PEABODY ENERGY CORP
10-Ks and 10-Qs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
| þ | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011
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: 1-16463
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| Delaware | 13-4004153 | |
| (State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer | |
| incorporation or organization) | Identification No.) |
| 701 Market Street, St. Louis, Missouri | 63101-1826 | |
| (Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) |
(314) 342-3400
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes
þ
No
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant 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 (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12
months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes
þ
No
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated
filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
| Large accelerated filer þ | Accelerated filer o | Non-accelerated filer o | Smaller reporting company o | |||
| (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
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
There were 270,736,666 shares of common stock with a par value of $0.01 per share outstanding at
April 29, 2011.
INDEX
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share data) | ||||||||
|
Revenues
|
||||||||
|
Sales
|
$ | 1,613.7 | $ | 1,385.1 | ||||
|
Other revenues
|
131.2 | 130.5 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
1,744.9 | 1,515.6 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Costs and expenses
|
||||||||
|
Operating costs and expenses
|
1,268.1 | 1,108.7 | ||||||
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
108.8 | 105.5 | ||||||
|
Asset retirement obligation expense
|
13.1 | 9.5 | ||||||
|
Selling and administrative expenses
|
61.6 | 55.4 | ||||||
|
Other operating (income) loss:
|
||||||||
|
Net gain on disposal or exchange of assets
|
(4.0 | ) | (7.3 | ) | ||||
|
Loss from equity affiliates
|
3.0 | 1.6 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Operating profit
|
294.3 | 242.2 | ||||||
|
Interest expense
|
51.0 | 50.0 | ||||||
|
Interest income
|
(4.1 | ) | (1.0 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes
|
247.4 | 193.2 | ||||||
|
Income tax provision
|
67.8 | 56.1 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations, net of income taxes
|
179.6 | 137.1 | ||||||
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
(0.9 | ) | (0.4 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net income
|
178.7 | 136.7 | ||||||
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
2.2 | 3.0 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net income attributable to common stockholders
|
$ | 176.5 | $ | 133.7 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Income From Continuing Operations
|
||||||||
|
Basic earnings per share
|
$ | 0.66 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
$ | 0.65 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net Income Attributable to Common Stockholders
|
||||||||
|
Basic earnings per share
|
$ | 0.66 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
$ | 0.65 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Dividends declared per share
|
$ | 0.085 | $ | 0.070 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
See accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
1
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| March 31, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | |||||||
| (Amounts in millions, except share and per share data) | ||||||||
|
ASSETS
|
||||||||
|
Current assets
|
||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$ | 1,273.2 | $ | 1,295.2 | ||||
|
Short-term investments
|
100.0 | — | ||||||
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $28.2 at March 31, 2011 and $30.3 at December 31, 2010
|
476.4 | 558.2 | ||||||
|
Inventories
|
362.8 | 332.9 | ||||||
|
Assets from coal trading activities, net
|
166.2 | 192.5 | ||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
114.7 | 120.4 | ||||||
|
Other current assets
|
552.9 | 459.0 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total current assets
|
3,046.2 | 2,958.2 | ||||||
|
Property, plant, equipment and mine development
|
||||||||
|
Land and coal interests
|
7,687.5 | 7,657.0 | ||||||
|
Buildings and improvements
|
1,086.5 | 1,079.8 | ||||||
|
Machinery and equipment
|
1,731.6 | 1,699.3 | ||||||
|
Less: accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
(3,084.1 | ) | (3,010.0 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Property, plant, equipment and mine development, net
|
7,421.5 | 7,426.1 | ||||||
|
Investments and other assets
|
1,056.2 | 978.8 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total assets
|
$ | 11,523.9 | $ | 11,363.1 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
||||||||
|
Current liabilities
|
||||||||
|
Current maturities of long-term debt
|
$ | 261.5 | $ | 43.2 | ||||
|
Liabilities from coal trading activities, net
|
157.4 | 181.7 | ||||||
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
1,225.8 | 1,288.8 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total current
liabilities
|
1,644.7 | 1,513.7 | ||||||
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
2,478.9 | 2,706.8 | ||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
578.2 | 539.8 | ||||||
|
Asset retirement obligations
|
508.6 | 501.3 | ||||||
|
Accrued postretirement benefit costs
|
965.6 | 963.9 | ||||||
|
Other noncurrent liabilities
|
456.1 | 448.3 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total liabilities
|
6,632.1 | 6,673.8 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Stockholders’ equity
|
||||||||
|
Preferred Stock — $0.01 per share par value; 10,000,000 shares
authorized, no shares issued or outstanding as of March 31, 2011 or December 31, 2010
|
— | — | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock — 1,500,000 shares
authorized, no shares issued or outstanding as of March 31, 2011 or December 31, 2010
|
— | — | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Perpetual Preferred Stock — 800,000 shares authorized, no shares issued
or outstanding as of March 31, 2011 or December 31, 2010
|
— | — | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Series Common Stock — $0.01 per share par value; 40,000,000 shares
authorized, no shares issued or outstanding as of March 31, 2011 or
December 31, 2010
|
— | — | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Common Stock — $0.01 per share par value; 800,000,000 shares
authorized, 279,825,706 shares issued and 270,677,543 shares outstanding as of March 31, 2011 and 279,149,028 shares issued and 270,236,256 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2010
|
2.8 | 2.8 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
2,204.8 | 2,182.0 | ||||||
|
Retained earnings
|
3,031.9 | 2,878.4 | ||||||
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
(20.9 | ) | (67.9 | ) | ||||
|
Treasury shares, at cost: 9,148,163 shares as of March 31, 2011 and 8,912,772 shares as of December 31, 2010
|
(349.7 | ) | (334.6 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Peabody Energy Corporation’s stockholders’ equity
|
4,868.9 | 4,660.7 | ||||||
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
22.9 | 28.6 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
4,891.8 | 4,689.3 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$ | 11,523.9 | $ | 11,363.1 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
See accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
2
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
||||||||
|
Net income
|
$ | 178.7 | $ | 136.7 | ||||
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
0.9 | 0.4 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations, net of income taxes
|
179.6 | 137.1 | ||||||
|
Adjustments to reconcile income from continuing operations, net of income taxes to net cash provided by operating activities:
|
||||||||
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
108.8 | 105.5 | ||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
23.4 | 49.8 | ||||||
|
Share-based compensation
|
10.9 | 11.4 | ||||||
|
Net gain on disposal or exchange of assets
|
(4.0 | ) | (7.3 | ) | ||||
|
Loss from equity affiliates
|
3.0 | 1.6 | ||||||
|
Changes in current assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||
|
Accounts receivable
|
82.4 | (25.1 | ) | |||||
|
Change in receivable from accounts receivable securitization program
|
— | 23.1 | ||||||
|
Inventories
|
(30.0 | ) | (18.1 | ) | ||||
|
Net assets from coal trading activities
|
(72.8 | ) | (6.2 | ) | ||||
|
Other current assets
|
(8.7 | ) | 4.1 | |||||
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
(91.4 | ) | (84.7 | ) | ||||
|
Asset retirement obligations
|
7.5 | 6.7 | ||||||
|
Workers’compensation obligations
|
7.1 | 2.5 | ||||||
|
Accrued postretirement benefit costs
|
6.3 | 5.4 | ||||||
|
Contributions to pension plans
|
(0.4 | ) | (16.5 | ) | ||||
|
Other, net
|
(0.9 | ) | (10.9 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net cash provided by continuing operations
|
220.8 | 178.4 | ||||||
|
Net cash used in discontinued operations
|
(0.2 | ) | (6.6 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
220.6 | 171.8 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
||||||||
|
Additions to property, plant, equipment and mine development
|
(107.2 | ) | (88.4 | ) | ||||
|
Investment in Prairie State Energy Campus
|
(8.9 | ) | (12.2 | ) | ||||
|
Proceeds from disposal of assets
|
5.5 | 4.4 | ||||||
|
Investments in equity affiliates and joint ventures
|
(1.1 | ) | (15.7 | ) | ||||
|
Proceeds from sale of debt securities
|
15.5 | — | ||||||
|
Purchases of debt securities
|
(14.6 | ) | — | |||||
|
Purchases of short-term investments
|
(100.0 | ) | — | |||||
|
Other, net
|
(0.4 | ) | (0.8 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net cash
used in investing activities
|
(211.2 | ) | (112.7 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
||||||||
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
(10.0 | ) | (2.6 | ) | ||||
|
Dividends paid
|
(23.0 | ) | (18.8 | ) | ||||
|
Repurchase of employee common stock relinquished for tax with holding
|
(15.1 | ) | (7.8 | ) | ||||
|
Excess tax benefits related to share-based compensation
|
4.9 | — | ||||||
|
Proceeds from stock options exercised
|
4.0 | 2.0 | ||||||
|
Other, net
|
7.8 | 4.7 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
(31.4 | ) | (22.5 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
|
(22.0 | ) | 36.6 | |||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
1,295.2 | 988.8 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Cash and
cash equivalents at end of period
|
$ | 1,273.2 | $ | 1,025.4 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
See accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
| Peabody Energy Corporation’s Stockholders’ Equity | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Additional | Accumulated | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Paid-in | Retained | Other Comprehensive | Noncontrolling | Stockholders’ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common Stock | Capital | Treasury Stock | Earnings | Loss | Interests | Equity | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
December 31, 2010
|
$ | 2.8 | $ | 2,182.0 | $ | (334.6 | ) | $ | 2,878.4 | $ | (67.9 | ) | $ | 28.6 | $ | 4,689.3 | ||||||||||||
|
Comprehensive income:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net income
|
— | — | — | 176.5 | — | 2.2 | 178.7 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Unrealized gains on available-for-sale
securities, net of income taxes
|
— | — | — | — | 1.0 | — | 1.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Increase in fair value of cash flow hedges
(net of $34.3 tax provision)
|
— | — | — | — | 32.5 | — | 32.5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Postretirement plans and workers’ compensation
obligations (net of $0.2 tax benefit)
|
— | — | — | — | 13.5 | — | 13.5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comprehensive income
|
176.5 | 47.0 | 2.2 | 225.7 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dividends paid
|
— | — | — | (23.0 | ) | — | — | (23.0 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Share-based compensation
|
— | 10.9 | — | — | — | — | 10.9 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Excess tax benefits related to share-based compensation
|
— | 4.9 | — | — | — | — | 4.9 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stock options exercised
|
— | 4.0 | — | — | — | — | 4.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Employee stock purchases
|
— | 3.0 | — | — | — | — | 3.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Repurchase of employee common stock relinquished for tax withholding
|
— | — | (15.1 | ) | — | — | — | (15.1 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
|
— | — | — | — | — | (7.9 | ) | (7.9 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
March 31, 2011
|
$ | 2.8 | $ | 2,204.8 | $ | (349.7 | ) | $ | 3,031.9 | $ | (20.9 | ) | $ | 22.9 | $ | 4,891.8 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
See accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(1) Basis of Presentation
The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Peabody Energy
Corporation (the Company) and its affiliates. All intercompany transactions, profits and balances
have been eliminated in consolidation.
The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements as of March 31, 2011 and for the
three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, and the notes thereto, are unaudited. However, in the
opinion of management, these financial statements reflect all normal, recurring adjustments
necessary for a fair presentation of the results of the periods presented. The balance sheet
information as of December 31, 2010 has been derived from the Company’s audited consolidated
balance sheet. The results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2011 are not
necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for future quarters or for the year ending
December 31, 2011.
The Company classifies items within discontinued operations in the unaudited condensed
consolidated statements of operations when the operations and cash flows of a particular component
(defined as operations and cash flows that can be clearly distinguished, operationally and for
financial reporting purposes, from the rest of the entity) of the Company have been (or will be)
eliminated from the ongoing operations of the Company as a result of a disposal transaction, and
the Company will no longer have any significant continuing involvement in the operations of that
component.
Certain amounts in prior periods have been reclassified to conform with the current year
presentations with no effect on previously reported net income or stockholders’ equity.
(2) Newly Adopted Accounting Standards and Accounting Standards Not Yet Implemented
In December 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued an update to guidance
on accounting for business combinations that clarified a public entity’s disclosure requirements
for pro forma presentation of revenue and earnings related to a business combination. The new
guidance, which became effective on January 1, 2011, requires that if comparative statements are
presented, the public entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though
the business combination that occurred during the year had occurred as of the beginning of the
comparable prior annual reporting period only. The guidance also requires the supplemental pro
forma disclosures to include a description of the nature and amount of material nonrecurring pro
forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro
forma revenue and earnings. The guidance, should it become applicable, will impact the Company’s
disclosures but it will not impact the Company’s results of operations, financial condition or cash
flows.
In January 2010, the FASB issued accounting guidance that requires new fair value disclosures,
including disclosures about significant transfers into and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair-value
measurements and a description of the reasons for the transfers. In addition, the guidance requires
new disclosures regarding activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, including a gross basis
reconciliation. The new disclosure requirements became effective for interim and annual periods
beginning January 1, 2010, except for the disclosure of activity within Level 3 fair value
measurements, which became effective January 1, 2011. While the adoption of the guidance had an
impact on the Company’s disclosures, it did not affect the Company’s results of operations,
financial condition or cash flows.
(3) Investments
The Company’s short-term investments are defined as those investments with original maturities
of greater than three months, but less than one year, and long-term investments are defined as
those investments with original maturities greater than one year. Short-term investments consist
of time deposits with highly-rated financial institutions, while the long-term portfolio primarily
consists of investments in debt securities.
