPA). As a result, the term of the HEP IPA was extended by an additional four years
and now expires in June 2024. Additionally, our minimum commitment under the HEP IPA was increased
and currently, results in minimum annual payments to HEP of $20.7 million.
Since HEP is a consolidated subsidiary, our transactions with HEP including fees paid under
our transportation agreements with HEP are eliminated and have no impact on our consolidated
financial statements.
SLC Pipeline Joint Venture Interest
On March 1, 2009, HEP acquired a 25% joint venture interest in the SLC Pipeline, a new 95-mile
intrastate pipeline system jointly owned with Plains. The SLC Pipeline commenced operations
effective March 2009 and allows various refineries in the Salt Lake City area, including our Woods
Cross Refinery, to ship crude oil into the Salt Lake City area from the Utah terminus of the
Frontier Pipeline as well as crude oil flowing from Wyoming and Utah via Plains Rocky Mountain
Pipeline. HEPs capitalized joint venture contribution was $25.5 million.
Rio Grande Pipeline Sale
On December 1, 2009 HEP sold its 70% interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company (Rio Grande) to a
subsidiary of Enterprise Products Partners LP for $35 million. Accordingly, the results of
operations of Rio Grande and the $14.5 million gain on the sale are presented in discontinued
operations.
In accounting for the sale, HEP recorded a gain of $14.5 million. The net asset balance of Rio
Grande at December 1, 2009, was $20.5 million, consisting of cash of $3.1 million, $29.9 million in
properties and equipment, net, $2.2 million in accounts payable and $10.3 million in equity,
representing BP, Plcs 30% noncontrolling interest.
The following table provides income statement information related to discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Income from discontinued operations before income taxes |
|
$ |
5,367 |
|
|
$ |
3,716 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
(942 |
) |
|
|
(798 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations, net |
|
|
4,425 |
|
|
|
2,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of discontinued operations before income taxes |
|
|
14,479 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
(1,978 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of discontinued operations, net |
|
|
12,501 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations, net |
|
$ |
16,926 |
|
|
$ |
2,918 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-87-
2008 Crude Pipelines and Tankage Transaction
On February 29, 2008, we closed on the sale of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets to HEP for
$180 million. The assets consisted of crude oil trunk lines that deliver crude oil to our Navajo
Refinery in southeast New Mexico, gathering and connection pipelines located in west Texas and New
Mexico, on-site crude tankage located within the Navajo and Woods Cross Refinery complexes, a jet
fuel products pipeline between Artesia and Roswell, New Mexico and a leased jet fuel terminal in
Roswell, New Mexico. Consideration received consisted of $171 million in cash and 217,497 HEP
common units having a value of $9 million.
The balance sheet impact of our reconsolidation of HEP on March 1, 2008 was an increase in cash of
$7.3 million, an increase in other current assets of $5.9 million, an increase in property, plant
and equipment of $336.9 million, an increase in goodwill, intangibles and other assets of $86.5
million, an increase in current liabilities of $19.6 million, an increase in long-term debt of
$338.5 million, an increase in deferred income taxes of $5 million, a decrease in other long-term liabilities of $0.5 million, an increase in minority
interest of $389.1 million and a decrease in distributions in excess of investment in HEP of $315.1
million.
Transportation Agreements
HEP serves our refineries in New Mexico, Utah and Oklahoma under several long-term pipeline and
terminal, tankage and throughput agreements.
In connection with our 2009 asset transfers to HEP, as described above, we entered into three new
15-year transportation agreements with HEP, each expiring in 2024.
In addition we have an agreement that relates to the pipelines and terminals contributed to HEP by
us at the time of their initial public offering in 2004 and expires in 2019 (the HEP PTA). We
also have the HEP IPA that relates to the intermediate pipelines sold to HEP in 2005 and in June
2009 and expires in 2024 and an agreement that relates to the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets
sold to HEP also discussed above that expires in February 2023 (the HEP CPTA).
Under these agreements, we pay HEP fees to transport, store and throughput volumes of refined
product and crude oil on HEPs pipeline and terminal, tankage and loading rack facilities that
result in minimum annual payments to HEP. These minimum annual payments are adjusted each year at
a percentage change based upon the change in the Producer Price Index (PPI) but will not decrease
as a result of a decrease in the PPI. Under these agreements, the agreed upon tariff rates are
adjusted each year on July 1 at a rate based upon the percentage change in PPI or Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) index, but with the exception of the HEP IPA, generally will not
decrease as a result of a decrease in the PPI or FERC index. The FERC index is the change in the
PPI plus a FERC adjustment factor that is reviewed periodically. Following the July 1, 2009 PPI
rate adjustments, these agreements, including our new 2009 agreements with HEP, will result in
minimum payments to HEP of $118.5 million for the twelve months ending June 30, 2010.
Additionally, in February 2010, we entered into a pipeline systems operating agreement with HEP
expiring in 2014 (the HEP Pipeline Operating Agreement). Under the HEP Pipeline Operating
Agreement, effective December 1, 2009, HEP will operate certain of our tankage, pipelines, asphalt
racks and terminal buildings for an annual management fee of $1.3 million.
-88-
HEP Equity Offerings
In November 2009, HEP closed on a public offering of 2,185,000 of its common units including
285,000 common units issued pursuant to the underwriters exercise of their over-allotment option.
Aggregate net proceeds of $74.9 million were used to fund the cash portion of HEPs December 1,
2009 asset acquisitions, to repay outstanding borrowings under the HEP Credit Agreement and for
general partnership purposes.
Additionally in May 2009, HEP closed a public offering of 2,192,400 of its common units including
192,400 common units issued pursuant to the underwriters exercise of their over-allotment option.
Net proceeds of $58.4 million were used to repay outstanding borrowings under the HEP Credit
Agreement and for general partnership purposes.
We have related party transactions with HEP for pipeline and terminal expenses, certain employee
costs, insurance costs and administrative costs under our long-term transportation agreements and
our omnibus agreement with HEP. Effective March 1, 2008, we reconsolidated HEP. As a result, our
financial statements include the consolidated results of HEP and intercompany transactions with HEP
are eliminated. Related party transactions prior to our reconsolidation of HEP are as follows:
|
|
|
Pipeline and terminal expenses paid to HEP were $10.6 million for the period from
January 1, 2008 through February 29, 2008 and $61 million for the year ended December 31,
2007, respectively. |
|
|
|
We charged HEP $0.4 million for the period from January 1, 2008 through February 29,
2008 and $2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, respectively, for general and
administrative services under an omnibus agreement that we have with HEP that we recorded
as a reduction in expenses. |
|
|
|
HEP reimbursed us for costs of employees supporting their operations of $2.1 million for
the period from January 1, 2008 through February 29, 2008 and $8.5 million for the year
ended December 31 2007, respectively, which we recorded as a reduction in expenses. |
|
|
|
We reimbursed HEP $0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 for certain costs
paid on our behalf. |
|
|
|
We received as regular distributions on our subordinated units, common units and general
partner interest $6.1 million for the period from January 1, 2008 through February 29, 2008
and $22.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, respectively. Our distributions
included $0.7 million for the period from January 1, 2008 through February 29, 2008 and
$2.2 million for the year ending December 31, 2007, respectively, in incentive
distributions with respect to our general partner interest. |
|
|
|
We had a related party receivable from HEP of $6 million at February 29, 2008 and
December 31, 2007. |
|
|
|
We had accounts payable to HEP of zero and $5.7 million at February 29, 2008 and
December 31, 2007, respectively. |
Note 4: Financial Instruments
Our financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts
payable, debt and interest rate swaps. The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, accounts
receivable and accounts payable approximate fair value due to the short-tem maturity of these
instruments.
Our debt consists of outstanding principal under our long-term senior notes and HEPs revolving
credit agreement and long-term senior notes. The $206 million carrying amount of outstanding debt
under HEPs Credit Agreement approximates fair value as interest rates are reset frequently using
current rates. The estimated fair value of the Holly Senior Notes was $318 million and the fair
value of the HEP Senior Notes was $177.6 million at December 31, 2009. This fair value estimate is
based on market quotes provided from a third-party bank. See Note 12 for additional information on
these instruments.
Fair Value Measurements
Fair value measurements are derived using inputs, assumptions that market participants would use in
pricing an asset or liability, including assumptions about risk. GAAP categorizes inputs used in
fair value measurements into three broad levels as follows:
|
|
|
(Level 1) Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. |
|
|
|
(Level 2) Observable inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1, such as quoted
prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, similar assets and liabilities
in markets that are not active or can be corroborated by observable market data. |
|
|
|
(Level 3) Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and
that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities. This includes
valuation techniques that involve significant unobservable inputs. |
-89-
Our investments in marketable securities are measured at fair value using quoted market prices, a
Level 1 input. See Note 7 for additional information on our investments in marketable securities,
including fair value measurements.
We have interest rate swaps that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis using Level 2
inputs. With respect to these instruments, fair value is based on the net present value of
expected future cash flows related to both variable and fixed rate legs of our interest rate swap
agreements. Our measurements are computed using the forward London Interbank Offered Rate
(LIBOR) yield curve, a market-based observable input. See Note 12 for additional information on
our interest rate swaps, including fair value measurements.
NOTE 5: Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share from continuing operations is calculated as income from continuing
operations divided by the average number of shares of common stock outstanding. Diluted earnings
per share from continuing operations assumes, when dilutive, the issuance of the net incremental
shares from stock options and variable performance shares. The following is a reconciliation of
the denominators of the basic and diluted per share computations for income from continuing
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
15,209 |
|
|
$ |
119,206 |
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of shares of common stock outstanding |
|
|
50,418 |
|
|
|
50,202 |
|
|
|
54,852 |
|
Effect of dilutive stock options, variable restricted shares and performance share units |
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
347 |
|
|
|
998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of shares of common stock outstanding assuming dilution |
|
|
50,603 |
|
|
|
50,549 |
|
|
|
55,850 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.37 |
|
|
$ |
6.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.36 |
|
|
$ |
5.98 |
|
NOTE 6: Stock-Based Compensation
On December 31, 2009, Holly had three principal share-based compensation plans, which are described
below. The compensation cost that has been charged against income for these plans was $6.8
million, $7.6 million and $10.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. The total income tax benefit recognized in the income statement for share-based
compensation arrangements was $2.6 million, $2.9 million and $4.2 million for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Our current accounting policy for the recognition
of compensation expense for awards with pro-rata vesting (substantially all of our awards) is to
expense the costs pro-rata over the vesting periods. At December 31, 2009, 1,932,278 shares of
common stock were reserved for future grants under the current long-term incentive compensation
plan, which reservation allows for awards of options, restricted stock, or other performance
awards.
Additionally, HEP maintains share-based compensation plans for HEP directors and select Holly
Logistic Services, L.L.C. executives and employees. Compensation cost attributable to HEPs
share-based compensation plans for the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $1.2 million and
$1.7 million, respectively
-90-
Stock Options
Under our long-term incentive compensation plan and a previous stock option plan, we have granted
stock options to certain officers and other key employees. All the options have been granted at
prices equal to the market value of the shares at the time of the grant and normally expire on the
tenth anniversary of the grant date. These awards generally vest 20% at the end of each of the
five years after the grant date. There have been no options granted since December 2001. The fair
value on the date of grant for each option awarded was been estimated using the Black-Scholes
option pricing model.
A summary of option activity and changes during the year ended December 31, 2009 is presented
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Value |
|
Options |
|
Shares |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Term |
|
|
($000) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2009 |
|
|
85,200 |
|
|
$ |
2.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(45,000 |
) |
|
|
2.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding and exercisable at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
40,200 |
|
|
$ |
2.98 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
$ |
911 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008
and 2007, was $0.9 million, $8.6 million and $68 million, respectively.
Cash received from option exercises under the stock option plans for the years ended December 31,
2009, 2008 and 2007, was $.1 million, $1 million and $2.3 million, respectively. The actual tax
benefit realized for the tax deductions from option exercises under the stock option plans totaled
$0.4 million, $3.4 million and $26 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
Restricted Stock
Under our long-term incentive compensation plan, we grant certain officers, other key employees and
outside directors restricted stock awards with substantially all awards vesting generally over a
period of one to five years. Although ownership of the shares does not transfer to the recipients
until after the shares vest, recipients have dividend rights on these shares from the date of
grant. The vesting for certain key executives is contingent upon certain earnings per share
targets being realized. The fair value of each share of restricted stock awarded, including the
shares issued to the key executives, was measured based on the market price as of the date of grant
and is being amortized over the respective vesting period.