The Company classifies its investments as either held-to-maturity or available-for-sale at the
time of purchase and reevaluates such designation periodically. Investments are classified as
held-to-maturity when the Company has the intent and ability to hold the securities to maturity.
Held-to-maturity securities are stated at amortized cost. Interest earned on the time deposits is
reported as “Interest income” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.
5
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Investments in securities not classified as held-to-maturity are classified as
available-for-sale. Available-for-sale securities are carried at fair value, with unrealized gains
and losses, net of income taxes, reported in “Accumulated other comprehensive loss” in the
condensed consolidated balance sheets. Realized gains and losses, determined on a specific
identification method, are included in “Interest income” in the unaudited condensed consolidated
statements of operations.
Investments in available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities at March 31, 2011 were as
follows:
| Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
| Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | ||||||||||||||
| Available-for-sale securities | Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | ||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Current:
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Federal government securities
|
$ | 2.2 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 2.2 | ||||||||
|
U.S. corporate bonds
|
3.9 | — | — | 3.9 | ||||||||||||
|
Noncurrent:
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Federal government securities
|
16.0 | — | 0.1 | 15.9 | ||||||||||||
|
U.S. corporate bonds
|
10.3 | — | — | 10.3 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 32.4 | $ | — | $ | 0.1 | $ | 32.3 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
| Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | ||||||||||||||
| Held-to-maturity securities | Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | ||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Time deposits
|
$ | 100.0 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 100.0 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
Investments in available-for-sale securities at December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
| Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | ||||||||||||||
| Available-for-sale securities | Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | ||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Current:
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Federal government securities
|
$ | 0.5 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 0.5 | ||||||||
|
U.S. corporate bonds
|
1.9 | — | — | 1.9 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Noncurrent:
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Federal government securities
|
9.2 | — | — | 9.2 | ||||||||||||
|
U.S. corporate bonds
|
6.3 | — | — | 6.3 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 17.9 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 17.9 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
6
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Contractual maturities for available-for-sale investments at March 31, 2011 were as shown
below. Expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the
right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
| Amortized | ||||||||
| Cost | Fair Value | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Due in one year or less
|
$ | 6.1 | $ | 6.1 | ||||
|
Due in one to five years
|
26.3 | 26.2 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 32.4 | $ | 32.3 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
Contractual maturities for held-to-maturity investments were all less than one year at
March 31, 2011.
The Company did not sell any of its long-term investments described above during the three
months ended March 31, 2011 and, thus, had no proceeds, realized gains or realized losses related
to these securities.
In addition to the securities described above, the Company holds investments in debt and
equity securities related to the Company’s pro-rata share of funding in the Newcastle Coal
Infrastructure Group (NCIG). The debt securities are recorded at cost, which approximates fair
value, in Australian dollars adjusted for changes in the U.S. dollar to Australian dollar exchange
rates. The equity securities are recorded at cost, which approximates fair value. During the
three months ended March 31, 2011, the Company sold $15.5 million of the debt securities related to
NCIG.
The Company did not recognize any other than temporary losses on any of its investments during
the three months ended March 31, 2011.
(4) Inventories
| Inventories consisted of the following: |
| March 31, | December 31, | |||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Materials and supplies
|
$ | 101.3 | $ | 97.1 | ||||
|
Raw coal
|
58.6 | 55.4 | ||||||
|
Saleable coal
|
202.9 | 180.4 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 362.8 | $ | 332.9 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
(5) Derivatives and Fair Value Measurements
Risk Management — Non Coal Trading Activities
The Company is exposed to various types of risk in the normal course of business, including
fluctuations in commodity prices, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates. These risks
are actively monitored in an effort to ensure compliance with the risk management policies of the
Company. In most cases, commodity price risk (excluding coal trading activities) related to the
sale of coal is mitigated through the use of long-term, fixed-price contracts rather than financial
instruments.
7
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Interest Rate Swaps.
The Company is exposed to interest rate risk on its fixed rate and
variable rate long-term debt. From time to time, the Company manages the interest rate risk
associated with the fair value of its fixed rate borrowings using fixed-to-floating interest rate
swaps to effectively convert a portion of the underlying cash flows on the debt into variable rate
cash flows. The Company designates these swaps as fair value hedges, with the objective of hedging
against changes in the fair value of the fixed rate debt that result from market interest rate
changes. From time to time, the interest rate risk associated with the Company’s variable rate
borrowings is managed using floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps. The Company designates these
swaps as cash flow hedges, with the objective of reducing the variability of cash flows associated
with market interest rate changes. As of March 31, 2011, the Company had no interest rate swaps in
place.
Foreign Currency Hedges.
The Company is exposed to foreign currency exchange rate risk,
primarily on Australian dollar expenditures made in its Australian Mining segment. This risk is
managed by entering into forward contracts and options that the Company designates as cash flow
hedges, with the objective of reducing the variability of cash flows associated with forecasted
Australian dollar expenditures.
Diesel Fuel and Explosives Hedges.
The Company is exposed to commodity price risk associated
with diesel fuel and explosives in the United States (U.S.) and Australia. This risk is managed
through the use of cost pass-through contracts and derivatives, primarily swaps. The Company has
generally designated the swap contracts as cash flow hedges, with the objective of reducing the
variability of cash flows associated with the forecasted purchase of diesel fuel and explosives. In
Australia, the explosives costs and a portion of the diesel fuel costs are not hedged as they are
usually included in the fees paid to the Company’s contract miners.
Notional Amounts and Fair Value.
The following summarizes the Company’s foreign currency and
commodity positions at March 31, 2011:
| Notional Amount by Year of Maturity | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2016 and | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | thereafter | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Foreign Currency
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A$:US$ hedge
contracts (A$
millions)
|
$ | 4,033.7 | $ | 1,139.9 | $ | 1,402.7 | $ | 1,022.6 | $ | 468.5 | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Commodity Contracts
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Diesel fuel hedge
contracts (million
gallons)
|
179.2 | 67.1 | 76.2 | 35.9 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
U.S. explosives
hedge contracts
(million MMBtu)
|
6.5 | 2.6 | 2.7 | 1.2 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Account Classification by | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash Flow | Fair Value | Economic | Fair Value Asset | |||||||||||||
| Hedge | Hedge | Hedge | (Liability) | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Foreign Currency
|
||||||||||||||||
|
A$:US$ hedge
contracts (A$
millions)
|
$ | 4,033.7 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 687.2 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Commodity Contracts
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Diesel fuel hedge
contracts (million
gallons)
|
179.2 | — | — | $ | 133.5 | |||||||||||
|
U.S. explosives hedge
contracts (million
MMBtu)
|
6.5 | — | — | $ | (0.1 | ) | ||||||||||
8
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Hedge Ineffectiveness.
The Company assesses, both at inception and at least quarterly
thereafter, whether the derivatives used in hedging activities are highly effective at offsetting
the changes in the anticipated cash flows of the hedged item. The effective portion of the change
in the fair value is recorded as a separate component of stockholders’ equity until the hedged
transaction impacts reported earnings, at which time gains and losses are reclassified to the
consolidated statements of operations at the time of the recognition of the underlying hedged item.
To the extent that the periodic changes in the fair value of the derivatives exceed the changes in
the hedged item, the ineffective portion of the periodic non-cash changes are recorded in the
consolidated statements of operations in the period of the change. If the hedge ceases to qualify
for hedge accounting, the Company prospectively recognizes the mark-to-market movements in the
consolidated statements of operations in the period of the change.
A measure of ineffectiveness is inherent in hedging future diesel fuel purchases with
derivative positions based on crude oil and refined petroleum products as a result of location and
product differences.
The Company’s derivative positions for the hedging of future explosives purchases are based on
natural gas, which is the primary price component of explosives. However, a small measure of
ineffectiveness exists as the contractual purchase price includes manufacturing fees that are
subject to periodic adjustments. In addition, other fees, such as transportation surcharges, can
result in ineffectiveness, but have historically changed infrequently and comprise a small portion
of the total explosives cost.
The Company’s derivative positions relating to foreign currency expenditures contain a small
measure of ineffectiveness due to timing differences between the hedge settlement and the purchase
transaction, which could differ by less than a day and up to a maximum of 30 days.
The tables below show the classification and amounts of pre-tax gains and losses related to
the Company’s non-trading hedges during the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010:
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Gain reclassified | Gain (loss) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Loss recognized in | Gain recognized in | from other | reclassified from | |||||||||||||||||
| income on non- | other comprehensive | comprehensive | other comprehensive | |||||||||||||||||
| Income Statement Classification | designated | income on derivative | income into income | income into income | ||||||||||||||||
| Financial Instrument | Gains (Losses) — Realized | derivatives | (effective portion) | (effective portion) | (ineffective portion) | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Diesel fuel hedge contracts:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
— Cash flow hedges
|
Operating costs and expenses | $ | — | $ | 98.9 | $ | 8.1 | $ | 2.4 | |||||||||||
|
Explosives cash flow hedge contracts:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
— Cash flow hedges
|
Operating costs and expenses | — | 0.1 | — | (0.1 | ) | ||||||||||||||
|
Foreign currency cash flow hedge
contracts
|
Operating costs and expenses | — | 119.8 | 72.7 | — | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | — | $ | 218.8 | $ | 80.8 | $ | 2.3 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Gain (loss) | Gain (loss) | Gain reclassified | ||||||||||||||||||
| Loss recognized in | recognized in other | reclassified from | from other | |||||||||||||||||
| income on non- | comprehensive | other comprehensive | comprehensive | |||||||||||||||||
| Income Statement Classification | designated | income on derivative | income into income | income into income | ||||||||||||||||
| Financial Instrument | Gains (Losses) — Realized | derivatives | (effective portion) | (effective portion) | (ineffective portion) | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Interest rate swaps:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
— Cash flow hedges
|
Interest Expense | $ | — | $ | 0.9 | $ | (1.2 | ) | $ | — | ||||||||||
|
Diesel fuel hedge contracts:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
— Cash flow hedges
|
Operating costs and expenses | — | 8.4 | (7.1 | ) | 1.0 | ||||||||||||||
|
Explosives cash flow hedge contracts:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
— Cash flow hedges
|
Operating costs and expenses | — | (3.8 | ) | (2.3 | ) | — | |||||||||||||
|
Foreign currency cash flow hedge contracts
|
Operating costs and expenses | — | 82.0 | 38.8 | — | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | — | $ | 87.5 | $ | 28.2 | $ | 1.0 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
9
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Based on the net fair value of the Company’s non-coal trading positions held in “Accumulated
other comprehensive loss” at March 31, 2011, unrealized gains to be reclassified from comprehensive
income to earnings over the next 12 months associated with the Company’s foreign currency and
diesel fuel hedge programs are expected to be approximately $319 million and $65 million,
respectively. The unrealized gains to be realized under the explosives hedge program are expected
to be less than $1 million. As these unrealized gains are associated with derivative instruments
that represent hedges of forecasted transactions, the amounts reclassified to earnings may
partially offset the realized transactions in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.
The classification and amount of derivatives presented on a gross basis as of March 31, 2011
and December 31, 2010 are as follows:
| Fair Value as of March 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||
| Current | Noncurrent | Current | Noncurrent | |||||||||||||
| Financial Instrument | Assets | Assets | Liabilities | Liabilities | ||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Diesel fuel cash flow hedge contracts
|
$ | 69.5 | $ | 68.7 | $ | 4.7 | $ | — | ||||||||
|
Explosives cash flow hedge contracts
|
0.4 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.5 | ||||||||||||
|
Foreign currency cash flow hedge contracts
|
319.0 | 368.2 | — | — | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 388.9 | $ | 437.0 | $ | 4.8 | $ | 0.5 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| Fair Value as of December 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
| Current | Noncurrent | Current | Noncurrent | |||||||||||||
| Financial Instrument | Assets | Assets | Liabilities | Liabilities | ||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Diesel fuel cash flow hedge contracts
|
$ | 25.3 | $ | 26.9 | $ | 11.9 | $ | — | ||||||||
|
Explosives cash flow hedge contracts
|
0.5 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.6 | ||||||||||||
|
Foreign currency cash flow hedge contracts
|
273.5 | 366.6 | — | — | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 299.3 | $ | 393.6 | $ | 12.0 | $ | 0.6 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
After netting by counterparty where permitted, the fair values of the respective
derivatives are reflected in “Other current assets,” “Investments and other assets,” “Accounts
payable and accrued expenses” and “Other noncurrent liabilities” in the condensed consolidated
balance sheets.
See Note 6 for information related to the Company’s coal trading activities and the
instruments that are part of its trading book.
Fair Value Measurements
Fair Value Measured on a Recurring Basis.
The Company uses a three-level fair value hierarchy
that categorizes assets and liabilities measured at fair value based on the observability of the
inputs utilized in the valuation. These levels include: Level 1, inputs are quoted prices in active
markets for the identical assets or liabilities; Level 2, inputs other than quoted prices included
in Level 1 that are directly or indirectly observable through market-corroborated inputs; and Level
3, inputs are unobservable, or observable but cannot be market-corroborated, requiring the Company
to make assumptions about pricing by market participants.
10
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
The following tables set forth the hierarchy of the Company’s net financial asset
(liability) positions for which fair value is measured on a recurring basis:
| March 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||
| Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Investment in debt securities
|
$ | 32.3 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 32.3 | ||||||||
|
Commodity swaps and options — diesel fuel
|
— | 133.5 | — | 133.5 | ||||||||||||
|
Commodity swaps and options — explosives
|
— | (0.1 | ) | — | (0.1 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Foreign currency hedge contracts
|
— | 687.2 | — | 687.2 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total net financial assets
|
$ | 32.3 | $ | 820.6 | $ | — | $ | 852.9 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
| Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Investment in debt securities
|
$ | 17.9 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 17.9 | ||||||||
|
Commodity swaps and options — diesel fuel
|
— | 40.3 | — | 40.3 | ||||||||||||
|
Commodity swaps and options — explosives
|
— | (0.1 | ) | — | (0.1 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Foreign currency hedge contracts
|
— | 640.1 | — | 640.1 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total net financial assets
|
$ | 17.9 | $ | 680.3 | $ | — | $ | 698.2 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
For Level 1 and 2 financial assets and liabilities, the Company utilizes both direct and
indirect observable price quotes, including interest rate yield curves, exchange indices, broker
quotes, published indices and other market quotes. Below is a summary of the Company’s valuation
techniques for Level 1 and 2 financial assets and liabilities:
| • | Investment in debt securities: valued based on quoted prices in active markets (Level 1). | ||
| • | Commodity swaps and options — diesel fuel and explosives: generally valued based on a valuation that is corroborated by the use of market-based pricing (Level 2). | ||
| • | Foreign currency hedge contracts: valued utilizing inputs obtained in quoted public markets (Level 2). |
The Company did not have any transfers between levels during the three months ended March 31,
2011 or 2010 for its non-coal trading positions. The Company’s policy is to value all transfers
between levels using the beginning of period valuation.
Other Financial Instruments.
The following methods and assumptions were used by the Company
in estimating fair values for other financial instruments as of March 31, 2011 and December 31,
2010:
| • | Cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, including those within the Company’s accounts receivable securitization program, and accounts payable and accrued expenses have carrying values which approximate fair value due to the short maturity or the financial nature of these instruments. | ||
| • | Investments and other assets in the consolidated balance sheets includes the Company’s investments in debt and equity securities related to the Company’s pro-rata share of funding in NCIG. The debt securities are recorded at cost, which approximates fair value, in Australian dollars adjusted for changes in the U.S. dollar to Australian dollar exchange rates. The equity securities are recorded at cost, which approximates fair value. |
11
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
| • | Long-term debt fair value estimates are based on observed prices for securities with an active trading market when available, and otherwise on estimated borrowing rates to discount the cash flows to their present value. The carrying amounts of the 7.875% Senior Notes due 2026 and the Convertible Junior Subordinated Debentures due 2066 (the Debentures) are net of the respective unamortized note discounts. |
The carrying amounts and estimated fair values of the Company’s debt are summarized as
follows:
| March 31, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | |||||||||||||||
| Carrying | Estimated | Carrying | Estimated | |||||||||||||
| Amount | Fair Value | Amount | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Long-term debt
|
$ | 2,740.4 | $ | 2,941.8 | $ | 2,750.0 | $ | 2,960.0 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
Nonperformance and Credit Risk
The fair value of the Company’s non-coal trading derivative assets and liabilities reflects
adjustments for nonperformance and credit risk. The Company conducts its hedging activities
related to foreign currency, interest rate, fuel and explosives exposures with a variety of
highly-rated commercial banks and closely monitors counterparty creditworthiness. To reduce its
credit exposure for these hedging activities, the Company seeks to enter into netting agreements
with counterparties that permit the Company to offset asset and liability positions with such
counterparties.
(6) Coal Trading
Risk Management — Coal Trading
The Company engages in direct and brokered trading of coal, ocean freight and fuel-related
commodities in over-the-counter markets (coal trading), some of which is subsequently
exchange-cleared and some of which is bilaterally-cleared. Except those for which the Company has
elected to apply a normal purchases and normal sales exception, all derivative coal trading
contracts are accounted for on a fair value basis.
The Company’s policy is to include instruments associated with coal trading transactions as a
part of its trading book. Trading revenues are recorded in “Other revenues” in the unaudited
consolidated statements of operations and include realized and unrealized gains and losses on
derivative instruments, including those under the normal purchases and normal sales exception.
Therefore, the Company has elected the trading exemption to reflect the disclosures for its coal
trading activities.
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| Trading Revenue by Type of Instrument | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Commodity swaps and options
|
$ | (31.8 | ) | $ | 27.4 | |||
|
Physical commodity purchase / sale contracts
|
21.9 | 28.6 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total trading revenue
|
$ | (9.9 | ) | $ | 56.0 | |||
|
|
||||||||
Hedge Ineffectiveness.
In some instances, the Company has designated an existing coal
trading derivative as a hedge and, thus, the derivative has a non-zero fair value at hedge
inception. The “off-market” nature of these derivatives, which is best described as an embedded
financing element within the derivative, is a source of ineffectiveness. In other instances, the
Company uses a coal trading derivative that settles at a different time, has different quality
specifications, or has a different location basis than the occurrence of the cash flow being
hedged. These collectively yield ineffectiveness to the extent that the derivative hedge contract
does not exactly offset changes in the fair value or expected cash flows of the hedged item.
Fair Value Measurements
The fair value of assets and liabilities from coal trading activities is set forth below:
| March 31, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Gross Basis | Net Basis | Gross Basis | Net Basis | |||||||||||||
|
Assets from coal trading activities
|
$ | 1,589.2 | $ | 166.2 | $ | 1,706.2 | $ | 192.5 | ||||||||
|
Liabilities from coal trading activities
|
(1,787.3 | ) | (157.4 | ) | (1,843.5 | ) | (181.7 | ) | ||||||||
|
Subtotal
|
(198.1 | ) | 8.8 | (137.3 | ) | 10.8 | ||||||||||
|
Net margin posted
(1)
|
206.9 | — | 148.1 | — | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net value of coal trading positions
|
$ | 8.8 | $ | 8.8 | $ | 10.8 | $ | 10.8 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Represents margin posted with counterparties of $206.9 million at March 31, 2011; and margin posted with counterparties of $148.2 million, net of margin held of $0.1 million at December 31, 2010. In addition, at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company held letters of credit of $5.5 million and $5.0 million, respectively, from counterparties in lieu of margin posted. Of the margin posted at March 31, 2011, approximately 85% related to cash flow hedges. |
12
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
For Level 1 and 2 financial assets and liabilities, the Company utilizes both direct and
indirect observable price quotes, including U.S. interest rate curves, LIBOR yield curves, New York
Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX), Intercontinental Exchange indices (ICE), NOS Clearing ASA,
LCH.Clearnet (formerly known as the London Clearing House), broker quotes, published indices and
other market quotes. Below is a summary of the Company’s valuation techniques for Level 1 and 2
financial assets and liabilities:
| • | Commodity swaps and options — generally valued based on unadjusted quoted prices in active markets (Level 1) or a valuation that is corroborated by the use of market-based pricing (Level 2). | ||
| • | Physical commodity purchase/sale contracts — purchases and sales at locations with significant market activity corroborated by market-based information (Level 2). |
Commodity swaps and options and physical commodity purchase/sale contracts transacted in less
liquid markets or contracts, such as long-term arrangements with limited price availability were
classified in Level 3. Indicators of less liquid markets are those with periods of low trade
activity or when broker quotes reflect wide pricing spreads. Generally, the Company’s Level 3
instruments or contracts are valued using internally generated models that include bid/ask price
quotations, other market assessments obtained from multiple, independent third-party brokers or
other transactional data. While the Company does not anticipate any decrease in the number of
third-party brokers or market liquidity, such events could erode the quality of market information
and therefore the valuing of its market positions should the number of third-party brokers decrease or if market liquidity is reduced. The Company’s valuation techniques
also include basis adjustments for heat rate, sulfur and ash content, port and freight costs, and
credit and nonperformance risk. The Company validates its valuation inputs with third-party
information and settlement prices from other sources where available. The Company has consistently applied these valuation techniques in all periods presented, and
believes it has obtained the most accurate information available for the types of derivative
contracts held.
The following tables set forth the hierarchy of the Company’s net financial asset
(liability) coal trading positions for which fair value is measured on a recurring basis:
| March 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||
| Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Commodity swaps and options
|
$ | 15.0 | $ | (87.6 | ) | $ | — | $ | (72.6 | ) | ||||||
|
Physical commodity purchase/sale contracts
|
— | 68.9 | 12.5 | 81.4 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total net financial assets (liabilities)
|
$ | 15.0 | $ | (18.7 | ) | $ | 12.5 | $ | 8.8 | |||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
| Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Commodity swaps and options
|
$ | 10.7 | $ | (76.2 | ) | $ | — | $ | (65.5 | ) | ||||||
|
Physical commodity purchase/sale contracts
|
— | 57.7 | 18.6 | 76.3 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total net financial assets (liabilities)
|
$ | 10.7 | $ | (18.5 | ) | $ | 18.6 | $ | 10.8 | |||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
The Company did not have any significant transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 during the
three months ended March 31, 2011 or 2010. During the three months ended March 31, 2011, certain
of the Company’s physical commodity purchase/sale contracts were transferred from Level 3 to Level
2 as the settlement dates entered a more liquid market. There were no significant transfers in or
out of Level 3 during the three months ended March 31, 2010. The Company’s policy is to value all
transfers between levels using the beginning of period valuation.
13
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s recurring Level 3 net financial
assets:
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Beginning of period
|
$ | 18.6 | $ | 17.0 | ||||
|
Total gains or losses (realized/unrealized):
|
||||||||
|
Included in earnings
|
10.1 | (4.7 | ) | |||||
|
Included in other comprehensive income
|
— | 0.3 | ||||||
|
Settlements
|
3.0 | (0.1 | ) | |||||
|
Transfers out
|
(19.2 | ) | — | |||||
|
End of period
|
$ | 12.5 | $ | 12.5 | ||||
The following table summarizes the changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to Level 3
net financial assets held both as of the beginning and the end of the period:
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Changes in unrealized gains (losses)
(1)
|
$ | 10.0 | $ | (1.2 | ) | |||
|
|
||||||||
| (1) | Within the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations for the periods presented, unrealized gains and losses from Level 3 items are combined with unrealized gains and losses on positions classified in Level 1 or 2, as well as other positions that have been realized during the applicable periods. |
The Company’s trading assets and liabilities are generally made up of forward contracts,
financial swaps and margin. The net fair value of coal trading positions designated as cash flow
hedges of anticipated future sales was a liability of $248.7 million and $174.2 million as of March
31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
Based on the net fair value of the Company’s coal trading positions held in “Accumulated other
comprehensive loss” at March 31, 2011, unrealized losses to be reclassified from comprehensive
income to earnings over the next 12 months are expected to be approximately $124 million. As these
unrealized losses are associated with derivative instruments that represent hedges of forecasted
transactions, the amounts reclassified to earnings may partially offset the realized transactions
in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.
As of March 31, 2011, the timing of the estimated future realization of the value of the
Company’s trading portfolio was as follows:
| Percentage of | ||||
| Year of Expiration | Portfolio Total | |||
|
2011
|
64 | % | ||
|
2012
|
25 | % | ||
|
2013
|
4 | % | ||
|
2014
|
5 | % | ||
|
2015
|
2 | % | ||
|
|
||||
|
|
100 | % | ||
|
|
||||
14
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
At March 31, 2011, 46% of the Company’s credit exposure related to coal trading
activities was with investment grade counterparties and 54% was with non-investment grade
counterparties.
Nonperformance and Credit Risk.
The fair value of the Company’s coal derivative assets and
liabilities reflects adjustments for nonperformance and credit risk. The Company’s exposure is
substantially with electric utilities, energy producers and energy marketers. The Company’s policy
is to independently evaluate each customer’s creditworthiness prior to entering into transactions
and to regularly monitor the credit extended. If the Company engages in a transaction with a
counterparty that does not meet its credit standards, the Company seeks to protect its position by
requiring the counterparty to provide an appropriate credit enhancement. Also, when appropriate
(as determined by its credit management function), the Company has taken steps to reduce its
exposure to customers or counterparties whose credit has deteriorated and who may pose a higher
risk of failure to perform under their contractual obligations. These steps include obtaining
letters of credit or cash collateral (margin), requiring prepayments for shipments or the creation
of customer trust accounts held for the Company’s benefit to serve as collateral in the event of a
failure to pay or perform. To reduce its credit exposure related to trading and brokerage
activities, the Company seeks to enter into netting agreements with counterparties that permit the
Company to offset asset and liability positions with such counterparties and, to the extent
required, will post or receive margin amounts associated with exchange-cleared positions.
Performance Assurances and Collateral.
Certain of the Company’s derivative trading instruments
require the parties to provide additional performance assurances whenever a material adverse event
jeopardizes one party’s ability to perform under the instrument. If the Company was to sustain a
material adverse event (using commercially reasonable standards), the counterparties could request
collateralization on derivative trading instruments in net liability positions which, based on an
aggregate fair value at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, would have amounted to collateral
postings of approximately $150 million and $160 million, respectively, to its counterparties. As
of March 31, 2011, $11.0 million of collateral was posted to counterparties for such positions
while $5.8 million was posted at December 31, 2010 (reflected in “Liabilities from coal trading
activities, net”).