A summary of restricted stock activity and changes during the year ended December 31, 2009 is
presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant-Date |
|
|
Value |
|
Restricted Stock |
|
Grants |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
($000) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2009 (non-vested) |
|
|
235,310 |
|
|
$ |
35.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting and transfer of ownership to recipients |
|
|
(133,616 |
) |
|
|
26.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
186,801 |
|
|
|
23.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(4,045 |
) |
|
|
40.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 (non-vested) |
|
|
284,450 |
|
|
$ |
31.82 |
|
|
$ |
7,290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total fair value of restricted stock vested and transferred to recipients during the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $3.4 million, $2.5 million and $12.9 million,
respectively. As of December 31, 2009, there was $1.8 million of total unrecognized compensation
cost related to non-vested restricted stock grants. That cost is expected to be recognized over a
weighted-average period of 1.3 years.
Performance Share Units
Under our long-term incentive compensation plan, we grant certain officers and other key employees
performance share units, which are payable in either cash or stock upon meeting certain criteria
over the service period, and
generally vest over a period of one to three years. Under the terms of our performance share unit
grants, awards are subject to either a financial performance or a market performance criteria.
-91-
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we granted 122,555 performance share units with a fair
value based on our grant date closing stock price of $22.94. All shares were granted during the
first quarter of 2009 and are payable in stock and are subject to certain financial performance
criteria.
The fair value of each performance share unit award subject to the financial performance criteria
and payable in stock is computed using the grant date closing stock price of each respective award
grant and will apply to the number of units ultimately awarded. The number of shares ultimately
issued for each award will be based on our financial performance as compared to peer group
companies over the performance period and can range from zero to 200%. As of December 31, 2009,
estimated share payouts for outstanding non-vested performance share unit awards ranged from 130%
to 170%.
The fair value of each performance share unit award based on market performance criteria and
payable in stock is computed based on an expected-cash-flow approach. The analysis utilizes the
grant date closing stock price, dividend yield, historical total returns, expected total returns
based on a capital asset pricing model methodology, standard deviation of historical returns and
comparison of expected total returns with the peer group. The expected total return and historical
standard deviation are applied to a lognormal expected return distribution in a Monte Carlo
simulation model to identify the expected range of potential returns and probabilities of expected
returns.
A summary of performance share unit activity and changes during the year ended December 31, 2009 is
presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
Performance Share Units |
|
Grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2009 (non-vested) |
|
|
169,669 |
|
Vesting and transfer of ownership to recipients |
|
|
(72,059 |
) |
Granted |
|
|
122,555 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(4,995 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 (non-vested) |
|
|
215,170 |
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2009 we issued 110,971 shares of our common stock having a
fair value of $2.2 million related to vested performance share units, representing a 154% payout.
Based on the weighted average grant date fair value of $35.07 there was $3.5 million of total
unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested performance share units. That cost is
expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.7 years.
NOTE 7: Cash and Cash Equivalents and Investments in Marketable Securities
Our investment portfolio consists of cash, cash equivalents, and investments in debt securities
primarily issued by government entities. In addition, we have 1,000,000 shares of Connacher common
stock that was received as partial consideration upon our sale of the Montana refinery in 2006.
During the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded an impairment loss of $3.7 million related to
our investment in Connacher common stock having an initial cost basis of $4.3 million. Although
this investment in equity securities was in an unrealized loss position for less than 12-months, we
accounted for this as an other-than-temporary decline due to the severity of the loss in fair value
of this investment.
The following is a summary of our available-for-sale securities at December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-Sale Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
(Net Carrying |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gain |
|
|
Amount) |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
$ |
604 |
|
|
$ |
619 |
|
|
$ |
1,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-92-
The following is a summary of our available-for-sale securities at December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-Sale Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Recognized |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Impairment |
|
|
(Net Carrying |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gain |
|
|
Loss |
|
|
Amount) |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
States and political subdivisions |
|
$ |
54,389 |
|
|
$ |
210 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
54,599 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
4,328 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,724 |
) |
|
|
604 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities |
|
$ |
58,717 |
|
|
$ |
210 |
|
|
$ |
(3,724 |
) |
|
$ |
55,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, we received a total of $230.3 million and
$945.5 million, respectively, related to sales and maturities of our investments in marketable debt
securities.
NOTE 8: Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost, using the LIFO method for crude oil and refined
products and the average cost method for materials and supplies, or market. Cost is determined
using the LIFO inventory valuation methodology and market is determined using current estimated
selling prices. Under the LIFO method, the most recently incurred costs are charged to cost of
sales and inventories are valued at the earliest acquisition costs. In periods of rapidly
declining prices, LIFO inventories may have to be written down to market due to the higher costs
assigned to LIFO layers in prior periods. In addition, the use of the LIFO inventory method may
result in increases or decreases to cost of sales in years that inventory volumes decline as the
result of charging cost of sales with LIFO inventory costs generated in prior periods.
Inventory consists of the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude oil |
|
$ |
60,874 |
|
|
$ |
21,446 |
|
Other raw materials and unfinished products (1) |
|
|
42,783 |
|
|
|
2,640 |
|
Finished products (2) |
|
|
155,925 |
|
|
|
83,725 |
|
Process chemicals (3) |
|
|
22,823 |
|
|
|
3,800 |
|
Repairs and maintenance supplies and other |
|
|
21,108 |
|
|
|
14,124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total inventory |
|
$ |
303,513 |
|
|
$ |
125,735 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Other raw materials and unfinished products include feedstocks and blendstocks, other
than crude. |
|
(2) |
|
Finished products include gasolines, jet fuels, diesels, lubricants, asphalts, LPGs
and residual fuels. |
|
(3) |
|
Process chemicals include catalysts, additives and other chemicals. |
The excess of current cost over the LIFO value of inventory was $207 million and $33 million
at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we recognized a
$8.4 million charge to cost of products sold. This charge was due to the liquidation of certain
LIFO inventory quantities that were carried at higher costs as compared to 2009 LIFO inventory
acquisition costs. For the year ended December 31, 2008, we recognized an $8.4 million reduction
in cost of products sold. This cost reduction resulted from liquidations of certain LIFO inventory
quantities that were carried at lower costs as compared to acquisition costs at the beginning of
the 2008 year.
-93-
NOTE 9: Properties, Plants and Equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land, buildings and improvements |
|
$ |
73,973 |
|
|
$ |
54,529 |
|
Refining facilities |
|
|
981,594 |
|
|
|
493,706 |
|
Pipelines and terminals |
|
|
478,522 |
|
|
|
338,558 |
|
Transportation vehicles |
|
|
20,760 |
|
|
|
19,313 |
|
Other fixed assets |
|
|
80,546 |
|
|
|
50,187 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
366,460 |
|
|
|
553,408 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,001,855 |
|
|
|
1,509,701 |
|
Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(371,885 |
) |
|
|
(304,379 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,629,970 |
|
|
$ |
1,205,322 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 we capitalized $3.2 million and $1 million,
respectively, in interest attributable to construction projects.
Depreciation expense was $78.4 million, $53.3 million and $35.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Depreciation expense for the years ended December
31, 2009 and 2008 includes $25 million and $17.5 million, respectively, of depreciation expense
attributable to the operations of HEP as a result of our reconsolidation effective March 1, 2008.
NOTE 10: Joint Venture
In December 2007, we entered into a definitive agreement with Sinclair to jointly build a 12-inch
refined products pipeline from Salt Lake City, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada, together with terminal
facilities in the Cedar City, Utah and north Las Vegas areas (the UNEV Pipeline). Under the
agreement, we own a 75% interest in the joint venture pipeline and Sinclair owns the remaining 25%
interest. The initial capacity of the pipeline will be 62,000 BPD, with the capacity for further
expansion to 120,000 BPD. The total cost of the pipeline project including terminals is expected
to be $275 million, with our share of this cost totaling $206 million. In connection with this
project, we have entered into a 10-year commitment to ship an annual average of 15,000 BPD of
refined products on the UNEV Pipeline at an agreed tariff rate. Our commitment for each year is
subject to reduction by up to 5,000 BPD in specified circumstances relating to shipments by other
shippers. We have an option agreement with HEP granting them an option to purchase all of our
equity interests in this joint venture pipeline effective for a 180-day period commencing when the
UNEV Pipeline becomes operational, at a purchase price equal to our investment in this joint
venture pipeline plus interest at 7% per annum. We expect the project will be ready to commence
operations in the fall of 2010.
We currently anticipate that all regulatory approvals required to commence the construction of the
UNEV Pipeline will be received by the end of the second quarter of 2010. Once such approvals are
received, construction of the pipeline will take approximately nine months. Under this schedule,
the pipeline would become operational during the first quarter of 2011.
NOTE 11: Environmental Costs
Consistent with our accounting policy for environmental remediation costs, we expensed $4.2
million, $0.6 million and $2.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively, for environmental remediation obligations. The accrued environmental liability
reflected in the consolidated balance sheet was $30.4 million and $7.3 million at December 31, 2009
and 2008, respectively, of which $24.2 million and $4.2 million, respectively, was classified as
other long-term liabilities. These liabilities include $22.3 million of environmental obligations
that we assumed in connection with our Tulsa Refinery acquisitions on June 1, 2009 and December 1,
2009. Costs of future expenditures for environmental remediation that are expected to be incurred
over the next several years and are not discounted to their present value.
-94-
NOTE 12: Debt
Credit Facilities
We have a $370 million senior secured credit agreement expiring in March 2013. In April 2009, we
entered into a second amended and restated $300 million senior secured revolving credit agreement
that amended and restated our previous credit agreement in its entirety with Bank of America, N.A.
as administrative agent and one of a syndicate of lenders (the Holly Credit Agreement).
Additionally, we upsized the credit agreement by $50 million in November 2009 and by an additional
$20 million in December 2009 pursuant to the accordion feature. The credit agreement may be used
to fund working capital requirements, capital expenditures, permitted acquisitions or other general
corporate purposes. We were in compliance with all covenants at December 31, 2009. At December
31, 2009, we had no outstanding borrowings and letters of credit totaling $56.3 million under the
Holly Credit Agreement. At that level of usage, the unused commitment under the Holly Credit
Agreement was $313.7 million at December 31, 2009.
HEP has a $300 million senior secured revolving credit agreement expiring in August 2011 (the HEP
Credit Agreement). The HEP Credit Agreement is available to fund capital expenditures,
acquisitions and working capital and for other general partnership purposes. At December 31, 2009,
HEP had outstanding borrowings totaling $206 million under the HEP Credit Agreement with unused
borrowing capacity of $94 million. HEPs obligations under the HEP Credit Agreement are
collateralized by substantially all of HEPs assets. HEP assets that are included in our
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009 consist of $2.5 million in cash and cash
equivalents, $7.6 million in trade accounts receivable and other current assets, $458.5 million in
property, plant and equipment, net and $159 million in intangible and other assets. Indebtedness
under the HEP Credit Agreement is recourse to HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., its general partner,
and guaranteed by HEPs wholly-owned subsidiaries. Any recourse to the general partner would be
limited to the extent of HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P.s assets, which other than its investment in
HEP, are not significant. Navajo Pipeline Co., L.P., Navajo Refining Company, L.L.C. and Woods
Cross Refining Company, L.L.C., three of our subsidiaries, have agreed to indemnify HEPs
controlling partner to the extent it makes any payment in satisfaction of debt service due on up to
a $171 million aggregate principal amount of borrowings under the HEP Credit Agreement.
Holly Senior Notes Due 2017
In June 2009, we issued $200 million in aggregate principal amount of Holly Senior Notes. A
portion of the $188 million in net proceeds received was used for post-closing payments for
inventories of crude oil and refined products acquired from Sunoco following the closing of the
Tulsa Refinery west facility purchase on June 1, 2009. In October 2009, we issued an additional
$100 million aggregate principal amount as an add-on offering to the Holly Senior Notes that was
used to fund the cash portion of our acquisition of Sinclairs 75,000 BPD refinery located in
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
The $300 million aggregate principal amount of Holly Senior Notes mature on June 15, 2017 and bear
interest at 9.875%. The Holly Senior Notes are unsecured and impose certain restrictive covenants,
including limitations on Hollys ability to incur additional debt, incur liens, enter into
sale-and-leaseback transactions, pay dividends, enter into mergers, sell assets and enter into
certain transactions with affiliates. At any time when the Holly Senior Notes are rated investment
grade by both Moodys and Standard & Poors and no default or event of default exists, we will not
be subject to many of the foregoing covenants. Additionally, we have certain redemption rights
under the Holly Senior Notes.