Certain of the Company’s other derivative trading instruments require the parties to provide
additional performance assurances whenever a credit downgrade occurs below a certain level as
specified in each underlying contract. The terms of such derivative trading instruments typically
require additional collateralization, which is commensurate with the severity of the credit
downgrade. If a credit downgrade were to have occurred below contractually specified levels, the
Company’s additional collateral requirement owed to its counterparties would have been
approximately $5 million at March 31, 2011 and zero at December 31, 2010 based on the aggregate
fair value of all derivative trading instruments with such features that were in a net liability
position. As of March 31, 2011, the Company had posted $1.0 million for such instruments in a net
liability position. As of December 31, 2010, $5.0 million of margin was posted with a counterparty
due to timing and market fluctuations (reflected in “Liabilities from coal trading activities,
net”).
The Company is required by an exchange to post certain collateral, known as initial margin,
which represents an estimate of potential future adverse price movements across the Company’s
portfolio under normal market conditions. As of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company
had posted initial margin of $35.0 million and $39.5 million, respectively (reflected in “Other
current assets”). In addition, the Company had posted $0.1 million and $4.4 million of margin in
excess of the exchange-required variation (discussed below) and initial margin as of March 31, 2011
and December 31, 2010, respectively (also reflected in “Other current assets”).
The Company is required to post collateral on positions that are in a net liability position
with an exchange, known as variation margin, which was $194.9 million as of March 31, 2011 and
$137.4 million as of December 31, 2010 (reflected in “Liabilities from coal trading activities,
net”).
15
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(7) Income Taxes
The following is a reconciliation of the expected statutory federal income tax provision to
the Company’s actual income tax provision:
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Expected income tax provision at federal statutory rate
|
$ | 86.6 | $ | 67.6 | ||||
|
Excess depletion
|
(10.8 | ) | (9.7 | ) | ||||
|
Foreign earnings provision differential
|
(16.3 | ) | (14.8 | ) | ||||
|
Remeasurement of foreign income tax accounts
|
6.4 | 5.4 | ||||||
|
State income taxes, net of U.S. federal tax benefit
|
1.8 | 2.4 | ||||||
|
General business tax credits
|
(3.1 | ) | (3.6 | ) | ||||
|
Changes in valuation allowance
|
1.3 | 5.2 | ||||||
|
Changes in tax reserves
|
2.0 | 1.8 | ||||||
|
Other, net
|
(0.1 | ) | 1.8 | |||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total provision
|
$ | 67.8 | $ | 56.1 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
(8) Pension and Postretirement Benefit Costs
Net periodic pension costs included the following components:
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Service cost for benefits earned
|
$ | 0.4 | $ | 0.4 | ||||
|
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation
|
12.4 | 12.6 | ||||||
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
(16.1 | ) | (14.2 | ) | ||||
|
Amortization of prior service cost
|
0.3 | 0.3 | ||||||
|
Amortization of actuarial loss
|
7.5 | 5.5 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net periodic pension costs
|
$ | 4.5 | $ | 4.6 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
As of March 31, 2011, the Company’s qualified defined benefit pension plans were at or
above the thresholds of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 to avoid benefit restrictions and
at-risk penalties for 2011. No contributions to the qualified plans are expected during 2011.
However, the Company does expect to make contributions to its non-qualified defined benefit pension
plans during 2011 totaling less than $2 million. During the three months ended March 31, 2010, the
Company made discretionary contributions of approximately $16 million to its defined benefit
pension plans.
Net periodic postretirement benefit costs included the following components:
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Service cost for benefits earned
|
$ | 3.3 | $ | 3.1 | ||||
|
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation
|
14.4 | 14.5 | ||||||
|
Amortization of prior service cost
|
0.5 | 0.5 | ||||||
|
Amortization of actuarial loss
|
6.7 | 6.4 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net periodic postretirement benefit costs
|
$ | 24.9 | $ | 24.5 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
16
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(9) Comprehensive Income
The following table sets forth the after-tax components of comprehensive income:
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Net income
|
$ | 178.7 | $ | 136.7 | ||||
|
Net increase in fair value of cash flow hedges, net of income taxes
|
32.5 | 55.0 | ||||||
|
Unrealized gains on available-for sale securities, net of income taxes
|
1.0 | — | ||||||
|
Amortization of actuarial loss and prior service cost associated with
postretirement plans and workers’ compensation obligations, net
of income taxes
|
13.5 | 7.5 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Comprehensive income
|
$ | 225.7 | $ | 199.2 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
Comprehensive income differs from net income by the amount of unrealized gains or losses
resulting from valuation changes of the Company’s cash flow hedges (see Note 5 and Note 6) or its
available-for-sale securities (see Note 3) and the change in actuarial loss and prior service cost
(see Note 8) during the periods. None of the reconciling items between net income and
comprehensive income relates to the Company’s noncontrolling interest for either period presented.
(10) Earnings per Share (EPS)
The Company’s restricted stock awards are considered participating securities because holders
are entitled to receive non-forfeitable dividends during the vesting term. As such, the Company
uses the two-class method to compute basic and diluted EPS. Diluted EPS includes securities that
could potentially dilute basic EPS during a reporting period, which for the Company includes the
Debentures and share-based compensation awards.
A conversion of the Debentures may result in settlement of the Company’s common stock for any
conversion value in excess of the principal amount of the Debentures. For diluted EPS purposes,
potential common stock is calculated based on whether the market price of the Company’s common
stock at the end of each reporting period is in excess of the conversion price of the Debentures.
For a full discussion of the conditions under which the Debentures may be converted, the conversion
rate to common stock and the conversion price, see Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
For all but the performance units, the potentially dilutive impact of the Company’s
share-based compensation awards is determined using the treasury stock method. With the contingent
features of the performance unit awards, the assessment for any potential common stock to be
included in the diluted EPS is done using the end of the reporting period as if it were the end of
the contingency period for all units granted. For a full discussion of the Company’s share-based
compensation awards, see Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Company’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
17
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
The following illustrates the earnings allocation method utilized in the calculation of basic
and diluted EPS.
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (In millions, except per share amounts) | ||||||||
|
EPS numerator:
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations, net of income taxes
|
$ | 179.6 | $ | 137.1 | ||||
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
2.2 | 3.0 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders,
before allocation of earnings to participating securities
|
177.4 | 134.1 | ||||||
|
Less: Earnings allocated to participating securities
|
(0.9 | ) | (0.9 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders,
after earnings allocated to participating securities
(1)
|
176.5 | 133.2 | ||||||
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
(0.9 | ) | (0.4 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net income attributable to common stockholders,
after earnings allocated to participating securities
(1)
|
$ | 175.6 | $ | 132.8 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
EPS denominator:
|
||||||||
|
Weighted average shares outstanding — basic
|
268.9 | 266.5 | ||||||
|
Impact of dilutive securities
|
3.9 | 1.7 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Weighted average shares outstanding — diluted
(2)
|
272.8 | 268.2 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Basic EPS attributable to common stockholders:
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations
|
$ | 0.66 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations
|
— | — | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net income
|
$ | 0.66 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Diluted EPS attributable to common stockholders:
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations
|
$ | 0.65 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations
|
— | — | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Net income
|
$ | 0.65 | $ | 0.50 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
| (1) | The reallocation adjustment for participating securities to arrive at the numerator used to calculate diluted EPS was less than $0.1 million for the periods presented. | |
| (2) | Weighted average shares outstanding excludes anti-dilutive shares of approximately 0.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010. |
(11) Financial Instruments and Guarantees with Off-Balance-Sheet Risk
In the normal course of business, the Company is a party to guarantees and financial
instruments with off-balance-sheet risk, which are not reflected in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets. Such financial instruments are valued based on the amount of exposure under the
instrument and the likelihood of required performance. In the Company’s past experience, virtually
no claims have been made against these financial instruments. Management does not expect any
material losses to result from these guarantees or off-balance-sheet instruments.
18
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Financial Instruments with Off-Balance Sheet Risk
The Company had various financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in support of the
Company’s reclamation, coal lease and workers’ compensation obligations as follows as of March 31,
2011:
| Workers’ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Reclamation | Lease | Compensation | ||||||||||||||||||
| Obligations | Obligations | Obligations | Other (1) | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Self bonding
|
$ | 938.4 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 938.4 | ||||||||||
|
Surety bonds
|
613.7 | 110.3 | 6.2 | 10.4 | 740.6 | |||||||||||||||
|
Bank guarantees
|
129.4 | — | — | 130.8 | 260.2 | |||||||||||||||
|
Letters of credit
|
— | — | 79.7 | 2.7 | 82.4 | |||||||||||||||
|
Bilateral cash collateralization agreements
|
— | — | — | 79.7 | 79.7 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
$ | 1,681.5 | $ | 110.3 | $ | 85.9 | $ | 223.6 | $ | 2,101.3 | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Other includes letter of credit and bilateral cash collateralization agreement obligations described below and an additional $141.2 million in bank guarantees and surety bonds related to collateral for surety companies, road maintenance, performance guarantees and other operations. |
The Company owns a 37.5% interest in Dominion Terminal Associates, a partnership that
operates a coal export terminal in Newport News, Virginia under a 30-year lease that permits the
partnership to purchase the terminal at the end of the lease term for a nominal amount. The
partners have severally (but not jointly) agreed to make payments under various agreements which in
the aggregate provide the partnership with sufficient funds to pay rents and to cover the principal
and interest payments on the floating-rate industrial revenue bonds issued by the Peninsula Ports
Authority, and which are supported by letters of credit from a commercial bank. As of March 31,
2011, the Company’s maximum reimbursement obligation to the commercial bank was in turn supported
by four letters of credit totaling $42.7 million. The Company has a bilateral cash
collateralization agreement for these letters of credit whereby the Company posted cash collateral
in lieu of utilizing the Company’s unsecured credit facility (Credit Facility). See Note 8 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010 for more information on the Company’s Credit Facility. Such cash collateral is
classified within cash and cash equivalents given the Company has the ability to substitute letters
of credit at any time for this cash collateral and it is therefore readily available to the
Company.
The Company is party to an agreement with the PBGC and TXU Europe Limited, an affiliate of the
Company’s former parent corporation, under which the Company is required to make special
contributions to two of the Company’s defined benefit pension plans and to maintain a $37.0 million
letter of credit in favor of the PBGC. If the Company or the PBGC gives notice of an intent to
terminate one or more of the covered pension plans in which liabilities are not fully funded, or if
the Company fails to maintain the letter of credit, the PBGC may draw down on the letter of credit
and use the proceeds to satisfy liabilities under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974, as amended. The PBGC, however, is required to first apply amounts received from a $110.0
million guarantee in place from TXU Europe Limited in favor of the PBGC before it draws on the
Company’s letter of credit. The Company has a bilateral cash collateralization agreement for this
letter of credit whereby the Company posted cash collateral in lieu of utilizing the Company’s
unsecured credit agreement. Such cash collateral is classified within cash and cash equivalents
given the Company has the ability to substitute a letter of credit at any time for this cash
collateral and it is therefore readily available to the Company. On November 19, 2002, TXU Europe
Limited was placed under the administration process in the United Kingdom (a process similar to
bankruptcy proceedings in the U.S.) and continues under this process as of March 31, 2011. As a
result of these proceedings, TXU Europe Limited may be liquidated or otherwise reorganized in such
a way as to relieve it of its obligations under its guarantee.
At March 31, 2011, the Company had a $2.7 million letter of credit for collateral for bank
guarantees issued with respect to certain reclamation and performance obligations related to some
of the Company’s Australian mines.
19
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Accounts Receivable Securitization
The Company has an accounts receivable securitization program (securitization program) with a
maximum capacity of $275.0 million through its wholly-owned, bankruptcy-remote subsidiary (Seller).
At March 31, 2011, the Company had $20.4 million available under the securitization program, net of
outstanding letters of credit and amounts drawn. Under the securitization program, the Company
contributes, on a revolving basis, trade receivables of most of the Company’s U.S. subsidiaries to
the Seller, which then sells the receivables in their entirety to a consortium of unaffiliated
asset-backed commercial paper conduits (the Conduits). After the sale, the Company, as servicer of
the assets, collects the receivables on behalf of the Conduits for a nominal servicing fee. The
Company utilizes proceeds from the sale of its accounts receivable as an alternative to short-term
borrowings under the Company’s Credit Facility, effectively managing its overall borrowing costs
and providing an additional source for working capital. The securitization program extends to May
2012, while the letter of credit commitment that supports the commercial paper facility underlying
the securitization program must be renewed annually.
The Seller is a separate legal entity whose assets are available first and foremost to satisfy
the claims of its creditors. Of the receivables sold to the Conduits, a portion of the amount due
to the Seller is deferred until the ultimate collection of the underlying receivables. During the
three months ended March 31, 2011, the Company received total consideration of $1,186.1 million
related to accounts receivable sold under the securitization program, including $952.4 million of
cash up front from the sale of the receivables, an additional $76.7 million of cash upon the
collection of the underlying receivables, and $157.0 million that had not been collected at March
31, 2011 and was recorded at fair value which approximates carrying value. The reduction in
accounts receivable as a result of securitization activity with the Conduits was $150.0 million at
March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
The securitization activity has been reflected in the unaudited condensed consolidated
statements of cash flows as operating activity because both the cash received from the Conduits
upon sale of receivables as well as the cash received from the Conduits upon the ultimate
collection of receivables are not subject to significantly different risks given the short-term
nature of the Company’s trade receivables. The Company recorded expense associated with
securitization transactions of $0.6 million and $0.7 million for the three months ended March 31,
2011 and 2010, respectively.