HEP Senior Notes Due 2015
The HEP senior notes maturing March 1, 2015 are registered with the SEC and bear interest at 6.25%
(HEP Senior Notes). The HEP Senior Notes are unsecured and impose certain restrictive covenants,
including limitations on HEPs ability to incur additional indebtedness, make investments, sell
assets, incur certain liens, pay distributions, enter into transactions with affiliates, and enter
into mergers. At any time when the HEP Senior Notes are rated investment grade by both Moodys and
Standard & Poors and no default or event of default exists, HEP will not be subject to many of the
foregoing covenants. Additionally, HEP has certain redemption rights under the HEP Senior Notes.
Indebtedness under the HEP Senior Notes is recourse to HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., its general
partner,
and guaranteed by HEPs wholly-owned subsidiaries. Any recourse to the general partner would be
limited to the extent of HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P.s assets, which other than its investment in
HEP, are not significant. Navajo Pipeline Co., L.P., one of our subsidiaries, has agreed to
indemnify HEPs controlling partner to the extent it makes any payment in satisfaction of debt
service on up to $35 million of the principal amount of the HEP Senior Notes.
-95-
Holly Financing Obligation
On October 20, 2009, we sold to Plains a portion of the crude oil petroleum storage, and certain
refining-related crude oil receiving pipeline facilities located at our Tulsa Refinery east
facility. In connection with this transaction, we entered into a 15-year lease agreement with
Plains, whereby we agreed to pay a fixed monthly fee for the exclusive use of this tankage as well
as a fee for volumes received at the receiving facilities purchased by Plains. Additionally, we
have a margin sharing agreement with Plains under which we will equally share contango profits with
Plains for crude oil purchased by them and delivered to our Tulsa Refinery west facility for
storage. Due to our continuing involvement in these assets, this transaction has been accounted
for as a financing obligation. As a result, we retained our assets on our books and established a
liability representing the $40 million in proceeds received.
The carrying amounts of long-term debt are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Holly Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal |
|
$ |
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Unamortized discount |
|
|
(11,549 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
288,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Financing Obligation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal |
|
|
39,809 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Holly long-term debt |
|
$ |
328,260 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HEP Credit Agreement |
|
$ |
206,000 |
|
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HEP Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal |
|
|
185,000 |
|
|
|
185,000 |
|
Unamortized discount |
|
|
(13,593 |
) |
|
|
(16,223 |
) |
Unamortized premium de-designated fair value hedge |
|
|
1,791 |
|
|
|
2,137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
173,198 |
|
|
|
170,914 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total HEP debt |
|
|
379,198 |
|
|
|
370,914 |
|
Less HEP Credit Agreement borrowings classified as short-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total HEP long-term debt |
|
$ |
379,198 |
|
|
$ |
341,914 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2009, the estimated fair values of the Holly Senior Notes and the HEP Senior
Notes were $318 million and $177.6 million, respectively.
Interest Rate Risk Management
HEP uses interest rate swaps (derivative instruments) to mange its exposure to interest rate risk.
As of December 31, 2009, HEP has three interest rate swap contracts.
HEP has an interest rate swap to hedge its exposure to the cash flow risk caused by the effects of
LIBOR changes on the $171 million HEP Credit Agreement advance that was used to finance HEPs
purchase of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets from us. This interest rate swap effectively
converts its $171 million LIBOR based debt to fixed rate debt having an interest rate of 3.74% plus
an applicable margin, currently 1.75%, which equaled an effective interest rate of 5.49% as of
December 31, 2009. This swap contract matures in February 2013.
-96-
HEP designated this interest rate swap as a cash flow hedge. Based on its assessment of
effectiveness using the change in variable cash flows method, HEP determined that this interest
rate swap is effective in offsetting the variability in interest payments on the $171 million
variable rate debt resulting from changes in LIBOR. Under hedge accounting, HEP adjusts the cash
flow hedge on a quarterly basis to its fair value with the offsetting fair value adjustment to
accumulated other comprehensive income. Also on a quarterly basis, HEP measures hedge
effectiveness by comparing the present value of the cumulative change in the expected future
interest to be paid or received on the variable leg of the swap against the expected future
interest payments on the $171 million variable rate debt. Any ineffectiveness is reclassified from
accumulated other comprehensive income to interest expense. As of December 31, 2009, HEP had no
ineffectiveness on its cash flow hedge.
HEP also has an interest rate swap contract that effectively converts interest expense associated
with $60 million of the HEP 6.25% Senior Notes from fixed to variable rate debt (Variable Rate
Swap). Under this swap contract, interest on the $60 million notional amount is computed using
the three-month LIBOR plus a spread of 1.1575%, which equaled an effective interest rate of 1.41%
as of December 31, 2009. The maturity date of this swap contract is March 1, 2015, matching the
maturity of the HEP Senior Notes.
In October 2008, HEP entered into an additional interest rate swap contract, effective December 1,
2008, that effectively unwinds the effects of the Variable Rate Swap discussed above, converting
$60 million of its hedged long-term debt back to fixed rate debt (Fixed Rate Swap). Under the
Fixed Rate Swap, interest on a notional amount of $60 million is computed at a fixed rate of 3.59%
versus three-month LIBOR which when added to the 1.1575% spread on the Variable Rate Swap results
in an effective fixed interest rate of 4.75%. The maturity date of this swap contract is December
1, 2013.
Prior to the execution of HEPs Fixed Rate Swap, the Variable Rate Swap was designated as a fair
value hedge of $60 million in outstanding principal under the HEP Senior Notes. HEP de-designated
this hedge in October 2008. At that time, the carrying balance of the HEP Senior Notes included a
$2.2 million premium due to the application of hedge accounting until the de-designation date.
This premium is being amortized as a reduction to interest expense over the remaining term of the
Variable Rate Swap.
HEPs interest rate swaps not having a hedge designation are measured quarterly at fair value
either as an asset or a liability in the consolidated balance sheets with the offsetting fair value
adjustment to interest expense. For the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, HEP recognized an
increase of $0.2 million and $2.3 million, respectively, in interest expense as a result of fair
value adjustments to its interest rate swaps.
HEP records interest expense equal to the variable rate payments under the swaps. Receipts under
the swap agreements are recorded as a reduction of interest expense.
Additional information on HEPs interest rate swaps at December 31, 2009 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Offsetting |
|
Offsetting |
|
Interest Rate Swaps |
|
Location |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Balance |
|
Amount |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Asset |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-to-variable interest rate swap
$60 million of 6.25% HEP Senior Notes |
|
Other assets |
|
$ |
2,294 |
|
|
Long-term debt HEP |
|
$ |
(1,791 |
)(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity |
|
|
(1,942 |
)(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
1,439 |
(3) |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,294 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(2,294 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flow hedge $171 million LIBOR
based debt |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
$ |
(9,141 |
) |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
9,141 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable-to-fixed interest rate swap |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
Equity |
|
|
4,166 |
(2) |
$60 million |
|
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(1,611 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(11,696 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
11,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents unamortized balance of dedesignated hedge premium. |
|
(2) |
|
Represents prior year charges to interest expense. |
|
(3) |
|
Net of amortization of premium attributable to dedesignated hedge. |
-97-
On January 29, 2010, HEP received notice from the counterparty that it is exercising its
option to cancel the Variable Rate Swap on March 1, 2010, pursuant to the terms of the swap
contract. HEP will receive a cancellation premium of $1.9 million.
NOTE 13: Income Taxes
The provision for income taxes from continuing operations is comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Current |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
$ |
(24,876 |
) |
|
$ |
27,795 |
|
|
$ |
113,999 |
|
State |
|
|
(2,266 |
) |
|
|
4,097 |
|
|
|
28,246 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
|
33,269 |
|
|
|
27,727 |
|
|
|
21,867 |
|
State |
|
|
4,253 |
|
|
|
5,207 |
|
|
|
1,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,380 |
|
|
$ |
64,826 |
|
|
$ |
165,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The statutory federal income tax rate applied to pre-tax book income from continuing
operations reconciles to income tax expense as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax computed at statutory rate |
|
$ |
15,331 |
|
|
$ |
65,711 |
|
|
$ |
174,805 |
|
State income taxes, net of federal tax benefit |
|
|
1,708 |
|
|
|
7,322 |
|
|
|
19,478 |
|
Federal tax credits |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(1,896 |
) |
|
|
(16,078 |
) |
Domestic production activities deduction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,380 |
) |
|
|
(8,670 |
) |
Tax exempt interest |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(2,772 |
) |
|
|
(4,200 |
) |
Discontinued operations (including noncontrolling interest) |
|
|
7,720 |
|
|
|
1,820 |
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in continuing operations |
|
|
(13,123 |
) |
|
|
(2,739 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
(1,023 |
) |
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,380 |
|
|
$ |
64,826 |
|
|
$ |
165,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the
carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used
for income tax purposes. Our deferred income tax assets and liabilities for continuing operations
as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Deferred taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued employee benefits |
|
$ |
7,701 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,701 |
|
Accrued postretirement benefits |
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
Accrued environmental costs |
|
|
2,339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,339 |
|
Inventory differences |
|
|
7,951 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,951 |
|
Prepayments and other |
|
|
2,423 |
|
|
|
(3,321 |
) |
|
|
(898 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current(1) |
|
|
22,226 |
|
|
|
(3,321 |
) |
|
|
18,905 |
|
Properties, plants and equipment (due primarily to
tax in excess of book depreciation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(176,889 |
) |
|
|
(176,889 |
) |
Accrued postretirement benefits |
|
|
13,488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,488 |
|
Accrued environmental costs |
|
|
9,420 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,420 |
|
Deferred turnaround costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,257 |
) |
|
|
(18,257 |
) |
Investment in HEP |
|
|
47,188 |
|
|
|
(4,507 |
) |
|
|
42,681 |
|
Other |
|
|
7,512 |
|
|
|
(2,540 |
) |
|
|
4,972 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noncurrent |
|
|
77,608 |
|
|
|
(202,193 |
) |
|
|
(124,585 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
99,834 |
|
|
$ |
(205,514 |
) |
|
$ |
(105,680 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-98-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Deferred taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued employee benefits |
|
$ |
7,135 |
|
|
$ |
(29 |
) |
|
$ |
7,106 |
|
Accrued postretirement benefits |
|
|
2,893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,893 |
|
Accrued environmental costs |
|
|
1,202 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,202 |
|
Inventory differences |
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
736 |
|
Prepayments and other |
|
|
1,066 |
|
|
|
(2,297 |
) |
|
|
(1,231 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current(1) |
|
|
13,032 |
|
|
|
(2,326 |
) |
|
|
10,706 |
|
Properties, plants and equipment (due primarily to
tax in excess of book depreciation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(122,684 |
) |
|
|
(122,684 |
) |
Accrued postretirement benefits |
|
|
14,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,824 |
|
Accrued environmental costs |
|
|
1,591 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
Deferred turnaround costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,491 |
) |
|
|
(11,491 |
) |
Investment in HEP |
|
|
44,612 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,612 |
|
Other |
|
|
6,212 |
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
|
3,657 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noncurrent |
|
|
67,239 |
|
|
|
(136,730 |
) |
|
|
(69,491 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
80,271 |
|
|
$ |
(139,056 |
) |
|
$ |
(58,785 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our net current deferred tax assets are classified as other current assets under
Prepayments and other in our consolidated balance sheets. |
We made income tax payments of $19.3 million in 2009, $21.1 million in 2008 and $139.4 million
in 2007.
The total amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2009, was $2 million. A
reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liability for |
|
|
|
Unrecognized |
|
|
|
Tax Benefits |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Balance at January 1, 2009 |
|
$ |
4,350 |
|
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year |
|
|
3 |
|
Additions for tax positions of prior years |
|
|
358 |
|
Reductions for tax positions of prior years |
|
|
(2,747 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
1,964 |
|
|
|
|
|
Included in the unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2009 are $1.1 million of tax
benefits that, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate. Unrecognized tax benefits are
adjusted in the period in which new information about a tax position becomes available or the final
outcome differs from the amount recorded.
We recognize interest and penalties relating to liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits as an
element of tax expense. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recognized $1 million in
interest (net of related tax benefits) as a component of tax expense. We have not recorded any
penalties related to our uncertain tax positions as we believe that it is more likely than not that
there will not be any assessment of penalties. We do not expect that unrecognized tax benefits for
tax positions taken with respect to 2009 and prior years will significantly change over the next
twelve months.
We are subject to U.S. federal income tax, New Mexico income tax and to income tax of multiple
other state jurisdictions. We have substantially concluded all U.S. federal income tax matters for
tax years through December 31, 2005 and all state and local income tax matters for tax years
through December 31, 2003.