Other
The Company is the lessee under numerous equipment and property leases. It is common in such
commercial lease transactions for the Company, as the lessee, to agree to indemnify the lessor for
the value of the property or equipment leased, should the property be damaged or lost during the
course of the Company’s operations. The Company expects that losses with respect to leased property
would be covered by insurance (subject to deductibles). The Company and certain of its subsidiaries
have guaranteed other subsidiaries’ performance under their various lease obligations. Aside from
indemnification of the lessor for the value of the property leased, the Company’s maximum potential
obligations under its leases are equal to the respective future minimum lease payments, and the
Company assumes that no amounts could be recovered from third parties.
In connection with the development of the Prairie State Energy Campus (Prairie State), a 1,600
megawatt coal-fuel electricity generation project currently under construction, each owner,
including one of the Company’s subsidiaries, has issued a guarantee for its proportionate share
(5.06% for the Company) of the construction costs under the Target Price Engineering, Procurement
and Construction Agreement with Bechtel Power Corporation.
The Company has provided financial guarantees under certain long-term debt agreements entered
into by its subsidiaries, and substantially all of the Company’s subsidiaries provide financial
guarantees under long-term debt agreements entered into by the Company. The maximum amounts
payable under the Company’s debt agreements are equal to the respective principal and interest
payments.
20
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(12) Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments
As of March 31, 2011, purchase commitments for capital expenditures were $535.4 million, all
of which is obligated within the next three years with $517.5 million obligated in the next 12
months.
A subsidiary of the Company owns a 5.06% undivided interest in Prairie State. The Company
invested $8.9 million and $12.2 million during the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010,
respectively, representing its 5.06% share of the construction costs for those periods. Included
in “Investments and other assets” in the condensed consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2011
and December 31, 2010 are costs of $211.4 million and $202.5 million, respectively. The Company’s
share of total construction costs for Prairie State is expected to be approximately $250 million
with most of the remaining funding expected in 2011.
There were no other material changes to the Company’s commitments from the information
provided in Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Company’s Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Contingencies
From time to time, the Company or its subsidiaries are involved in legal proceedings arising
in the ordinary course of business or related to indemnities or historical operations. The Company
believes it has recorded adequate reserves for these liabilities and that there is no individual
case pending that is likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition,
results of operations or cash flows. The Company discusses its significant legal proceedings
below.
Litigation Relating to Continuing Operations
Navajo Nation Litigation.
On June 18, 1999, the Navajo Nation served three of the Company’s
subsidiaries, including Peabody Western Coal Company (Peabody Western), with a complaint that had
been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Navajo Nation alleged 16
claims, including Civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) violations and
fraud. On April 12, 2010, the Navajo Nation filed an amended complaint to substantially narrow the
scope of its claims by removing the RICO allegations but leaving the other 12 common law tort and
contractual claims. The complaint alleges that the defendants jointly participated in unlawful
activity to obtain favorable coal lease amendments. The plaintiff is seeking various remedies
including actual damages of at least $600 million, punitive damages of at least $1 billion, a
determination that Peabody Western’s two coal leases terminated due to Peabody Western’s breach of
these leases and a reformation of these leases to adjust the royalty rate to 20%. The court allowed
the Hopi Tribe to intervene in this lawsuit, and the Hopi Tribe sought unspecified actual damages,
punitive damages and reformation of its coal lease. One of the Company’s subsidiaries named as a
defendant is now a subsidiary of Patriot. However, the Company is responsible for this litigation
under the Separation Agreement entered into with Patriot in connection with the spin-off. The U.S.
Supreme Court has ruled against the Navajo Nation in a related case against the U.S. government,
and remanded that case to the lower court to dismiss the complaint. The U.S. Supreme Court said
that none of the sources relied on by the Navajo Nation provided a basis for its breach-of-trust
lawsuit against the U.S. government, which undermines some of the claims the Navajo Nation asserts
in its litigation against the Company.
In October 2010, the Company and the other defendants settled the Hopi claims, and the court
dismissed those claims. The court ordered the Navajo Nation and the defendants to mediate the
case. Mediation commenced in November 2010 and the parties continue the mediation.
The outcome of this litigation is subject to numerous uncertainties. Based on the Company’s
evaluation of the issues and their potential impact, the amount of any future loss cannot be
reasonably estimated. However, based on current information, the Company believes this matter is
likely to be resolved without a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition,
results of operations or cash flows.
21
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Gulf Power Company Litigation.
On June 22, 2006, Gulf Power Company (Gulf Power) filed a
breach of contract lawsuit against a Company subsidiary in the U.S. District Court, Northern
District of Florida, contesting the force majeure declaration by the Company’s subsidiary under a
coal supply agreement with Gulf Power and seeking damages for alleged past and future tonnage
shortfalls of nearly five million tons under the agreement, which expired on December 31, 2007.
Gulf Power filed a motion for partial summary judgment on liability, and the Company subsidiary
filed a motion for summary judgment seeking complete dismissal. On June 30, 2009, the court granted
Gulf Power’s motion for partial summary judgment and denied the Company subsidiary’s motion for
summary judgment. The damages portion of the trial was held in February 2010. On September 30,
2010, the court entered its order on damages, awarding Gulf Power zero dollars in damages and the
Company its costs to defend the lawsuit. The Company is also seeking its reasonable attorney’s
fees incurred since October 15, 2008. On November 1, 2010, Gulf Power filed a motion to alter or
amend the judgment, contesting the trial court’s damages order, to which the Company objected. The
court has not yet ruled on the motion.
The outcome of this litigation is subject to numerous uncertainties. Based on the Company’s
evaluation of the issues and their potential impact, the amount of any future loss cannot
reasonably be estimated. However, based on current information, the Company believes this matter is
likely to be resolved without a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of
operations or cash flows.
Claims and Litigation Relating to Indemnities or Historical Operations
Oklahoma Lead Litigation.
Gold Fields Mining, LLC (Gold Fields) is a dormant, non-coal
producing entity that was previously managed and owned by Hanson PLC, the Company’s predecessor
owner. In a February 1997 spin-off, Hanson PLC transferred ownership of Gold Fields to the Company,
despite the fact that Gold Fields had no ongoing operations and the Company had no prior
involvement in its past operations. Gold Fields is currently one of the Company’s subsidiaries. The
Company indemnified TXU Group with respect to certain claims relating to a former affiliate of Gold
Fields. A predecessor of Gold Fields formerly operated two lead mills near Picher, Oklahoma prior
to the 1950s and mined, in accordance with lease agreements and permits, approximately 0.15% of the
total amount of the crude ore mined in the county.
Gold Fields and several other companies are defendants in two property damage lawsuits pending
in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma arising from past operations near
Picher, Oklahoma. The plaintiffs are seeking compensatory damages for diminution in property values
and punitive damages. These cases were originally filed as putative class actions, but the court
denied class certification and the cases were subsequently amended to include a number of
individual plaintiffs.
In February 2005, the state of Oklahoma, on behalf of itself and several other parties, sent a
notice to Gold Fields and other companies regarding a possible natural resources damage claim.
The outcome of litigation and these claims are subject to numerous uncertainties. Based on the
Company’s evaluation of the issues and their potential impact, the amount of any future loss cannot
be reasonably estimated. However, based on current information, the Company believes this matter is
likely to be resolved without a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of
operations or cash flows.
22
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
Environmental Claims and Litigation
Environmental claims have been asserted against Gold Fields related to activities of Gold
Fields or a former affiliate. Gold Fields or the former affiliate has been named a potentially
responsible party (PRP) at five national priority list sites based on the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986. Claims were asserted at 13 additional sites, bringing the total to 18,
which have since been reduced to 11 by completion of work, transfer or regulatory inactivity. The
number of PRP sites in and of itself is not a relevant measure of liability because the nature and
extent of environmental concerns varies by site, as does the estimated share of responsibility for
Gold Fields or the former affiliate. Undiscounted liabilities for environmental cleanup-related
costs for all of the sites noted above were $50.9 million as of March 31, 2011 and $51.1 million as
of December 31, 2010, $6.1 million and $6.3 million of which was reflected as a current liability,
respectively. These amounts represent those costs that the Company believes are probable and
reasonably estimable. In June 2005, Gold Fields and other PRPs received a letter from the U.S.
Department of Justice alleging that the PRP’s mining operations caused the EPA to incur
approximately $125 million in residential yard remediation costs at Picher, Oklahoma and will cause
the EPA to incur additional remediation costs relating to historical mining sites. In June 2008,
Gold Fields and other PRPs received letters from the U.S. Department of Justice and the EPA
re-initiating settlement negotiations. Gold Fields continues to participate in the settlement
discussions. Gold Fields believes it has meritorious defenses to these claims.
Gold Fields is involved in other litigation in the Picher area, and the Company indemnified
TXU Group with respect to a defendant as is more fully discussed under the “Oklahoma Lead
Litigation” caption above. Gold Fields has also been contacted by the state of Kansas (Kansas
Department of Health and Environment) and is in negotiations for final resolution of natural
resource damages claims at two sites. Significant uncertainty exists as to whether claims will be
pursued against Gold Fields in all cases, and where they are pursued, the amount of the eventual
costs and liabilities, which could be greater or less than the liabilities recorded in the
consolidated balance sheets. Based on the Company’s evaluation of the issues and their potential
impact, the total amount of any future loss cannot be reasonably estimated. However, based on
current information, the Company believes these claims and litigation are likely to be resolved
without a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Native Village of Kivalina and City of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil Corporation, et al.
In February
2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California against the Company, several owners of electricity
generating facilities and several oil companies. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of a
village in Alaska that they contend is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global
warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The
plaintiffs assert claims for nuisance, and allege that the defendants have acted in concert and are
jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property
values and for the cost of relocating the village. The defendants filed motions to dismiss on the
grounds of lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction. In June 2009, the court granted
defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction finding that plaintiffs’
federal claim for nuisance is barred by the political question doctrine and for lack of standing.
The plaintiffs are appealing the court’s dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit. The parties have filed their respective briefs with the court. The Ninth Circuit has
stayed the case until June 15, 2011.
Other
In addition, at times the Company becomes a party to other claims, lawsuits, arbitration
proceedings and administrative procedures in the ordinary course of business in the U.S., Australia
and other countries where the Company does business. In June 2007, the New York Office of the
Attorney General served a letter and subpoena on the Company, seeking information and documents
relating to the Company’s disclosure to investors of risks associated with possible climate change
and related legislation and regulations. The Company believes that it has made full and proper
disclosure of these potential risks.
Based on current information, the Company believes that the ultimate resolution of such other
pending or threatened proceedings is not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on its
financial position, results of operations or liquidity.
23
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(13) Segment Information
The Company reports its operations primarily through the following reportable operating
segments: “Western U.S. Mining,” “Midwestern U.S. Mining,” “Australian Mining,” “Trading and
Brokerage” and “Corporate and Other.” The Company’s chief operating decision maker uses Adjusted
EBITDA as the primary measure of segment profit and loss. The Company defines Adjusted EBITDA as
income from continuing operations before deducting net interest expense, income taxes, asset
retirement obligation expense and depreciation, depletion and amortization.
Operating segment results were as follows:
| Three Months Ended | ||||||||
| March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Revenues:
|
||||||||
|
Western U.S. Mining
|
$ | 703.7 | $ | 662.1 | ||||
|
Midwestern U.S. Mining
|
367.0 | 309.4 | ||||||
|
Australian Mining
|
580.6 | 446.5 | ||||||
|
Trading and Brokerage
|
83.9 | 90.1 | ||||||
|
Corporate and Other
|
9.7 | 7.5 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 1,744.9 | $ | 1,515.6 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Adjusted EBITDA:
|
||||||||
|
Western U.S. Mining
|
$ | 179.4 | $ | 207.9 | ||||
|
Midwestern U.S. Mining
|
109.9 | 74.1 | ||||||
|
Australian Mining
|
190.5 | 123.3 | ||||||
|
Trading and Brokerage
|
26.8 | 32.4 | ||||||
|
Corporate and Other
|
(90.4 | ) | (80.5 | ) | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$ | 416.2 | $ | 357.2 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
A reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to consolidated income from continuing operations follows:
| Three Months Ended | ||||||||
| March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Total Adjusted EBITDA
|
$ | 416.2 | $ | 357.2 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
108.8 | 105.5 | ||||||
|
Asset retirement obligation expense
|
13.1 | 9.5 | ||||||
|
Interest expense
|
51.0 | 50.0 | ||||||
|
Interest income
|
(4.1 | ) | (1.0 | ) | ||||
|
Income tax provision
|
67.8 | 56.1 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations, net of income taxes
|
$ | 179.6 | $ | 137.1 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
24
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(14) Supplemental Guarantor/Non-Guarantor Financial Information
In accordance with the indentures governing the 6.875% Senior Notes due March 2013 (redeemed
in the third quarter of 2010), the 5.875% Senior Notes due March 2016 (redeemed subsequent to March
31, 2011 as discussed in Note 15), the 7.375% Senior Notes due November 2016, the 6.5% Senior Notes
due September 2020 and the 7.875% Senior Notes due November 2026 (collectively; the Senior Notes),
certain wholly-owned U.S. subsidiaries of the Company have fully and unconditionally guaranteed
these Senior Notes, on a joint and several basis. Separate financial statements and other
disclosures concerning the Guarantor Subsidiaries are not presented because management believes
that such information is not material to the holders of the Senior Notes. The following historical
financial statement information is provided for the Guarantor/Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries.
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidating Statements of Operations
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parent | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | ||||||||||||||||||
| Company | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Eliminations | Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
$ | — | $ | 976.9 | $ | 897.0 | $ | (129.0 | ) | $ | 1,744.9 | |||||||||
|
Costs and expenses
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Operating costs and expenses
|
(82.8 | ) | 686.2 | 793.7 | (129.0 | ) | 1,268.1 | |||||||||||||
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
— | 74.2 | 34.6 | — | 108.8 | |||||||||||||||
|
Asset retirement obligation expense
|
— | 9.8 | 3.3 | — | 13.1 | |||||||||||||||
|
Selling and administrative expenses
|
8.5 | 50.0 | 3.1 | — | 61.6 | |||||||||||||||
|
Other operating (income) loss:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net (gain) loss on disposal or exchange of assets
|
— | (4.9 | ) | 0.9 | — | (4.0 | ) | |||||||||||||
|
(Income) loss from equity affiliates
|
(159.9 | ) | 1.9 | 1.1 | 159.9 | 3.0 | ||||||||||||||
|
Interest expense
|
51.1 | 13.2 | 3.4 | (16.7 | ) | 51.0 | ||||||||||||||
|
Interest income
|
(4.3 | ) | (5.3 | ) | (11.2 | ) | 16.7 | (4.1 | ) | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes
|
187.4 | 151.8 | 68.1 | (159.9 | ) | 247.4 | ||||||||||||||
|
Income tax provision
|
10.3 | 41.2 | 16.3 | — | 67.8 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations, net of income taxes
|
177.1 | 110.6 | 51.8 | (159.9 | ) | 179.6 | ||||||||||||||
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
(0.6 | ) | (0.3 | ) | — | — | (0.9 | ) | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net income
|
176.5 | 110.3 | 51.8 | (159.9 | ) | 178.7 | ||||||||||||||
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
— | — | 2.2 | — | 2.2 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net income attributable to common stockholders
|
$ | 176.5 | $ | 110.3 | $ | 49.6 | $ | (159.9 | ) | $ | 176.5 | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
25
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidating Statements of Operations
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parent | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | ||||||||||||||||||
| Company | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Eliminations | Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
$ | — | $ | 1,103.5 | $ | 597.9 | $ | (185.8 | ) | $ | 1,515.6 | |||||||||
|
Costs and expenses
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Operating costs and expenses
|
(28.3 | ) | 828.8 | 494.0 | (185.8 | ) | 1,108.7 | |||||||||||||
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
— | 72.4 | 33.1 | — | 105.5 | |||||||||||||||
|
Asset retirement obligation expense
|
— | 7.0 | 2.5 | — | 9.5 | |||||||||||||||
|
Selling and administrative expenses
|
9.1 | 44.6 | 1.7 | — | 55.4 | |||||||||||||||
|
Other operating (income) loss:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net gain on disposal or exchange of assets
|
— | (7.3 | ) | — | — | (7.3 | ) | |||||||||||||
|
(Income) loss from equity affiliates
|
(150.6 | ) | 1.8 | 1.2 | 149.2 | 1.6 | ||||||||||||||
|
Interest expense
|
49.5 | 12.8 | 3.7 | (16.0 | ) | 50.0 | ||||||||||||||
|
Interest income
|
(3.8 | ) | (5.4 | ) | (7.8 | ) | 16.0 | (1.0 | ) | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes
|
124.1 | 148.8 | 69.5 | (149.2 | ) | 193.2 | ||||||||||||||
|
Income tax provision (benefit)
|
(9.6 | ) | 48.9 | 16.8 | — | 56.1 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations, net of income taxes
|
133.7 | 99.9 | 52.7 | (149.2 | ) | 137.1 | ||||||||||||||
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
— | (0.4 | ) | — | — | (0.4 | ) | |||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net income
|
133.7 | 99.5 | 52.7 | (149.2 | ) | 136.7 | ||||||||||||||
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
— | — | 3.0 | — | 3.0 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net income attributable to common stockholders
|
$ | 133.7 | $ | 99.5 | $ | 49.7 | $ | (149.2 | ) | $ | 133.7 | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
26
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheets
| March 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parent | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Reclassifications/ | |||||||||||||||||
| Company | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Eliminations | Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Assets
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current assets
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$ | 791.4 | $ | 3.4 | $ | 478.4 | $ | — | $ | 1,273.2 | ||||||||||
|
Short-term investments
|
75.0 | — | 25.0 | — | 100.0 | |||||||||||||||
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
5.5 | 17.8 | 453.1 | — | 476.4 | |||||||||||||||
|
Inventories
|
— | 178.5 | 184.3 | — | 362.8 | |||||||||||||||
|
Assets from coal trading activities, net
|
— | 28.8 | 137.4 | — | 166.2 | |||||||||||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
— | 42.3 | 78.4 | (6.0 | ) | 114.7 | ||||||||||||||
|
Other current assets
|
396.2 | 38.8 | 117.9 | — | 552.9 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total current assets
|
1,268.1 | 309.6 | 1,474.5 | (6.0 | ) | 3,046.2 | ||||||||||||||
|
Property, plant, equipment and mine development, net
|
— | 4,697.1 | 2,724.4 | — | 7,421.5 | |||||||||||||||
|
Investments and other assets
|
9,464.8 | 194.5 | 112.8 | (8,715.9 | ) | 1,056.2 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total assets
|
$ | 10,732.9 | $ | 5,201.2 | $ | 4,311.7 | $ | (8,721.9 | ) | $ | 11,523.9 | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current liabilities
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current maturities of long-term debt
|
$ | 243.1 | $ | — | $ | 18.4 | $ | — | $ | 261.5 | ||||||||||
|
Payables to (receivables from) affiliates, net
|
2,156.9 | (2,560.2 | ) | 403.3 | — | — | ||||||||||||||
|
Liabilities from coal trading activities, net
|
— | 24.8 | 132.6 | — | 157.4 | |||||||||||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
6.0 | — | — | (6.0 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
54.4 | 688.4 | 483.0 | — | 1,225.8 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total current liabilities
|
2,460.4 | (1,847.0 | ) | 1,037.3 | (6.0 | ) | 1,644.7 | |||||||||||||
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
2,385.6 | 0.1 | 93.2 | — | 2,478.9 | |||||||||||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
140.0 | 120.8 | 317.4 | — | 578.2 | |||||||||||||||
|
Notes payable to (receivables from) affiliates, net
|
819.1 | (823.8 | ) | 4.7 | — | — | ||||||||||||||
|
Other noncurrent liabilities
|
58.9 | 1,666.4 | 205.0 | — | 1,930.3 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total liabilities
|
5,864.0 | (883.5 | ) | 1,657.6 | (6.0 | ) | 6,632.1 | |||||||||||||
|
Peabody Energy Corporation’s stockholders’ equity
|
4,868.9 | 6,084.7 | 2,631.2 | (8,715.9 | ) | 4,868.9 | ||||||||||||||
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
— | — | 22.9 | — | 22.9 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
4,868.9 | 6,084.7 | 2,654.1 | (8,715.9 | ) | 4,891.8 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$ | 10,732.9 | $ | 5,201.2 | $ | 4,311.7 | $ | (8,721.9 | ) | $ | 11,523.9 | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
27
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheets
| December 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parent | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Reclassifications/ | |||||||||||||||||
| Company | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Eliminations | Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Assets
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current assets
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$ | 903.8 | $ | 5.2 | $ | 386.2 | $ | — | $ | 1,295.2 | ||||||||||
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
2.1 | 5.5 | 550.6 | — | 558.2 | |||||||||||||||
|
Inventories
|
— | 168.0 | 164.9 | — | 332.9 | |||||||||||||||
|
Assets from coal trading activities, net
|
— | 23.8 | 168.7 | — | 192.5 | |||||||||||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
— | 78.6 | 47.9 | (6.1 | ) | 120.4 | ||||||||||||||
|
Other current assets
|
307.9 | 30.7 | 120.4 | — | 459.0 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total current assets
|
1,213.8 | 311.8 | 1,438.7 | (6.1 | ) | 2,958.2 | ||||||||||||||
|
Property, plant, equipment and mine development, net
|
— | 4,732.7 | 2,693.4 | — | 7,426.1 | |||||||||||||||
|
Investments and other assets
|
9,331.0 | 179.8 | 99.1 | (8,631.1 | ) | 978.8 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total assets
|
$ | 10,544.8 | $ | 5,224.3 | $ | 4,231.2 | $ | (8,637.2 | ) | $ | 11,363.1 | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current liabilities
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current maturities of long-term debt
|
$ | 25.0 | $ | — | $ | 18.2 | $ | — | $ | 43.2 | ||||||||||
|
Payables to (receivables from) affiliates, net
|
2,225.3 | (2,528.3 | ) | 303.0 | — | — | ||||||||||||||
|
Liabilities from coal trading activities, net
|
— | 29.5 | 152.2 | — | 181.7 | |||||||||||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
6.1 | — | — | (6.1 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
47.4 | 777.2 | 464.2 | — | 1,288.8 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total current liabilities
|
2,303.8 | (1,721.6 | ) | 937.6 | (6.1 | ) | 1,513.7 | |||||||||||||
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
2,609.6 | 0.1 | 97.1 | — | 2,706.8 | |||||||||||||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
93.2 | 135.4 | 311.2 | — | 539.8 | |||||||||||||||
|
Notes payable to (receivables from) affiliates, net
|
818.9 | (825.3 | ) | 6.4 | — | — | ||||||||||||||
|
Other noncurrent liabilities
|
58.6 | 1,652.8 | 202.1 | — | 1,913.5 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total liabilities
|
5,884.1 | (758.6 | ) | 1,554.4 | (6.1 | ) | 6,673.8 | |||||||||||||
|
Peabody Energy Corporation’s stockholders’ equity
|
4,660.7 | 5,982.9 | 2,648.2 | (8,631.1 | ) | 4,660.7 | ||||||||||||||
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
— | — | 28.6 | — | 28.6 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
4,660.7 | 5,982.9 | 2,676.8 | (8,631.1 | ) | 4,689.3 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$ | 10,544.8 | $ | 5,224.3 | $ | 4,231.2 | $ | (8,637.2 | ) | $ | 11,363.1 | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
28
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||
| Parent | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | ||||||||||||||
| Company | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Consolidated | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations
|
$ | 63.2 | $ | 185.7 | $ | (28.1 | ) | $ | 220.8 | |||||||
|
Net cash provided by (used in) discontinued operations
|
0.1 | (0.3 | ) | — | (0.2 | ) | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
63.3 | 185.4 | (28.1 | ) | 220.6 | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Additions to property, plant, equipment and
mine development
|
— | (39.1 | ) | (68.1 | ) | (107.2 | ) | |||||||||
|
Investment in Prairie State Energy Campus
|
— | (8.9 | ) | — | (8.9 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Proceeds from disposal of assets
|
— | 5.5 | — | 5.5 | ||||||||||||
|
Investment in equity affiliates and joint ventures
|
— | (1.1 | ) | — | (1.1 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Proceeds from sale of debt securities
|
— | — | 15.5 | 15.5 | ||||||||||||
|
Purchases of debt securities
|
— | — | (14.6 | ) | (14.6 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Purchases of short-term investments
|
(75.0 | ) | — | (25.0 | ) | (100.0 | ) | |||||||||
|
Other, net
|
— | (0.4 | ) | — | (0.4 | ) | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
(75.0 | ) | (44.0 | ) | (92.2 | ) | (211.2 | ) | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
(6.3 | ) | — | (3.7 | ) | (10.0 | ) | |||||||||
|
Dividends paid
|
(23.0 | ) | — | — | (23.0 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Repurchase of employee common stock relinquished for tax withholding
|
(15.1 | ) | — | — | (15.1 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Excess tax benefits related to share-based compensation
|
4.9 | — | — | 4.9 | ||||||||||||
|
Proceeds from stock options exercised
|
4.0 | — | — | 4.0 | ||||||||||||
|
Other, net
|
3.1 | — | 4.7 | 7.8 | ||||||||||||
|
Transactions with affiliates, net
|
(68.3 | ) | (143.2 | ) | 211.5 | — | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
(100.7 | ) | (143.2 | ) | 212.5 | (31.4 | ) | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
|
(112.4 | ) | (1.8 | ) | 92.2 | (22.0 | ) | |||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
903.8 | 5.2 | 386.2 | 1,295.2 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$ | 791.4 | $ | 3.4 | $ | 478.4 | $ | 1,273.2 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
29
Table of Contents
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
| Parent | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | ||||||||||||||
| Company | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Consolidated | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations
|
$ | (43.4 | ) | $ | 309.2 | $ | (87.4 | ) | $ | 178.4 | ||||||
|
Net cash used in discontinued operations
|
(6.0 | ) | (0.6 | ) | — | (6.6 | ) | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
(49.4 | ) | 308.6 | (87.4 | ) | 171.8 | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Additions to property, plant, equipment and
mine development
|
— | (74.3 | ) | (14.1 | ) | (88.4 | ) | |||||||||
|
Investment in Prairie State Energy Campus
|
— | (12.2 | ) | — | (12.2 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Proceeds from disposal of assets
|
— | 3.5 | 0.9 | 4.4 | ||||||||||||
|
Investment in equity affiliates and joint ventures
|
— | (15.0 | ) | (0.7 | ) | (15.7 | ) | |||||||||
|
Other, net
|
— | (0.8 | ) | — | (0.8 | ) | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
— | (98.8 | ) | (13.9 | ) | (112.7 | ) | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
— | — | (2.6 | ) | (2.6 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Dividends paid
|
(18.8 | ) | — | — | (18.8 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Repurchase of employee common stock relinquished for tax withholding
|
(7.8 | ) | — | — | (7.8 | ) | ||||||||||
|
Proceeds from stock options exercised
|
2.0 | — | — | 2.0 | ||||||||||||
|
Other, net
|
2.8 | (1.0 | ) | 2.9 | 4.7 | |||||||||||
|
Transactions with affiliates, net
|
127.8 | (208.9 | ) | 81.1 | — | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
106.0 | (209.9 | ) | 81.4 | (22.5 | ) | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
|
56.6 | (0.1 | ) | (19.9 | ) | 36.6 | ||||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
368.4 | 0.2 | 620.2 | 988.8 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$ | 425.0 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 600.3 | $ | 1,025.4 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
(15) Subsequent Event
On April 15, 2011, the Company used cash on hand to redeem its $218.1 million aggregate
principal 5.875% Senior Notes due in April 2016 (the 5.875% Notes). In compliance with the terms of
the indenture governing the 5.875% Notes, the redemption price was equal to 100.979% of the
aggregate principal amount of the 5.875% Notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest to April 15, 2011.