-99-
NOTE 14: Stockholders Equity
The following table shows our common shares outstanding and the activity during the year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares outstanding at beginning of year |
|
|
49,943,220 |
|
|
|
52,616,169 |
|
|
|
55,316,615 |
|
Common shares issued to Sinclair in connection with Tulsa Refinery east
facility acquisition |
|
|
2,789,155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options |
|
|
45,000 |
|
|
|
406,000 |
|
|
|
1,085,600 |
|
Issuance of restricted stock, excluding restricted stock with performance
feature |
|
|
154,078 |
|
|
|
46,943 |
|
|
|
49,677 |
|
Vesting of performance units |
|
|
146,664 |
|
|
|
84,948 |
|
|
|
151,000 |
|
Vesting of restricted stock with performance feature |
|
|
49,719 |
|
|
|
57,572 |
|
|
|
180,519 |
|
Forfeitures of restricted stock |
|
|
(1,633 |
) |
|
|
(2,033 |
) |
|
|
(23,537 |
) |
Purchase of treasury stock(1) |
|
|
(59,934 |
) |
|
|
(3,266,379 |
) |
|
|
(4,143,705 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares outstanding at end of year |
|
|
53,066,269 |
|
|
|
49,943,220 |
|
|
|
52,616,169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes shares purchased under the terms of restricted stock agreements to provide funds
for the payment of payroll and income taxes due at vesting of restricted stock. |
Common Stock Repurchases: Under our common stock repurchase program, common stock repurchases
are being made from time to time in the open market or privately negotiated transactions based on
market conditions, securities law limitations and other factors. During the year ended December
31, 2009, we did not purchase any shares of common stock, other than shares purchased to provide
funds for the payment of payroll and income taxes due at the vesting of restricted shares for
certain officers and employees who did not elect to satisfy such taxes by other means. Since
inception of our common stock repurchase initiative beginning in May 2005 through December 31,
2009, we have repurchased 16,759,395 shares at a cost of $655.2 million or an average of $39.10 per
share.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we repurchased at market price from certain executives
59,934 shares of our common stock at a cost of $1.2 million. These purchases were made under the
terms of restricted stock and performance share unit agreements to provide funds for the payment of
payroll and income taxes due at the vesting of restricted shares in the case of officers and
employees who did not elect to satisfy such taxes by other means.
NOTE 15: Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
The components and allocated tax effects of other comprehensive income (loss) are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax Expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before-Tax |
|
|
(Benefit) |
|
|
After-Tax |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities |
|
$ |
409 |
|
|
$ |
158 |
|
|
$ |
251 |
|
Retirement medical obligation adjustment |
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
Minimum pension liability adjustment |
|
|
12,497 |
|
|
|
4,862 |
|
|
|
7,635 |
|
Unrealized gain on HEP cash flow hedge |
|
|
3,726 |
|
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
3,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
17,374 |
|
|
|
5,972 |
|
|
|
11,402 |
|
Less other comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
2,021 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,021 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders |
|
$ |
15,353 |
|
|
$ |
5,972 |
|
|
$ |
9,381 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities |
|
$ |
(169 |
) |
|
$ |
(67 |
) |
|
$ |
(102 |
) |
Retirement medical obligation adjustment |
|
|
1,433 |
|
|
|
557 |
|
|
|
876 |
|
Minimum pension liability adjustment |
|
|
(21,572 |
) |
|
|
(8,391 |
) |
|
|
(13,181 |
) |
Unrealized loss on HEP cash flow hedge |
|
|
(12,967 |
) |
|
|
(2,290 |
) |
|
|
(10,677 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(33,275 |
) |
|
|
(10,191 |
) |
|
|
(23,084 |
) |
Less other comprehensive loss attributable to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
(7,079 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,079 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders |
|
$ |
(26,196 |
) |
|
$ |
(10,191 |
) |
|
$ |
(16,005 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-100-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax Expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before-Tax |
|
|
(Benefit) |
|
|
After-Tax |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum pension liability adjustment |
|
$ |
(9,373 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,647 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,726 |
) |
Retirement medical obligation adjustment |
|
|
(5,038 |
) |
|
|
(1,960 |
) |
|
|
(3,078 |
) |
Unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
693 |
|
|
|
1,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss attributable to Holly Corporation
stockholders |
|
$ |
(12,632 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,914 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,718 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The temporary unrealized gain (loss) on securities available-for-sale is due to changes in the
market prices of securities.
Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the equity section of our Consolidated Balance Sheets
includes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension obligation adjustment |
|
$ |
(21,774 |
) |
|
$ |
(29,409 |
) |
Retiree medical obligation adjustment |
|
|
(1,749 |
) |
|
|
(2,202 |
) |
Unrealized gain on securities available-for-sale |
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
Unrealized loss on HEP cash flow hedge, net of minority interest |
|
|
(2,556 |
) |
|
|
(3,598 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
(25,700 |
) |
|
$ |
(35,081 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 16: Retirement Plans
Retirement Plan: We have a non-contributory defined benefit retirement plan that covers most of
our employees who were hired prior to January 1, 2007. Our policy is to make contributions
annually of not less than the minimum funding requirements of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974. Benefits are based on the employees years of service and compensation.
Effective January 1, 2007, the retirement plan was frozen to new employees not covered by
collective bargaining agreements with labor unions. To the extent an employee was hired prior to
January 1, 2007, and elected to participate in automatic contributions features under our defined
contribution plan, their participation in future benefits of the retirement plan was frozen.
The following table sets forth the changes in the benefit obligation and plan assets of our
retirement plan for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Change in plans benefit obligation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension plans benefit obligation beginning of year |
|
$ |
74,488 |
|
|
$ |
72,842 |
|
Service cost |
|
|
4,314 |
|
|
|
4,229 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
4,943 |
|
|
|
4,692 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(3,726 |
) |
|
|
(6,188 |
) |
Actuarial (gain) loss |
|
|
1,151 |
|
|
|
(1,087 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension plans benefit obligation end of year |
|
|
81,170 |
|
|
|
74,488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in pension plan assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets beginning of year |
|
|
45,342 |
|
|
|
56,454 |
|
Actual return on plan assets |
|
|
12,977 |
|
|
|
(19,924 |
) |
Benefits paid |
|
|
(3,726 |
) |
|
|
(6,188 |
) |
Employer contributions |
|
|
1,025 |
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets end of year |
|
|
55,618 |
|
|
|
45,342 |
|
-101-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Funded status |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under-funded balance |
|
$ |
(25,552 |
) |
|
$ |
(29,146 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recognized in consolidated balance sheets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued pension liability |
|
$ |
(25,552 |
) |
|
$ |
(29,146 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actuarial loss |
|
$ |
(31,677 |
) |
|
$ |
(43,475 |
) |
Prior service cost |
|
|
(2,811 |
) |
|
|
(3,201 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(34,488 |
) |
|
$ |
(46,676 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accumulated benefit obligation was $65 million and $58.7 million at December 31, 2009 and
2008, respectively. The measurement dates used for our retirement plan were December 31, 2009 and
2008.
The weighted average assumptions used to determine end of period benefit obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate |
|
|
6.20 |
% |
|
|
6.50 |
% |
Rate of future compensation increases |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
Net periodic pension expense consisted of the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Service cost benefit earned during the year |
|
$ |
4,314 |
|
|
$ |
4,229 |
|
|
$ |
4,110 |
|
Interest cost on projected benefit obligations |
|
|
4,943 |
|
|
|
4,692 |
|
|
|
4,075 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(3,843 |
) |
|
|
(4,793 |
) |
|
|
(4,078 |
) |
Amortization of prior service cost |
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
Amortization of net loss |
|
|
3,815 |
|
|
|
1,218 |
|
|
|
908 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic pension expense |
|
$ |
9,619 |
|
|
$ |
5,736 |
|
|
$ |
5,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted average assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate |
|
|
6.50 |
% |
|
|
6.40 |
% |
|
|
6.00 |
% |
Rate of future compensation increases |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
Expected long-term rate of return on assets |
|
|
8.50 |
% |
|
|
8.50 |
% |
|
|
8.50 |
% |
The estimated amounts that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income into
net periodic benefit expense in 2010 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Actuarial loss |
|
$ |
2,496 |
|
Prior service cost |
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
-102-
At year end, our retirement plan assets were allocated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of Plan Assets at |
|
|
|
Target |
|
|
Year End |
|
|
|
Allocation |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
Asset Category |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
69 |
% |
|
|
65 |
% |
Debt Securities |
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
31 |
% |
|
|
35 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The investment policy developed for the Holly Corporation Pension Plan (the Plan) has been
designed exclusively for the purpose of providing the highest probabilities of delivering benefits
to Plan members and beneficiaries. Among the factors considered in developing the investment
policy are: the Plans primary investment goal, rate of return objective, investment risk,
investment time horizon, role of asset classes and asset allocation.
The most important component of the investment strategy is the asset allocation between the various
classes of securities available to the Plan for investment purposes. The current target asset
allocation is 70% equity investments and 30% fixed income investments. Equity investments include
a blend of domestic growth and value stocks of various sizes of capitalization and international
stocks.
The overall expected long-term rate of return on Plan assets is 8.5% and is estimated using a
financial simulation model of asset returns. Model assumptions are derived using historical data
given the assumption that capital markets are informationally efficient.
We expect to contribute between zero and $10 million to the retirement plan in 2010. Benefit
payments, which reflect expected future service, are expected to be paid as follows: $5.6 million
in 2010; $6.3 million in 2011; $7.1 million in 2012; $8 million in 2013; $7.8 million in 2014 and
$55.2 million in 2015-2019.
Retirement Restoration Plan: We adopted an unfunded retirement restoration plan that provides for
additional payments from us so that total retirement plan benefits for certain executives will be
maintained at the levels provided in the retirement plan before the application of Internal Revenue
Code limitations. We expensed $0.7 million, $1.1 million and $0.9 million for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, in connection with this plan. The accrued
liability reflected in the consolidated balance sheets was $6.1 million at December 31, 2009 and
2008. As of December 31, 2009, the projected benefit obligation under this plan was $6.1 million.
Benefit payments, which reflect expected future service, are expected to be paid as follows: $0.4
million in 2010; $1.2 million in 2011; $0.5 million in 2012; $1.7 million in 2013; $0.5 million in
2014 and $3.2 million in 2015-2019.
Defined Contribution Plans: We have defined contribution 401(k) plans that cover substantially
all employees. Our contributions are based on employees compensation and partially match employee
contributions. We expensed $5 million, $3.7 million and $2.8 million for the years ended December
31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, in connection with these plans.
Postretirement Medical Plans: We adopted an unfunded postretirement medical plan as part of the
voluntary early retirement program offered to eligible employees in fiscal 2000. As part of the
early retirement program, we agreed to allow retiring employees to continue coverage at a reduced
cost under our group medical plans until normal retirement age. The accrued liability reflected in
the consolidated balance sheets was $6.6 million and $6.6 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively, related to this plan.
Additionally, we maintain an unfunded postretirement medical plan whereby certain retirees between
the ages of 62 and 65 can receive benefits paid by us. Periodic costs under this plan have
historically been insignificant.
As of December 31, 2009, the total accumulated postretirement benefit obligation under our
postretirement medical plans was $6.6 million.
-103-
NOTE 17: Lease Commitments
We lease certain facilities and equipment under operating leases, most of which contain renewal
options. At December 31, 2009, the minimum future rental commitments under operating leases having
non-cancellable lease terms in excess of one year are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
$ |
16,712 |
|
2011 |
|
|
14,963 |
|
2012 |
|
|
11,683 |
|
2013 |
|
|
9,919 |
|
2014 |
|
|
9,360 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
25,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
87,762 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expense charged to operations was $11.8 million, $9.8 million and $3.2 million for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Rental expense for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 includes $7.1 million and $6.5 million, respectively, of rental expense
attributable to the operations of HEP as a result of our reconsolidation effective March 1, 2008.
NOTE 18: Contingencies and Contractual Obligations
In May 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Court of
Appeals) issued its decision on petitions for review, brought by us and other parties, concerning
rulings by the FERC in proceedings brought by us and other parties against SFPP, L.P. (SFPP).