The Company recognized costs of $1.7 million associated with the redemption.
30
Table of Contents
Cautionary Notice Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This report includes statements of our expectations, intentions, plans and beliefs that
constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of
1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and are intended to come within the
safe harbor protection provided by those sections. These statements relate to future events or our
future financial performance, including, without limitation, the section captioned “Outlook” in
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. We use words
such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “expect,” “may,” “project,” “should,” “estimate,” or “plan” or
other similar words to identify forward-looking statements.
Without limiting the foregoing, all statements relating to our future operating results,
anticipated capital expenditures, future cash flows and borrowings, and sources of funding are
forward-looking statements and speak only as of the date of this report. These forward-looking
statements are based on numerous assumptions that we believe are reasonable, but are subject to a
wide range of uncertainties and business risks and actual results may differ materially from those
discussed in these statements. Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ
materially are:
| • | demand for coal in the United States (U.S.) and the seaborne thermal and metallurgical coal markets; | ||
| • | price volatility and demand, particularly in higher-margin products and in our trading and brokerage businesses; | ||
| • | impact of weather on demand, production and transportation; | ||
| • | reductions and/or deferrals of purchases by major customers and ability to renew sales contracts; | ||
| • | credit and performance risks associated with customers, suppliers, co-shippers, and trading, banks and other financial counterparties; | ||
| • | geologic, equipment, permitting and operational risks related to mining; | ||
| • | transportation availability, performance and costs; | ||
| • | availability, timing of delivery and costs of key supplies, capital equipment or commodities such as diesel fuel, steel, explosives and tires; | ||
| • | successful implementation of business strategies, including our Btu Conversion and generation development initiatives; | ||
| • | negotiation of labor contracts, employee relations and workforce availability; | ||
| • | changes in postretirement benefit and pension obligations and their related funding requirements; | ||
| • | replacement and development of coal reserves; | ||
| • | availability, access to and the related cost of capital and financial markets; | ||
| • | effects of changes in interest rates and currency exchange rates (primarily the Australian dollar); | ||
| • | effects of acquisitions or divestitures; | ||
| • | economic strength and political stability of countries in which we have operations or serve customers; | ||
| • | legislation, regulations and court decisions or other government actions, including new environmental requirements, changes in income tax regulations or other regulatory taxes; | ||
| • | litigation, including claims not yet asserted; | ||
| • | terrorist attacks or threats; | ||
| • | impacts of pandemic illnesses; and | ||
| • | other factors, including those discussed in Legal Proceedings. |
When considering these forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind the cautionary
statements in this document and in our other Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings,
including the more detailed discussion of these factors, as well as other factors that could affect
our results, contained in Item 1A. “Risk Factors” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2010. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which such
statements were made, and we undertake no obligation to update these statements except as required
by federal securities laws.
31
Table of Contents
Overview
We are the world’s largest private sector coal company, with majority interests in 28 coal
mining operations in the U.S. and Australia. In 2010, we produced 218.4 million tons of coal and
sold 245.9 million tons of coal.
We conduct business through four principal operating segments: Western U.S. Mining, Midwestern
U.S. Mining, Australian Mining, and Trading and Brokerage. Our fifth segment, Corporate and Other,
includes mining and export/transportation joint ventures, energy-related commercial activities, as
well as the management of our vast coal reserve and real estate holdings. In the U.S., we typically
sell coal to utility customers under long-term contracts (those with terms longer than one year).
In Australia, our production is sold primarily into the export metallurgical and thermal markets.
Historically, we predominately entered into multi-year international coal agreements that contained
provisions allowing either party to commence a renegotiation of the agreement price annually in the
second quarter of each year. Current industry practice, and our practice, is to negotiate pricing
for metallurgical coal contracts quarterly and seaborne thermal contracts annually. During 2010,
approximately 91% of our worldwide sales (by volume) were under long-term contracts. For the year
ended December 31, 2010, 84% of our total sales (by volume) were to U.S. electricity generators,
14% were to customers outside the U.S. and 2% were to the U.S. industrial sector.
We continue to explore Btu Conversion projects that expand the uses of coal through
coal-to-liquids (CTL) and coal-to-gas (CTG) technologies. Our participation in generation
development projects involves using our surface lands and coal reserves as the basis for mine-mouth
plants, such as with our involvement in the Prairie State Energy Campus (Prairie State). We are
also advancing several initiatives associated with clean coal technologies, including carbon
capture and storage (CCS).
Recent Events
On April 15, 2011, we used cash on hand to redeem our $218.1 million aggregate principal
5.875% Senior Notes due in April 2016 (the 5.875% Notes). In compliance with the terms of the
indenture governing the 5.875% Notes, the redemption price was equal to 100.979% of the aggregate
principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to April 15, 2011.
In February 2011, we announced a throughput and development agreement for up to 24 million
metric tons per year of Powder River Basin coal through a planned West Coast export facility.
Permitting is currently under way.
Results of Operations
Adjusted EBITDA
The discussion of our results of operations below includes references to and analysis of our
segments’ Adjusted EBITDA results. We define Adjusted EBITDA as income from continuing operations
before deducting net interest expense, income taxes, asset retirement obligation expense and
depreciation, depletion and amortization. Adjusted EBITDA is used by management to measure our
segments’ operating performance, and management also believes it is a useful indicator of our
ability to meet debt service and capital expenditure requirements. Because Adjusted EBITDA is not
calculated identically by all companies, our calculation may not be comparable to similarly titled
measures of other companies. Adjusted EBITDA is reconciled to its most comparable measure, under
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), in Note 13 to our unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements.
Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2010
Summary
The global coal supply-demand balance remains tight. Coal-fueled electricity generation
increased an average of 10% in China and India in the first quarter of 2011 and global steel
production rose an estimated 10%, while coal supplies were constrained by heavy rains across the
Southern Hemisphere. Increasing global coal demand has led to higher pricing for both
metallurgical and thermal coal during the first quarter of 2011. Metallurgical coal from our
Australian mines has been priced off the benchmark for high-quality hard coking coal price of $330
per tonne for three-month contracts. We are currently pricing approximately 30-40% of our
Australian seaborne thermal coal for delivery over the next year off of the benchmark price of
nearly $130 per tonne.
32
Table of Contents
U.S. coal shipments increased an estimated 2% year to date to serve higher domestic steel
production and rising export demand, offset by reduced domestic electricity generation. We
estimate inventory reductions at U.S. utilities during the first
quarter of 2011 were twice the
five-year average and ended the quarter 5% lower than the prior year on a days-use basis.
Revenue increased compared to the prior year by $229.3 million driven by increased pricing in
Australia and higher U.S. volumes. Segment Adjusted EBITDA increased over the prior year by $68.9
million primarily due to the increased pricing in Australia, partially offset by the unfavorable
current year weather-related impacts in Australia on volume and costs.
Income from continuing operations, net of income taxes, increased compared to the prior year
by $42.5 million due to the increase in Segment Adjusted EBITDA discussed above, partially offset
by increased income taxes and decreased Corporate and Other Adjusted EBITDA.
At March 31, 2011, our available liquidity was $2.8 billion, as discussed further in
“Liquidity and Capital Resources.”
Tons Sold
The following table presents tons sold by operating segment:
| Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
| March 31, | Increase (Decrease) | |||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | Tons | % | |||||||||||||
| (Tons in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Western U.S. Mining
|
43.8 | 40.0 | 3.8 | 9.5 | % | |||||||||||
|
Midwestern U.S. Mining
|
7.6 | 7.1 | 0.5 | 7.0 | % | |||||||||||
|
Australian Mining
|
5.6 | 6.2 | (0.6 | ) | (9.7 | )% | ||||||||||
|
Trading and Brokerage
|
4.2 | 5.0 | (0.8 | ) | (16.0 | )% | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total tons sold
|
61.2 | 58.3 | 2.9 | 5.0 | % | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
Revenues
The following table presents revenues by operating segment:
| Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
| March 31, | Increase (Decrease) | |||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | Tons | % | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Western U.S. Mining
|
$ | 703.7 | $ | 662.1 | $ | 41.6 | 6.3 | % | ||||||||
|
Midwestern U.S. Mining
|
367.0 | 309.4 | 57.6 | 18.6 | % | |||||||||||
|
Australian Mining
|
580.6 | 446.5 | 134.1 | 30.0 | % | |||||||||||
|
Trading and Brokerage
|
83.9 | 90.1 | (6.2 | ) | (6.9 | )% | ||||||||||
|
Corporate and Other
|
9.7 | 7.5 | 2.2 | 29.3 | % | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
$ | 1,744.9 | $ | 1,515.6 | $ | 229.3 | 15.1 | % | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
The increase in Australian Mining operations’ revenues was driven by a higher weighted
average sales price (43.0%), led by increased pricing on seaborne metallurgical and thermal coal
due to increased global coal demand. Volumes were down from the prior year (9.7%) as the region
was affected by the flooding in Queensland that began in late 2010 and carried over into 2011,
which negatively impacted our production and restricted throughput due to damaged port and rail
systems. Metallurgical coal shipments of 2.1 million tons were 0.2 million tons less than the
prior year due to the flooding.
33
Table of Contents
In the Midwestern U.S. Mining segment, revenue improvements were due to higher volumes (7.0%)
on increased demand led by our Bear Run Mine (commissioned in the second quarter of 2010) and our
Wild Boar Mine (commissioned in the fourth quarter of 2010). This segment also benefited from a
higher weighted average sales price (10.6%) driven by favorable contracts signed in recent years.
Western U.S. Mining operations’ revenues were higher compared to the prior year due to
increased sales volumes (9.5%) driven by our Powder River Basin and Southwest regions on improved
demand due partly to customer inventory builds prior to the summer burn months. Our weighted
average sales price decreased by 2.9% due to a combination of sales mix and the expiration of some
higher priced, long-term contracts signed before the economic recession in late 2008 and during
2009, resulting in a partial offset to the increased volumes.
Trading and Brokerage revenues were down primarily due to unfavorable market movements
against positions held in our international trading book, driven, in part, by pricing volatility
resulting from the Japan earthquake that occurred in March 2011. This decrease was partially
offset by improved revenues on brokerage activities.
Segment Adjusted EBITDA
The following table presents segment Adjusted EBITDA by operating segment:
| Increase (Decrease) | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | to Segment Adjusted | |||||||||||||||
| March 31, | EBITDA | |||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | $ | % | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Western U.S. Mining
|
$ | 179.4 | $ | 207.9 | $ | (28.5 | ) | (13.7 | )% | |||||||
|
Midwestern U.S. Mining
|
109.9 | 74.1 | 35.8 | 48.3 | % | |||||||||||
|
Australian Mining
|
190.5 | 123.3 | 67.2 | 54.5 | % | |||||||||||
|
Trading and Brokerage
|
26.8 | 32.4 | (5.6 | ) | (17.3 | )% | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total Segment Adjusted EBITDA
|
$ | 506.6 | $ | 437.7 | $ | 68.9 | 15.7 | % | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
Our Australian Mining segment benefitted from a higher weighted average sales price ($173.8
million), partially offset by weather-related volume decreases ($23.3 million) as discussed above.
Also negatively impacting Australian Mining Adjusted EBITDA were unfavorable geological conditions
at certain of our mines ($18.1 million), decreased longwall production driven by a fourth quarter
2010 roof fall at one of our mines ($17.9 million), the weather-related impact on our costs and
productivity ($17.6 million), cost escalations for labor, materials and services ($13.5 million),
increased royalty expense associated with our higher-priced coal shipments ($13.3 million) and
unfavorable foreign currency impact on operating costs, net of hedging ($8.2 million).
Midwestern U.S. Mining operations Adjusted EBITDA increased compared to the prior year due to
a higher weighted average sales price ($21.0 million) and increased volumes ($10.4 million) as
discussed above, decreased sales related expenses ($5.7 million) due to more economical shipping
methods and shorter hauling distances, and decreased commodity costs, net of hedging ($5.2
million). These favorable impacts were partially offset by increased materials and services costs
($6.5 million) due to compliance measures and geological conditions at some of our underground
mines.