These proceedings relate to tariffs of common carrier pipelines, which are owned and operated by
SFPP, for shipments of refined products from El Paso, Texas to Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona and from
points in California to points in Arizona. We are one of several refiners that regularly utilize
the SFPP pipeline to ship refined products from El Paso, Texas to Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona on
SFPPs East Line. The Court of Appeals in its May 2007 decision approved a FERC position, which is
adverse to us, on the treatment of income taxes in the calculation of allowable rates for pipelines
operated by partnerships and ruled in our favor on an issue relating to our rights to reparations
when it is determined that certain tariffs we paid to SFPP in the past were too high. The income
tax issue and the other remaining issues relating to SFPPs obligations to shippers are being
handled by the FERC in a single compliance proceeding covering the period from 1992 through
May 2006. We currently estimate that, as a result of the May 2007 Court of Appeals decision and
prior rulings by the Court of Appeals and the FERC in these proceedings, a net amount will be due
from SFPP to us for the period January 1992 through May 2006 in addition to the $15.3 million we
received in 2003 from SFPP as reparations for the period from 1992 through July 2000. Because
proceedings in the FERC following the Court of Appeals decision have not been completed and final
action by the FERC could be subject to further court proceedings, it is not possible at this time
to determine what will be the net amount payable to us at the conclusion of these proceedings.
We and other shippers have been engaged in settlement discussions with SFPP on remaining issues
relating to East Line service in the FERC proceedings. A partial settlement covering the period
June 2006 through November 2007, which became final in February 2008, resulted in a payment from
SFPP to us of approximately $1.3 million in April 2008. On October 22, 2008, we and other shippers
jointly filed at the FERC with SFPP a settlement covering the period from December 2008 through
November 2010. The FERC approved the settlement on January 29, 2009. The settlement reduced SFPPs
current rates and required SFPP to make additional payments to us of approximately $2.9 million,
which was received on May 18, 2009.
On June 2, 2009, SFPP notified us that it would terminate the October 2008 settlement, as provided
under the settlement, effective August 31, 2009. On July 31, 2009, SFPP filed substantial rate
increases for East Line service to become effective September 1, 2009. We and several other
shippers filed protests at the FERC challenging the rate increase and asking FERC to suspend the
effectiveness of the increased rates. On August 31, 2009, FERC issued an order suspending the
effective date of the rate increase until January 1, 2010, on which date the rate increase was
placed into effect, and setting the rate increase for a full evidentiary hearing to be held in
2010. We are not in a position to predict the ultimate outcome of the rate proceeding.
-104-
We are a party to various other litigation and proceedings not mentioned in this report that we
believe, based on advice of counsel, will not either individually or in the aggregate have a
materially adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Contractual Obligations
We have a long-term supply agreement to secure a hydrogen supply source for our Woods Cross
hydrotreater unit. The contract commits us to purchase a minimum of 5 million standard cubic feet
of hydrogen per day at market prices over a 15-year period expiring in 2023. The contract also
requires the payment of a base facility charge for use of the suppliers facility over the supply
term.
We also have crude oil transportation agreements that obligate us to ship a total of approximately
43,000 barrels per day for initial terms of 10 years expiring in 2019 through 2024.
Other contractual obligations relate to the transportation of natural gas and feedstocks to our
refineries under contracts expiring in 2016 through 2024 and various service contracts with
expiration dates through 2011.
NOTE 19: Segment Information
Our operations are currently organized into two reportable segments, Refining and HEP. Our
operations that are not included in the Refining and HEP segments are included in Corporate and
Other. Intersegment transactions are eliminated in our consolidated financial statements and are
included in Consolidations and Eliminations.
The Refining segment includes the operations of our Navajo, Woods Cross, and Tulsa Refineries
and Holly Asphalt Company. The Refining segment involves the purchase and refining of crude oil
and wholesale and branded marketing of refined products, such as gasoline, diesel fuel and jet
fuel. The petroleum products produced by the Refining segment are primarily marketed in the
Southwest, Rocky Mountain and Mid-Continent regions of the United States and northern Mexico.
Additionally, the Refining segment also includes specialty lubricant products produced at our Tulsa
Refinery that are marketed throughout North America and are distributed in Central and South
America. Holly Asphalt manufactures and markets asphalt and asphalt products in Arizona, New
Mexico, Texas and northern Mexico.
HEP is a VIE as defined under GAAP. A VIE is legal entity whose equity owners do not have
sufficient equity at risk or a controlling interest in the entity, or have voting rights that are
not proportionate to their economic interest.
Under GAAP, HEPs acquisition of the Crude Pipelines and Tankage Assets (see Note 3) qualified as a
reconsideration event whereby we reassessed whether HEP continued to qualify as a VIE. Following
this transfer, we determined that HEP continued to qualify as a VIE, and furthermore, we determined
that our beneficial interest in HEP exceeded 50%. Accordingly, we reconsolidated HEP effective
March 1, 2008 and no longer account for our investment in HEP under the equity method of
accounting. As a result, our consolidated financial statements include the results of HEP.
The HEP segment involves all of the operations of HEP effective March 1, 2008 (date of
reconsolidation). HEP owns and operates a system of petroleum product and crude gathering
pipelines in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Utah, distribution terminals in Texas, New Mexico,
Arizona, Utah, Idaho, and Washington and refinery tankage in New Mexico and Utah. Revenues are
generated by charging tariffs for transporting petroleum products and crude oil through its
pipelines, by leasing certain pipeline capacity to Alon USA, Inc., by charging fees for
terminalling refined products and other hydrocarbons and storing and providing other services at
its storage tanks and terminals. The HEP segment also includes a 25% interest in SLC Pipeline that
services refineries in the Salt Lake City, Utah area. Revenues from the HEP segment are earned
through transactions with unaffiliated parties for pipeline transportation, rental and terminalling
operations as well as revenues relating to pipeline transportation services provided for our
refining operations. Our revaluation of HEPs assets and liabilities at March 1, 2008 (date of
reconsolidation) resulted in basis adjustments to our consolidated HEP balances. Therefore, our
reported amounts for the HEP segment may not agree to amounts reported in HEPs periodic public
filings.
-105-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate |
|
|
and |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Refining(1) |
|
|
HEP(2) |
|
|
and Other |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
4,786,937 |
|
|
$ |
146,561 |
|
|
$ |
2,248 |
|
|
$ |
(101,478 |
) |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
67,347 |
|
|
$ |
24,599 |
|
|
$ |
6,805 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
98,751 |
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
$ |
68,397 |
|
|
$ |
70,373 |
|
|
$ |
(57,355 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,104 |
) |
|
$ |
80,311 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
$ |
266,648 |
|
|
$ |
32,999 |
|
|
$ |
2,904 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
302,551 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
2,142,317 |
|
|
$ |
641,775 |
|
|
$ |
392,007 |
|
|
$ |
(30,160 |
) |
|
$ |
3,145,939 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
5,837,449 |
|
|
$ |
94,439 |
|
|
$ |
2,641 |
|
|
$ |
(74,172 |
) |
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
40,090 |
|
|
$ |
18,390 |
|
|
$ |
4,515 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
62,995 |
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
$ |
210,252 |
|
|
$ |
37,082 |
|
|
$ |
(51,654 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
195,680 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
$ |
381,227 |
|
|
$ |
34,317 |
|
|
$ |
2,515 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
418,059 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,288,211 |
|
|
$ |
458,049 |
|
|
$ |
141,768 |
|
|
$ |
(13,803 |
) |
|
$ |
1,874,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
4,790,164 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,578 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
40,325 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,131 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
43,456 |
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
$ |
537,118 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(70,786 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
466,332 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
$ |
151,448 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,810 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
161,258 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,271,163 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
392,782 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,663,945 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Refining segment reflects the operations of our Tulsa Refinery west and east
facilities beginning on our respective acquisition dates of June 1, 2009 and December 1,
2009, respectively. |
|
(2) |
|
HEP segment revenues from external customers were $45.5 million and $19.3 million for
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The HEP segment reflects the operations of various 2009 asset acquisitions (see Note
3). |
|
NOTE 20: Supplemental Guarantor/Non-Guarantor Financial Information
Our obligations under the Holly Senior Notes have been jointly and severally guaranteed by the
substantial majority of our existing and future restricted subsidiaries (Guarantor Restricted
Subsidiaries). These guarantees are full and unconditional. HEP in which we have a 34% ownership
interest and its subsidiaries (collectively, Non-Guarantor Non-Restricted Subsidiaries), and
certain of our other subsidiaries (Non-Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries) have not guaranteed
these obligations.
The following financial information presents condensed consolidating balance sheets, statements of
income, and statements of cash flows of Holly Corporation (the Parent), the Guarantor Restricted
Subsidiaries, the Non-Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries and the Non-Guarantor Non-Restricted
Subsidiaries. The information has been presented as if the Parent accounted for its ownership in
the Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries, and the Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries accounted for the
ownership of the Non-Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries and Non-Guarantor Non-Restricted
Subsidiaries, using the equity method of accounting. The Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries and the
Non-Guarantor Restricted Subsidiaries are collectively the Restricted Subsidiaries.
Our revaluation of HEPs assets and liabilities at March 1, 2008 (date of reconsolidation) resulted
in basis adjustments to our consolidated HEP balances. Therefore, our reported amounts for the HEP
segment may not agree to amounts reported in HEPs periodic public filings.
-106-
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
127,560 |
|
|
$ |
(12,477 |
) |
|
$ |
7,005 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
122,088 |
|
|
$ |
2,508 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
124,596 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,223 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
973 |
|
|
|
759,140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
760,113 |
|
|
|
18,767 |
|
|
|
(16,425 |
) |
|
|
762,455 |
|
Intercompany accounts
receivable (payable) |
|
|
(1,134,296 |
) |
|
|
817,647 |
|
|
|
316,649 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
303,348 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
303,348 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
303,513 |
|
Income taxes receivable |
|
|
38,071 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,072 |
|
Prepayments and other assets |
|
|
24,940 |
|
|
|
29,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,958 |
|
|
|
574 |
|
|
|
(3,575 |
) |
|
|
50,957 |
|
Current assets of discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
(942,752 |
) |
|
|
1,897,900 |
|
|
|
323,654 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,278,802 |
|
|
|
24,209 |
|
|
|
(20,000 |
) |
|
|
1,283,011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties and equipment, net |
|
|
21,918 |
|
|
|
1,005,422 |
|
|
|
155,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,182,753 |
|
|
|
458,521 |
|
|
|
(11,304 |
) |
|
|
1,629,970 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
2,010,510 |
|
|
|
435,970 |
|
|
|
(314,973 |
) |
|
|
(2,131,507 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangibles and other assets |
|
|
8,752 |
|
|
|
64,017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,769 |
|
|
|
159,045 |
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
232,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,098,428 |
|
|
$ |
3,403,309 |
|
|
$ |
164,094 |
|
|
$ |
(2,131,507 |
) |
|
$ |
2,534,324 |
|
|
$ |
641,775 |
|
|
$ |
(30,160 |
) |
|
$ |
3,145,939 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
8,968 |
|
|
$ |
974,177 |
|
|
$ |
2,224 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
985,369 |
|
|
$ |
6,211 |
|
|
$ |
(16,425 |
) |
|
$ |
975,155 |
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
23,752 |
|
|
|
15,477 |
|
|
|
709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,938 |
|
|
|
13,594 |
|
|
|
(3,575 |
) |
|
|
49,957 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
32,720 |
|
|
|
989,654 |
|
|
|
2,933 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,025,307 |
|
|
|
19,805 |
|
|
|
(20,000 |
) |
|
|
1,025,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
288,451 |
|
|
|
39,809 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
328,260 |
|
|
|
379,198 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
707,458 |
|
Non-current liabilities |
|
|
37,859 |
|
|
|
48,137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,996 |
|
|
|
12,349 |
|
|
|
(17,342 |
) |
|
|
81,003 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
119,127 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
119,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,951 |
|
|
|
124,585 |
|
Distributions in excess of inv
in HEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
314,970 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314,970 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(314,970 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity Holly Corporation |
|
|
620,271 |
|
|
|
2,010,510 |
|
|
|
160,883 |
|
|
|
(2,171,393 |
) |
|
|
620,271 |
|
|
|
230,423 |
|
|
|
(231,655 |
) |
|
|
619,039 |
|
Equity Noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,886 |
|
|
|
39,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
548,856 |
|
|
|
588,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity |
|
$ |
1,098,428 |
|
|
$ |
3,403,309 |
|
|
$ |
164,094 |
|
|
$ |
(2,131,507 |
) |
|
$ |
2,534,324 |
|
|
$ |
641,775 |
|
|
$ |
(30,160 |
) |
|
$ |
3,145,939 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-107-
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
33,316 |
|
|
$ |
(1,182 |
) |
|
$ |
3,402 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
35,536 |
|
|
$ |
3,708 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
39,244 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
48,590 |
|
|
|
604 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,194 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
1,734 |
|
|
|
283,480 |
|
|
|
1,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
286,738 |
|
|
|
13,332 |
|
|
|
(11,451 |
) |
|
|
288,619 |
|
Intercompany accounts
receivable (payable) |
|
|
(1,419,212 |
) |
|
|
1,134,118 |
|
|
|
285,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
125,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125,613 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125,735 |
|
Income taxes receivable |
|
|
6,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,350 |
|
Prepayments and other assets |
|
|
13,814 |
|
|
|
6,842 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,656 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
(2,352 |
) |
|
|
18,775 |
|
Current assets of discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,706 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,706 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
(1,315,408 |
) |
|
|
1,549,475 |
|
|
|
290,020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
524,087 |
|
|
|
20,339 |
|
|
|
(13,803 |
) |
|
|
530,623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties and equipment, net |
|
|
22,997 |
|
|
|
718,575 |
|
|
|
109,660 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
851,232 |
|
|
|
321,692 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,172,924 |
|
Marketable securities (long-term) |
|
|
6,009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,009 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
1,911,613 |
|
|
|
371,964 |
|
|
|
(321,003 |
) |
|
|
(1,962,574 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangibles and other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,651 |
|
|
|
83,620 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
132,271 |
|
Non-current assets of discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,398 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,398 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
625,211 |
|
|
$ |
2,688,665 |
|
|
$ |
78,677 |
|
|
$ |
(1,962,574 |
) |
|
$ |
1,429,979 |
|
|
$ |
458,049 |
|
|
$ |
(13,803 |
) |
|
$ |
1,874,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
9,269 |
|
|
$ |
384,285 |
|
|
$ |
1,021 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
394,575 |
|
|
$ |
7,315 |
|
|
$ |
(11,452 |
) |
|
$ |
390,438 |
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
15,086 |
|
|
|
8,118 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,215 |
|
|
|
20,921 |
|
|
|
(2,351 |
) |
|
|
41,785 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
(8,130 |
) |
|
|
8,130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
Current liabilities of discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
16,225 |
|
|
|
400,533 |
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
417,790 |
|
|
|
58,171 |
|
|
|
(13,803 |
) |
|
|
462,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
341,914 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
341,914 |
|
Non-current liabilities |
|
|
41,693 |
|
|
|
5,033 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,726 |
|
|
|
17,604 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,330 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
24,894 |
|
|
|
44,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,491 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,491 |
|
Distributions in excess of inv in
HEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
326,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
326,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(326,889 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity Holly Corporation |
|
|
542,399 |
|
|
|
1,911,613 |
|
|
|
77,645 |
|
|
|
(1,989,258 |
) |
|
|
542,399 |
|
|
|
30,142 |
|
|
|
(31,001 |
) |
|
|
541,540 |
|
Equity Noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,684 |
|
|
|
26,684 |
|
|
|
10,218 |
|
|
|
357,890 |
|
|
|
394,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity |
|
$ |
625,211 |
|
|
$ |
2,688,665 |
|
|
$ |
78,677 |
|
|
$ |
(1,962,574 |
) |
|
$ |
1,429,979 |
|
|
$ |
458,049 |
|
|
$ |
(13,803 |
) |
|
$ |
1,874,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-108-
Condensed Consolidating Statement of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
3,346 |
|
|
$ |
4,785,781 |
|
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,789,185 |
|
|
$ |
146,561 |
|
|
$ |
(101,478 |
) |
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,336,973 |
|
|
|
900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,337,873 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,865 |
) |
|
|
4,238,008 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
313,361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
313,361 |
|
|
|
44,003 |
|
|
|
(509 |
) |
|
|
356,855 |
|
General and administrative
expenses |
|
|
51,648 |
|
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,757 |
|
|
|
7,586 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,343 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
3,928 |
|
|
|
68,956 |
|
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,152 |
|
|
|
24,599 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
55,576 |
|
|
|
4,720,608 |
|
|
|
1,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,778,143 |
|
|
|
76,188 |
|
|
|
(100,374 |
) |
|
|
4,753,957 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(52,230 |
) |
|
|
65,173 |
|
|
|
(1,901 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,042 |
|
|
|
70,373 |
|
|
|
(1,104 |
) |
|
|
80,311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
96,266 |
|
|
|
31,643 |
|
|
|
33,052 |
|
|
|
(127,909 |
) |
|
|
33,052 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(33,052 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Interest income (expense) |
|
|
(13,713 |
) |
|
|
1,096 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,573 |
) |
|
|
(21,490 |
) |
|
|
(1,238 |
) |
|
|
(35,301 |
) |
Other income (expense) |
|
|
(1,480 |
) |
|
|
1,480 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,986 |
|
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
1,919 |
|
Acquisition costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,126 |
) |
|
|
(1,356 |
) |
|
|
1,356 |
|
|
|
(3,126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,073 |
|
|
|
31,093 |
|
|
|
33,096 |
|
|
|
(127,909 |
) |
|
|
17,353 |
|
|
|
(20,860 |
) |
|
|
(33,001 |
) |
|
|
(36,508 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations before income taxes |
|
|
28,843 |
|
|
|
96,266 |
|
|
|
31,195 |
|
|
|
(127,909 |
) |
|
|
28,395 |
|
|
|
49,513 |
|
|
|
(34,105 |
) |
|
|
43,803 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
10,295 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,295 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(2,855 |
) |
|
|
7,460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
18,548 |
|
|
|
96,266 |
|
|
|
31,195 |
|
|
|
(127,909 |
) |
|
|
18,100 |
|
|
|
49,493 |
|
|
|
(31,250 |
) |
|
|
36,343 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,780 |
|
|
|
(2,854 |
) |
|
|
16,926 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
18,548 |
|
|
|
96,266 |
|
|
|
31,195 |
|
|
|
(127,909 |
) |
|
|
18,100 |
|
|
|
69,273 |
|
|
|
(34,104 |
) |
|
|
53,269 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less net income attributable to
noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(448 |
) |
|
|
(448 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,184 |
|
|
|
33,736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Holly
Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
18,548 |
|
|
$ |
96,266 |
|
|
$ |
31,195 |
|
|
$ |
(127,461 |
) |
|
$ |
18,548 |
|
|
$ |
69,273 |
|
|
$ |
(68,288 |
) |
|
$ |
19,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidating Statement of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
1,831 |
|
|
$ |
5,838,244 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,840,090 |
|
|
$ |
94,439 |
|
|
$ |
(74,172 |
) |
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
5,354,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,354,584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73,885 |
) |
|
|
5,280,699 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
231,995 |
|
|
|
627 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
232,639 |
|
|
|
33,353 |
|
|
|
(287 |
) |
|
|
265,705 |
|
General and administrative
expenses |
|
|
46,230 |
|
|
|
3,434 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,664 |
|
|
|
5,614 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,278 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
3,627 |
|
|
|
40,299 |
|
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,605 |
|
|
|
18,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,995 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
49,897 |
|
|
|
5,630,289 |
|
|
|
1,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,681,492 |
|
|
|
57,357 |
|
|
|
(74,172 |
) |
|
|
5,664,677 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(48,066 |
) |
|
|
207,955 |
|
|
|
(1,291 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
158,598 |
|
|
|
37,082 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
195,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
257,587 |
|
|
|
15,700 |
|
|
|
16,633 |
|
|
|
(273,287 |
) |
|
|
16,633 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,643 |
) |
|
|
2,990 |
|
Interest income (expense) |
|
|
(23,875 |
) |
|
|
31,698 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,330 |
|
|
|
(21,488 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,158 |
) |
Net gain (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233,712 |
|
|
|
49,632 |
|
|
|
17,140 |
|
|
|
(273,287 |
) |
|
|
27,197 |
|
|
|
(21,488 |
) |
|
|
(13,643 |
) |
|
|
(7,934 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations before income taxes |
|
|
185,646 |
|
|
|
257,587 |
|
|
|
15,849 |
|
|
|
(273,287 |
) |
|
|
185,795 |
|
|
|
15,594 |
|
|
|
(13,643 |
) |
|
|
187,746 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
64,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,537 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
(747 |
) |
|
|
64,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
121,109 |
|
|
|
257,587 |
|
|
|
15,849 |
|
|
|
(273,287 |
) |
|
|
121,258 |
|
|
|
15,356 |
|
|
|
(12,896 |
) |
|
|
123,718 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,665 |
|
|
|
(747 |
) |
|
|
2,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
121,109 |
|
|
|
257,587 |
|
|
|
15,849 |
|
|
|
(273,287 |
) |
|
|
121,258 |
|
|
|
19,021 |
|
|
|
(13,643 |
) |
|
|
126,636 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less net income attributable to
noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,227 |
) |
|
|
(6,078 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Holly
Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
121,109 |
|
|
$ |
257,587 |
|
|
$ |
15,849 |
|
|
$ |
(273,138 |
) |
|
$ |
121,407 |
|
|
$ |
19,021 |
|
|
$ |
(19,870 |
) |
|
$ |
120,558 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-109-
Condensed Consolidating Statement of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2007 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
4,791,729 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,791,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,999,931 |
|
|
|
3,557 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,003,488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,003,488 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
209,192 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
209,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
209,281 |
|
General and administrative
expenses |
|
|
66,305 |
|
|
|
2,880 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,185 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
2,245 |
|
|
|
41,211 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
68,562 |
|
|
|
4,253,214 |
|
|
|
3,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,325,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,325,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(68,549 |
) |
|
|
538,515 |
|
|
|
(3,634 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
466,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
466,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
653,060 |
|
|
|
15,233 |
|
|
|
19,109 |
|
|
|
(668,293 |
) |
|
|
19,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,109 |
|
Interest income (expense) |
|
|
(85,067 |
) |
|
|
99,312 |
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
567,993 |
|
|
|
114,545 |
|
|
|
18,867 |
|
|
|
(668,293 |
) |
|
|
33,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations before income taxes |
|
|
499,444 |
|
|
|
653,060 |
|
|
|
15,233 |
|
|
|
(668,293 |
) |
|
|
499,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
499,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
165,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
165,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
165,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Holly
Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
$ |
653,060 |
|
|
$ |
15,233 |
|
|
$ |
(668,293 |
) |
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
334,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-110-
Condensed Consolidating Statement of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
(277,912 |
) |
|
$ |
448,020 |
|
|
$ |
308 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
170,416 |
|
|
$ |
68,195 |
|
|
$ |
(27,066 |
) |
|
$ |
211,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties, plants and equipment Holly |
|
|
(2,904 |
) |
|
|
(215,343 |
) |
|
|
(51,305 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(269,552 |
) |
|
|
(25,665 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(295,217 |
) |
Additions to properties, plants and
equipment HEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(128,079 |
) |
|
|
95,080 |
|
|
|
(32,999 |
) |
Purchases of marketable securities |
|
|
(175,892 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(175,892 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(175,892 |
) |
Sales and maturities of marketable
securities |
|
|
230,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
230,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
230,281 |
|
Acquisition of Tulsa Refinery
Holly Corporation |
|
|
74,000 |
|
|
|
(341,141 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(267,141 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(267,141 |
) |
Investment in SLC Pipeline |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,500 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,500 |
) |
Proceeds from the sale of assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,280 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,280 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(83,280 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of RGPC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for)
investing activities |
|
|
125,485 |
|
|
|
(473,204 |
) |
|
|
(51,305 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(399,024 |
) |
|
|
(147,379 |
) |
|
|
11,800 |
|
|
|
(534,603 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net borrowings under credit
agreement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,000 |
|
Issuance of common units net of
underwriters discount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
133,035 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
133,035 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
(30,123 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,123 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,123 |
) |
Distributions to noncontrolling
interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(62,688 |
) |
|
|
29,488 |
|
|
|
(33,200 |
) |
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
Contribution from joint venture
partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39,450 |
) |
|
|
54,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,150 |
|
Excess tax benefit from equity
based compensation |
|
|
(1,209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,209 |
) |
Deferred financing costs |
|
|
(8,842 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,842 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,842 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of notes,
net of underwriter discount HOC |
|
|
287,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287,925 |
|
Proceeds from Plains financing
transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
Other financing activities, net |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
13,339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,473 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
(14,222 |
) |
|
|
(673 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing
activities |
|
|
246,671 |
|
|
|
13,889 |
|
|
|
54,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
315,160 |
|
|
|
76,423 |
|
|
|
15,266 |
|
|
|
406,849 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) for the period |
|
|
94,244 |
|
|
|
(11,295 |
) |
|
|
3,603 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,552 |
|
|
|
(2,761 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,791 |
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
33,316 |
|
|
|
(1,182 |
) |
|
|
3,402 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,536 |
|
|
|
5,269 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,805 |
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
127,560 |
|
|
$ |
(12,477 |
) |
|
$ |
7,005 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
122,088 |
|
|
$ |
2,508 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
124,596 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes $1,561 in cash classified as current assets of discontinued operations at December 31, 2008. |
-111-
Condensed Consolidating Statement of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
(63,480 |
) |
|
$ |
192,299 |
|
|
$ |
364 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
129,183 |
|
|
$ |
46,091 |
|
|
$ |
(19,784 |
) |
|
$ |
155,490 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties, plants
and equipment Holly |
|
|
(2,515 |
) |
|
|
(295,937 |
) |
|
|
(85,290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(383,742 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(383,742 |
) |
Additions to properties, plants and
equipment HEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,317 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,317 |
) |
Purchases of marketable securities |
|
|
(769,142 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(769,142 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(769,142 |
) |
Sales and maturities of marketable
securities |
|
|
945,461 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
945,461 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
945,461 |
|
Proceeds from sale of crude
pipeline and tankage assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
171,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171,000 |
|
Proceeds from sale of HPI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,958 |
|
Increase in cash due to
consolidation of HEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,295 |
|
|
|
7,295 |
|
Investment in HEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for)
investing activities |
|
|
173,804 |
|
|
|
(119,269 |
) |
|
|
(85,290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,755 |
) |
|
|
(34,317 |
) |
|
|
7,295 |
|
|
|
(57,777 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net borrowings under credit
agreement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
Issuance of common stock upon
exercise of options |
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
(29,054 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29,054 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(29,064 |
) |
Distributions to noncontrolling
interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(41,603 |
) |
|
|
19,505 |
|
|
|
(22,098 |
) |
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
(151,106 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(151,106 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(151,106 |
) |
Contribution from joint venture
partner |
|
|
(1,500 |
) |
|
|
(55,500 |
) |
|
|
74,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,000 |
|
Excess tax benefit from equity
based compensation |
|
|
5,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,694 |
|
Deferred financing costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(800 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(800 |
) |
|
|
(113 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(913 |
) |
Purchase of units for restricted
grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for)
financing activities |
|
|
(174,961 |
) |
|
|
(56,300 |
) |
|
|
74,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(157,261 |
) |
|
|
(13,511 |
) |
|
|
19,495 |
|
|
|
(151,277 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) for the period |
|
|
(64,637 |
) |
|
|
16,730 |
|
|
|
(10,926 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(58,833 |
) |
|
|
(1,737 |
) |
|
|
7,006 |
|
|
|
(53,564 |
) |
Beginning of period |
|
|
97,953 |
|
|
|
(17,912 |
) |
|
|
14,328 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94,369 |
|
|
|
7,006 |
|
|
|
(7,006 |
) |
|
|
94,369 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
33,316 |
|
|
$ |
(1,182 |
) |
|
$ |
3,402 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
35,536 |
|
|
$ |
5,269 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
40,805 |
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes $1,561 in cash classified as current assets of discontinued operations at December 31, 2008. |
-112-
Condensed Consolidating Statement of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly Corp. |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Non-Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2007 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
of HEP(1) |
|
|
(HEP Segment) |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
283,276 |
|
|
$ |
144,406 |
|
|
$ |
(4,945 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
422,737 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
422,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties, plants
and equipment Holly |
|
|
(9,810 |
) |
|
|
(170,762 |
) |
|
|
19,314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(161,258 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(161,258 |
) |
Purchases of marketable securities |
|
|
(641,144 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(641,144 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(641,144 |
) |
Sales and maturities of marketable
securities |
|
|
509,345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
509,345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
509,345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for)
investing activities |
|
|
(141,609 |
) |
|
|
(170,762 |
) |
|
|
19,314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(293,057 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(293,057 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends |
|
|
(23,208 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,208 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,208 |
) |
Purchase of
treasury stock |
|
|
(207,196 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(207,196 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(207,196 |
) |
Contribution
from joint venture partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
Excess tax benefit from equity
based compensation |
|
|
30,355 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,355 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,355 |
|
Issuance of common stock upon
exercise of options |
|
|
2,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for)
financing activities |
|
|
(197,761 |
) |
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(189,428 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(189,428 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) for the period |
|
|
(56,094 |
) |
|
|
(18,023 |
) |
|
|
14,369 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(59,748 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(59,748 |
) |
Beginning of period |
|
|
154,047 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
154,117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
154,117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
97,953 |
|
|
$ |
(17,912 |
) |
|
$ |
14,328 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
94,369 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
94,369 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes Holly Corporations investment in HEP based on the equity method of accounting. |
NOTE 21: Significant Customers
All revenues were domestic revenues, except for sales of gasoline and diesel fuel for export into
Mexico by the Refining segment. The export sales were to an affiliate of PEMEX and accounted for
$114.6 million (2%) of our revenues in 2009, $325.4 million (6%) of our revenues in 2008 and $200
million (5%) of revenues in 2007. In 2009, 2008 and 2007, we had several significant customers,
none of which accounted for more than 10% of our revenues.
NOTE 22: Quarterly Information (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First |
|
|
Second |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Year |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
648,031 |
|
|
$ |
1,035,778 |
|
|
$ |
1,488,490 |
|
|
$ |
1,661,969 |
|
|
$ |
4,834,268 |
|
Operating costs and expenses |
|
$ |
610,240 |
|
|
$ |
998,327 |
|
|
$ |
1,432,908 |
|
|
$ |
1,712,482 |
|
|
$ |
4,753,957 |
|
Income from operations |
|
$ |
37,791 |
|
|
$ |
37,451 |
|
|
$ |
55,582 |
|
|
$ |
(50,513 |
) |
|
$ |
80,311 |
|
Income from continuing operations
before income taxes |
|
$ |
33,922 |
|
|
$ |
29,258 |
|
|
$ |
43,676 |
|
|
$ |
(63,053 |
) |
|
$ |
43,803 |
|
Net income attributable to Holly
Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
21,964 |
|
|
$ |
14,621 |
|
|
$ |
23,503 |
|
|
$ |
(40,555 |
) |
|
$ |
19,533 |
|
Net income per share attributable to
Holly Corporation stockholders
basic |
|
$ |
0.44 |
|
|
$ |
0.29 |
|
|
$ |
0.47 |
|
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
Net income per share attributable to.
Holly Corporation stockholders
diluted |
|
$ |
0.44 |
|
|
$ |
0.29 |
|
|
$ |
0.47 |
|
|
$ |
(0.79 |
) |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
Dividends per common share |
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
Average number of shares of
common stock outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
50,042 |
|
|
|
50,170 |
|
|
|
50,244 |
|
|
|
51,200 |
|
|
|
50,418 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
50,171 |
|
|
|
50,226 |
|
|
|
50,327 |
|
|
|
51,380 |
|
|
|
50,603 |
|
-113-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First |
|
|
Second |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Year |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and other revenues |
|
$ |
1,479,194 |
|
|
$ |
1,741,654 |
|
|
$ |
1,718,276 |
|
|
$ |
921,233 |
|
|
$ |
5,860,357 |
|
Operating costs and expenses |
|
$ |
1,470,050 |
|
|
$ |
1,722,733 |
|
|
$ |
1,636,305 |
|
|
$ |
835,589 |
|
|
$ |
5,664,677 |
|
Income from operations |
|
$ |
9,144 |
|
|
$ |
18,921 |
|
|
$ |
81,971 |
|
|
$ |
85,644 |
|
|
$ |
195,680 |
|
Income from continuing operations
before income taxes |
|
$ |
13,692 |
|
|
$ |
16,482 |
|
|
$ |
76,484 |
|
|
$ |
81,088 |
|
|
$ |
187,746 |
|
Net income attributable to Holly
Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
8,649 |
|
|
$ |
11,452 |
|
|
$ |
49,899 |
|
|
$ |
50,558 |
|
|
$ |
120,558 |
|
Net income per share attributable to
Holly Corporation stockholders
basic |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
|
$ |
1.02 |
|
|
$ |
2.40 |
|
Net income per share attributable to
Holly Corporation stockholders
diluted |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
|
$ |
2.38 |
|
Dividends per common share |
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
Average number of shares of
common stock outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
51,165 |
|
|
|
50,158 |
|
|
|
49,717 |
|
|
|
49,794 |
|
|
|
50,202 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
51,515 |
|
|
|
50,515 |
|
|
|
50,032 |
|
|
|
49,997 |
|
|
|
50,549 |
|
-114-
|
|
|
Item 9. |
|
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
We have had no change in, or disagreement with, our independent registered public accountants on
matters involving accounting and financial disclosure.
|
|
|
Item 9A. |
|
Controls and Procedures |
Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures. Our principal executive officer and principal
financial officer have evaluated, as required by Rule 13a-15(b) under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (the Exchange Act), our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rule 13a-15(e)) as of the end of the period covered by this annual report on Form 10-K. Our
disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance that the
information we are required to disclose in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange
Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer
and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure and is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in
the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and forms. Based upon the evaluation, our principal
executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective as of December 31, 2009.
Changes in internal control over financial reporting. There have been no changes in our internal
control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that
occurred during our last fiscal quarter that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to
materially affect our internal control over financial reporting.
See Item 8 for Managements Report on its Assessment of the Companys Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting and Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
|
Item 9B. |
|
Other Information |
There have been no events that occurred in the fourth quarter of 2009 that would need to be
reported on Form 8-K that have not previously been reported.
PART III
|
|
|
Item 10. |
|
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance |
The information required by Items 401, 405, 406 and 407(c)(3), (d)(4) and d(5) of Regulation S-K in
response to this item is set forth in our definitive proxy statement for the annual meeting of
stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010 and is incorporated herein by reference.
New York Stock Exchange Certification
In 2009, Matthew P. Clifton, as our Chief Executive Officer, provided to the New York Stock
Exchange the annual CEO certification regarding our compliance with the New York Stock Exchanges
corporate governance listing standards.
|
|
|
Item 11. |
|
Executive Compensation |
The information required by Item 402 of Regulation S-K in response to this item is set forth in our
definitive proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010 and is
incorporated herein by reference.
-115-
|
|
|
Item 12. |
|
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder
Matters |
The equity compensation plan information required by Item 201(d) and the information required by
Item 403 of Regulation S-K in response to this item is set forth in our definitive proxy statement
for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010 and is incorporated herein by
reference.
|
|
|
Item 13. |
|
Certain Relationships, Related Transactions and Director Independence |
The information required by Item 404 of Regulation S-K in response to this item is set forth in our
definitive proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010 and is
incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
|
Item 14. |
|
Principal Accountant Fees and Services |
The information required by Item 9(e) of Schedule 14A in response to this item is set forth in our
definitive proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010 and is
incorporated herein by reference.
-116-
PART IV
|
|
|
Item 15. |
|
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules |
(a) Documents filed as part of this report
|
(1) |
|
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page in |
|
|
|
Form 10-K |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009 and 2008 |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
81 |
|
|
(2) |
|
Index to Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules |
|
|
|
|
All schedules are omitted since the required information is not present or is not present in
amounts sufficient to require submission of the schedule, or because the information
required is included in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto. |
|
|
(3) |
|
Exhibits |
|
|
|
|
See Index to Exhibits on pages 120 to 125. |
-117-
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
HOLLY CORPORATION
(Registrant)
|
|
|
/s/ Matthew P. Clifton
|
|
|
Matthew P. Clifton |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
Date: February 26, 2010
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 and as of the date
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Capacity |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Matthew P. Clifton
Matthew P. Clifton
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
of the Board
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Bruce R. Shaw
Bruce R. Shaw
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Scott C. Surplus
Scott C. Surplus
|
|
Vice President and Controller (Principal
Accounting Officer)
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Denise C. McWatters
Denise C. McWatters
|
|
Vice President, General Counsel
and Secretary
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Buford P. Berry
Buford P. Berry
|
|
Director
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Leldon E. Echols
Leldon E. Echols
|
|
Director
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Marcus R. Hickerson
Marcus R. Hickerson
|
|
Director
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Robert G. McKenzie
Robert G. McKenzie
|
|
Director
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas K. Matthews, II
Thomas K. Matthews, II
|
|
Director
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Jack P. Reid
Jack P. Reid
|
|
Director
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Paul T. Stoffel
|
|
Director
|
|
February 26, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Paul T. Stoffel |
|
|
|
|
-118-
HOLLY CORPORATION
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
Exhibits are numbered to correspond to the exhibit table
in Item 601 of Regulation S-K
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement, dated October 19, 2009 by and between Holly Refining &
Marketing-Tulsa LLC, HEP Tulsa LLC and Sinclair Tulsa Refining Company (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 2.1 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed October 21, 2009,
File No. 1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement, dated December 1, 2009, by and
between Holly Refining & Marketing-Tulsa LLC, HEP Tulsa LLC and Sinclair Tulsa Refining
Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K
filed December 7, 2009, File No. 1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement dated as of April 15, 2009 by and between Holly Refining
& Marketing-Midcon, L.L.C. and Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1
of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 16, 2009, File No. 1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3(a), of Amendment No. 1 dated December 13, 1988 to Registrants Annual
Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended July 31, 1988, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
Certificate of Amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Holly Corporation,
adopted May 26, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 of Registrants Annual Report
on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
Certificate of Amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Holly
Corporation, adopted May 29, 2007 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 of Registrants
Annual Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
By-Laws of Holly Corporation as amended and restated December 22, 2005 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.2.2 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed December 22,
2005, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
Registration Rights and Transfer Restrictions Agreement, dated October 19, 2009 by and
between Holly Corporation and Sinclair Tulsa Refining Company (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed October 20, 2009, File No.
1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
Indenture, dated as of June 10, 2009, among Holly Corporation, the subsidiary guarantors
named therein and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as trustee, relating to Holly
Corporations 9.875% Senior Notes due 2017 (includes the form of certificate for the notes
issued thereunder) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of Registrants Form 8-K
Current Report dated June 11, 2009, File No. 1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
Indenture, dated February 28, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners, L.P. and Holly Energy
Finance Corp., the Guarantors and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Current Report on Form 8-K
filed March 4, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
-119-
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
Form of 6.25% Senior Note Due 2015 (included as Exhibit A to the Indenture included as
Exhibit 4.1 hereto) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 of Holly Energy Partners,
L.P.s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 4, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
Form of Notation of Guarantee (included as Exhibit E to the Indenture included as Exhibit
4.1 hereto) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 4, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
First Supplemental Indenture, dated March 10, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners,
L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp., the Guarantors identified therein, and U.S. Bank National
Association (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
Second Supplemental Indenture, dated April 27, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners, L.P.,
Holly Energy Finance Corp., the Guarantors identified therein, and U.S. Bank National
Association (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8 |
+ |
|
Third Supplemental Indenture, dated as of June 11, 2009, among Lovington-Artesia, L.L.C.,
Holly Energy Partners, L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp., the other Guarantors identified
therein, and U.S. Bank National Association. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.9 |
+ |
|
Fourth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of June 29, 2009, among HEP SLC, LLC, Holly
Energy Partners, L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp., the other Guarantors named therein, and
U.S. Bank National Association. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.10 |
+ |
|
Fifth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of July 13, 2009, among HEP Tulsa LLC, Holly
Energy Partners, L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp., the other Guarantors named therein, and
U.S. Bank National Association. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.11 |
+ |
|
Sixth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of December 15, 2009, among Roadrunner Pipeline,
L.L.C., Holly Energy Partners, L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp., the other Guarantors named
therein, and U.S. Bank National Association. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
Option Agreement, dated January 31, 2008, by and among Holly Corporation, Holly UNEV
Pipeline Company, Navajo Pipeline Co., L.P., Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C., HEP Logistics
Holdings, L.P., Holly Energy Partners, L.P., HEP Logistics GP, L.L.C. and Holly Energy
Partners Operating, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants
Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 5, 2008, File No. 1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Intermediate Pipelines Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2009, by and
among Holly Corporation, Navajo Refining Company, L.L.C., Holly Energy Partners, L.P., Holly
Energy Partners Operating, L.P., HEP Pipeline, L.L.C., Lovington-Artesia, L.L.C., HEP
Logistics Holdings, L.P., Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. and HEP Logistics GP, L.L.C.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Form 8-K Current
Report dated June 5, 2009, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
Tulsa Equipment and Throughput Agreement, dated as of August 1, 2009, between Holly
Refining & Marketing Tulsa LLC and HEP Tulsa LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.3 of Holly Energy Partners L.P.s Form 8-K Current Report dated August 6, 2009, File No.
1-32225). |
-120-
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
|
Tulsa Purchase Option agreement, dated as of August 1, 2009, between Holly Refining &
Marketing Tulsa LLC and HEP Tulsa LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of Holly
Energy Partners L.P.s Form 8-K Current Report dated August 6, 2009, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.5 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Crude Pipelines and Tankage Agreement, dated as of December 1, 2009,
by and among Navajo Refining Company, L.L.C., Holly Refining & Marketing Company Woods
Cross, Holly Refining & Marketing Company, Holly Energy Partners-Operating, L.P., HEP
Pipeline, L.L.C. and HEP Woods Cross, L.L.C. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 of
Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 7, 2009, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.6 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Refined Product Pipelines and Terminals Agreement, dated as of
December 1, 2009, by and among Navajo Refining Company, L.L.C., Holly Refining & Marketing
Company Woods Cross, Holly Energy Partners-Operating, L.P., HEP Pipeline Assets, Limited
Partnership, HEP Pipeline, L.L.C., HEP Refining Assets, L.P., HEP Refining, L.L.C., HEP
Mountain Home, L.L.C. and HEP Woods Cross, L.L.C. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9
of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 7, 2009, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
|
Third Amended and Restated Omnibus Agreement, dated as of December 1, 2009, by and among
Holly Corporation, Holly Energy Partners, L.P., and certain of their respective subsidiaries
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Current Report on
Form 8-K dated December 7, 2009, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.8 |
|
|
Pipeline Throughput Agreement, dated as of December 1, 2009, by and between Navajo Refining
Company, L.L.C. and Holly Energy Partners-Operating, L.P. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 7,
2009, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.9 |
|
|
Pipelines, Tankage, and Loading Rack Throughput Agreement, dated December 1, 2009 by and
between HEP Tulsa LLC and Holly Refining & Marketing-Tulsa LLC (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated December 7, 2009, File No.
1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.10 |
|
|
Indemnification Proceeds and Payments Allocation Agreement, dated December 1, 2009 by and
between HEP Tulsa LLC and Holly Refining & Marketing-Tulsa LLC (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated December 7, 2009, File No.
1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.11 |
|
|
Lease and Access Agreement, dated December 1, 2009 by and between HEP Tulsa LLC and Holly
Refining & Marketing-Tulsa LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of Registrants
Form 8-K Current Report dated December 7, 2009, File No. 1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.12 |
* |
|
Holly Corporation Stock Option Plan As adopted at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of
Holly Corporation on December 13, 1990 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4(i) of
Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended July 31, 1991, File No.
1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.13 |
* |
|
Holly Corporation Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan as amended and restated on May 24,
2007 as approved at the annual meeting of stockholders of Holly Corporation on May 24, 2007
(incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 of Registrants Annual
Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal
year ended December 31, 2008, File
No. 1-3876). |
-121-
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.14 |
* |
|
Amendment No. 1 to the Holly Corporation Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan, as amended
and restated on May 24, 2007 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 of Registrants
Annual Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.15 |
* |
|
Holly Corporation Supplemental Payment Agreement for 2001 Service as Director
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19 of Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for
its fiscal year ended July 31, 2002, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.16 |
* |
|
Holly Corporation Supplemental Payment Agreement for 2002 Service as Director
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20 of Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for
its fiscal year ended July 31, 2002, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.17 |
* |
|
Holly Corporation Supplemental Payment Agreement for 2003 Service as Director
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended January 31, 2003, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.18 |
* |
|
Form of Executive Restricted Stock Agreement [five-year term vesting form] (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed November 4,
2004, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.19 |
* |
|
Form of Executive Restricted Stock Agreement [five-year term and performance vesting form]
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed
November 4, 2004, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.20 |
* |
|
Form of Performance Share Unit Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of
Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 12, 2007, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.21 |
|
|
First Amendment to Performance Share Unit Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.16 of Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2008,
File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.22 |
|
|
Holly Corporation Change in Control Agreement Policy (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.1 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 20, 2008, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.23 |
|
|
Holly Corporation Employee Form of Change in Control Agreement (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.2 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 20, 2008, File No.
1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.24 |
|
|
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. Employee Form of Change in Control Agreement (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3 of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 20, 2008,
File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.25 |
* |
|
Form of Executive Restricted Stock Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.26 |
* |
|
Form of Employee Restricted Stock Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.27 |
* |
|
Form of Director Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4
of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009). |
-122-
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.28 |
* |
|
Form of Form of Performance Share Unit Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.5 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2009). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.29 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated March 14, 2008, between Holly Corporation,
Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent and L/C issuer, PNC Bank, National
Association and Guaranty Bank, as co-documentation agents, Union Bank of California, N.A.
and Compass Bank, as co-syndication agents, and certain other lenders from time to time
party thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants Current Report on
Form 8-K filed March 20, 2008, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.30 |
|
|
Reaffirmation and Assumption Agreement dated March 14, 2008, among Holly Corporation, the
subsidiaries identified therein, the additional grantors identified therein and Bank of
America, N.A. (adding additional grantors under the Guaranty and Collateral Agreement
included as Exhibit 10.31 below) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 of Registrants
Annual Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.31 |
|
|
Guarantee and Collateral Agreement, dated July 1, 2004, among Holly Corporation and
certain of its Subsidiaries in favor of Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.32 |
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated April 7, 2009 by and among Holly
Corporation and Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, swing line lender, and L/C
issuer, UBS Loan Finance LLC and U.S. Bank National Association, as co-documentation agents,
Union Bank of California, N.A. and Compass Bank, as syndication agents, and certain other
lenders from time to time party thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File No.
1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.33 |
+ |
|
Confirmation of Commitments [reflects increases in commitments on November 3, 2009 and
December 4, 2009 under the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement filed as Exhibit
10.35 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.34 |
|
|
First Amendment to Guarantee and Collateral Agreement and Reaffirmation and Assumption
Agreement, dated April 7, 2009, by and among Holly Corporation and certain of its
subsidiaries, in favor of Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, for certain other
lenders from time to time party to the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated
April 7, 2009 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 of Registrants Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, File No. 1-03876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.35 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated August 27, 2007, between Holly Energy
Partners Operating, L.P., Union Bank of California, N.A., as administrative agent, issuing
bank and sole lead arranger, Bank of America, N.A., as syndication agent, Guaranty Bank, as
documentation agent and certain other lenders (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of
Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Current Report on Form 8-K filed October 31, 2007, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.36 |
|
|
Agreement and Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated February 25,
2008, between Holly Energy Partners Operating, L.P., Union Bank of California, N.A., as
administrative agent, issuing bank and sole lead arranger and certain other lenders
(incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Holly Energy
Partners Current Report on Form 8-K filed
February 27, 2008, File No. 1-32225). |
-123-
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.37 |
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated September 8, 2008, between Holly Energy Partners Operating,
L.P., certain of its subsidiaries acting as guarantors, Union Bank of California, N.A.,
as administrative agent, issuing bank and sole lead arranger and certain other lenders
(incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.11 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed October 31,
2008, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.38 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Pledge Agreement, dated August 27, 2007, between Holly Energy
Partners Operating, L.P., certain of its subsidiaries, and Union Bank of California, N.A.,
as administrative agent (entered into in connection with the Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
Annual Report on Form 10-K filed February 17, 2009, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.39 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Guaranty Agreement, dated August 27, 2007, between Holly Energy
Partners Operating, L.P., certain of its subsidiaries, and Union Bank of California, N.A.,
as administrative agent (entered into in connection with the Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
Annual Report on Form 10-K filed February 17, 2009, File No. 1-32225) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.40 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Security Agreement, dated August 27, 2007, between Holly Energy
Partners Operating, L.P., certain of its subsidiaries, and Union Bank of California, N.A.,
as administrative agent (entered into in connection with the Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
Annual Report on Form 10-K filed February 17, 2009, File No. 1-32225) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.41 |
|
|
Form of Mortgage, Deed of Trust, Security Agreement, Assignment of Rents and Leases,
Fixture Filing and Financing Statement (for purposes of granting security interests in real
property in connection with the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement) (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.15 of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
February 17, 2009, File No. 1-32225) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.42 |
* |
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement entered into with directors and officers of Holly
Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants Current Report on Form
8-K filed December 13, 2006, File No. 1-3876). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.1 |
+ |
|
Subsidiaries of Registrant. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
23.1 |
+ |
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1 |
+ |
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
+ |
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1 |
+ |
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2 |
+ |
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
+ |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
* |
|
Constitutes management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements. |
-124-