Western U.S. Mining operations’ Adjusted EBITDA decreased compared to the prior year due to:
| • | Higher equipment repairs and scheduled maintenance costs ($14.6 million); | ||
| • | A lower weighted average sales price ($10.8 million) as discussed above; | ||
| • | Increased materials and services costs ($7.9 million) primarily due to the increased volumes as discussed above; | ||
| • | Increased labor costs ($7.7 million) due to a combination of increased headcount in support of the higher volumes and increased wage rates; and | ||
| • | Increased commodity costs, net of hedging ($6.6 million) |
The above decreases to Western U.S. Mining operations’ Adjusted EBITDA were partially offset
by increased volumes ($24.2 million) as discussed above.
34
Table of Contents
Trading and Brokerage Adjusted EBITDA decreased primarily due to the lower trading results
discussed above, partially offset by higher margins on brokerage activities.
Income From Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes
The following table presents income from continuing operations before income taxes:
| Three Months Ended | Increase (Decrease) | |||||||||||||||
| March 31, | to Income | |||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | $ | % | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Total Segment Adjusted EBITDA
|
$ | 506.6 | $ | 437.7 | $ | 68.9 | 15.7 | % | ||||||||
|
Corporate and Other Adjusted EBITDA
(1)
|
(90.4 | ) | (80.5 | ) | (9.9 | ) | (12.3 | )% | ||||||||
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
(108.8 | ) | (105.5 | ) | (3.3 | ) | (3.1 | )% | ||||||||
|
Asset retirement obligation expense
|
(13.1 | ) | (9.5 | ) | (3.6 | ) | (37.9 | )% | ||||||||
|
Interest expense
|
(51.0 | ) | (50.0 | ) | (1.0 | ) | (2.0 | )% | ||||||||
|
Interest income
|
4.1 | 1.0 | 3.1 | 310.0 | % | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations
before income taxes
|
$ | 247.4 | $ | 193.2 | $ | 54.2 | 28.1 | % | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Corporate and Other Adjusted EBITDA results include selling and administrative expenses, equity income (loss) from our joint ventures, net gains on asset disposals or exchanges, activity related to our captive insurance entity, costs associated with past mining obligations and revenues and expenses related to our other commercial activities such as generation development and Btu Conversion development costs. |
Income from continuing operations before income taxes was higher compared to the prior
year primarily due to the higher Total Segment Adjusted EBITDA discussed above, partially offset
by lower Corporate and Other Adjusted EBITDA, driven by:
| • | Current year increase in selling and administrative expenses due to costs to support our business development and international expansion (e.g. headcount, travel, professional services); and | ||
| • | Lower net gain on disposal or exchange of assets in the current year. |
Net Income Attributable to Common Stockholders
The following table presents net income attributable to common stockholders:
| Three Months Ended | Increase (Decrease) | |||||||||||||||
| March 31, | to Income | |||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | $ | % | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations
before income taxes
|
$ | 247.4 | $ | 193.2 | $ | 54.2 | 28.1 | % | ||||||||
|
Income tax provision
|
(67.8 | ) | (56.1 | ) | (11.7 | ) | (20.9 | )% | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Income from continuing operations,
net of income taxes
|
179.6 | 137.1 | 42.5 | 31.0 | % | |||||||||||
|
Loss from discontinued operations
|
(0.9 | ) | (0.4 | ) | (0.5 | ) | 125.0 | % | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net income
|
178.7 | 136.7 | 42.0 | 30.7 | % | |||||||||||
|
Less: Net income attributable to
noncontrolling interests
|
2.2 | 3.0 | 0.8 | 26.7 | % | |||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net income attributable to common
stockholders
|
$ | 176.5 | $ | 133.7 | $ | 42.8 | 32.0 | % | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
35
Table of Contents
Net income attributable to common stockholders increased compared to the prior year due
to the increased income from continuing operations before income taxes as discussed above.
The income tax provision increased over the prior year as a result of additional current year
income tax primarily due to higher current year earnings ($19.0 million), partially offset by
valuation allowances related primarily to general business credits recorded in the prior year
($3.9 million).
Other
The net fair value of our diesel fuel hedges increased from an asset of $40.3 million at
December 31, 2010 to an asset of $133.5 million at March 31, 2011 due to the rising cost of crude
oil in the current year. The net fair value of our foreign currency hedges increased from an asset
of $640.1 million at December 31, 2010 to an asset of $687.2 million at March 31, 2011 due to the
strengthening of the Australian dollar against the U.S. dollar in the current year. These
increases are reflected in “Other current assets” and “Investments and other assets” in the
condensed consolidated balance sheets
The net fair value of our coal trading positions designated as cash flow hedges of future
sales decreased from a liability of $174.2 million at December 31, 2010 to a liability of $248.7
million at March 31, 2011 due to market price movements contrary to our positions held.
Outlook
Near-Term Outlook
The unfortunate disaster in Japan which occurred in March 2011 has a number of implications for coal. Modest near-term
dislocations on coal imports in the directly affected areas are likely to be offset by increased
coal use for steel mills elsewhere in Japan and Asia, coal-fueled power plants within Japan running
at higher utilization rates, and increased European coal demand as some nuclear units are taken off
line for extended inspections.
In April 2011, we encountered difficult geology at our Twentymile Mine, which is part of our
Western U.S. Mining segment. The U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has approved an
interim plan for the mine to resume longwall production. The plan is conditional on no further
geologic difficulties in the affected area, and we along with MSHA will continue to monitor
progress.
The World Bank estimates global economic activity, as measured by gross domestic product
(GDP), will grow 3.3% in 2011 and 3.6% in 2012, with developing economies, led by China and India,
expanding 6.0% or more in each year, more than twice the growth expected for high income countries.
China’s GDP is projected by the World Bank to grow 8.7% in 2011. India, the world’s second fastest
growing economy, is projected by the World Bank to grow 8.4% in 2011.
| • | According to the World Steel Association (WSA), global steel use is expected to increase 5.9% in 2011. In 2012, it is forecast that world steel demand will grow further by 6.0%. The WSA forecasts India’s steel demand will rise 13.3% in 2011. Industry reports indicate China is expected to grow its steel use 5% in 2011 and 2012. | ||
| • | Industry reports forecast that approximately 90 gigawatts of coal-fueled generation are expected to be under construction and/or come online in 2011, requiring more than 340 million tons of coal. China and India continue to make up the vast majority of this growth. | ||
| • | Given coal supply constraints in key nations such as Australia, Indonesia, South Africa, South America and Canada, along with continued growth in steel production and electricity generation from coal, prices for seaborne metallurgical and thermal coal have been increasing. High-quality hard coking coal prices have increased from $225 per tonne for quarterly contracts commencing January 2011 to $330 per tonne for quarterly contracts commencing April 2011. |
36
Table of Contents
Accordingly to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Short-Term Energy Outlook,
2011 coal consumption (including exports) is expected to be essentially on par with 2010, utility
stockpiles are projected to decline modestly in 2011, while production is expected to increase
slightly. U.S. coal demand growth from the electric power sector is projected to resume in 2012.
U.S.
natural gas consumption increased 5.7% and production rose 4.5% in 2010,
according to the EIA. The NYMEX — Henry Hub spot price averaged $4.31 per thousand cubic feet in
the first quarter of 2011, 37% below the 2007 — 2009 average of $6.79 per thousand cubic feet.
The EIA also projects that natural gas consumption will increase slightly in 2011, production
growth will continue and gas inventory will increase. Growth in natural gas consumption is
expected to moderate in 2012.
U.S. shale natural gas development continues in the U.S., accounting for approximately 25% of
gas production in 2010 and is estimated by the PIRA Energy Group to grow to over 30% of gas share
over the next several years. This is expected to lead to continued growth in natural gas-fired
electricity in the U.S.
As of April 15, 2011, in Australia we had 4 to 5 million tons of our targeted 2011
metallurgical coal volumes and 5 to 6 million tons of our planned 2011 seaborne thermal coal
volumes available for pricing. For 2012 in Australia, all of our expected metallurgical coal sales
and 80 to 85 percent of our estimated seaborne thermal coal sales are available to price. In the
U.S., we have modest amounts of coal to price for 2011 delivery, 30% to 35% for 2012 and 70% to 80%
for 2013. We may continue to adjust our production levels in response to change in market demand.
We continue to manage costs and operating performance in an effort to mitigate external cost
pressures, geologic conditions and potential shipping delays resulting from adverse port and rail
performance. We may have higher per ton costs as a result of suboptimal production levels due to
market-driven changes in demand. We may also encounter poor geologic conditions, lower third-party
contract miner or brokerage performance or unforeseen equipment problems that limit our ability to
produce at forecasted levels. To the extent upward pressure on costs exceeds our ability to
realize sales increases, or if we experience unanticipated operating or transportation
difficulties, our operating margins would be negatively impacted. Reductions in the relative cost
of other fuels, including natural gas, could impact the use of coal for electricity generation. See
Cautionary Notice Regarding Forward-Looking Statements and Item 1A. “Risk Factors” of our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 for additional considerations regarding
our outlook.
We rely on ongoing access to worldwide financial markets for capital, insurance, hedging and
investments through a wide variety of financial instruments and contracts. To the extent these
markets are not available or increase significantly in cost, this could have a negative impact on
our ability to meet our business goals. Similarly, many of our customers and suppliers rely on the
availability of the financial markets to secure the necessary financing and financial surety
(letters of credit, bank guarantees, performance bonds, etc.) to complete transactions with us. To
the extent customers and suppliers are not able to secure this financial support, it could have a
negative impact on our results of operations and/or counterparty credit exposure.
Financial Regulation.
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act), which includes a number of
provisions applicable to us in the areas of corporate governance, executive compensation and mine
safety and extractive industries disclosure. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act imposes additional
regulation of financial derivatives transactions that may apply to our hedging and our Trading and
Brokerage activities. Although the Dodd-Frank Act became generally effective upon its enactment,
many provisions have extended implementation periods and delayed effective dates and require
further action by the federal regulatory authorities. As a result, in many respects the ultimate
impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on us will not be fully known for an extended period of time. We do
expect that the Dodd-Frank Act will increase compliance and transaction costs associated with our
hedging and Trading and Brokerage activities. Until the various provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act
are finalized, along with any clarifying or implementation guidance, the extent of any impact
cannot be determined at this time.
The potential for increased financial regulation is also evident in the European Union as the
European Commission is considering a number of initiatives around financial derivatives
transactions. These new regulations could also impact our hedging and Trading and Brokerage
activities.
37
Table of Contents
Minerals Resource Rent Tax.
On May 2, 2010, the Australian government released a report on
Australia’s Future Tax System, which included a recommendation to replace the current resource
taxing arrangements imposed on non-renewable resources by the Australian federal and state
governments with a uniform resource rent tax (the Resource Tax) imposed and administered by the
Australian government. As proposed, the Resource Tax would be profit-based and would apply to
non-renewable resources projects, including existing projects. On July 2, 2010, the Australian
government announced changes to the Resource Tax and proposed a new minerals resource rent tax (the
MRRT). The MRRT would still be profit-based, but measures were introduced to lessen the impact of
the MRRT. The Australian government and major industry policy makers are actively engaged to work
through various structural aspects of the proposed MRRT together with detailed implementation
issues. The Committee charged with consulting with industry and preparing recommendations as to
the final form of the MRRT submitted its report in late December 2010. The Committee’s
recommendations largely endorse the mining industry’s understanding as to what was agreed with the
federal government prior to the federal election. In March 2011, the Committee’s recommendations
were accepted by the federal government, which included the recommendation that all state royalties
(current and future) are creditable against MRRT payments. An implementation group was formed,
which includes industry participants, to assist with drafting the legislation. The draft law is
expected to be presented to the Australian Parliament in late 2011, and if the MRRT becomes law, it
is intended to become effective July 1, 2012. If the MRRT were to become law, it may affect the
level of taxation incurred by our Australian operations from the effective date forward.
Long-Term Outlook
Our long-term global outlook remains positive. According to the BP Statistical Review of World
Energy 2010, coal has been the fastest-growing fuel in the world for the past decade.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates in its World Energy Outlook 2010, current
policies scenario, that world primary energy demand will grow 47% between 2008 and 2035. Demand for
coal is projected to rise 59%, and the growth in global electricity generation from coal is
expected to be greater than the growth in oil, natural gas, nuclear, hydro, biomass, geothermal and
solar combined. China and India account for more than 85% of the 2008 — 2035 coal-based primary
energy demand growth.
Under the current policies scenario, the IEA expects coal to retain its strong presence as a
fuel for the power sector worldwide. Coal’s share of the power generation mix was 41% in 2008. By
2035, the IEA estimates coal’s fuel share to be 43% as it continues to have the largest share of
worldwide electric power production. Currently, we estimate approximately 390 gigawatts of
coal-fueled electricity generating plants are planned or under construction around the world, with
expected online dates ranging between 2011 and 2015. When complete, those plants would require an
estimated 1.2 billion tons of annual coal demand. While coal-based plant retirements are expected,
the EIA is projecting U.S. coal demand to remain relatively constant through 2015.
The IEA projects global natural gas-fueled electricity generation will have a compound annual
growth rate of 2.5%, from 4.3 trillion kilowatt hours in 2008 to 8.3 trillion kilowatt hours in
2035. The total amount of electricity generated from natural gas is expected to be approximately
one-half the total for coal, even in 2035. Renewables are projected to comprise 23% of the 2035
fuel mix versus 19% in 2008. Nuclear power is expected to grow 52%, however its share of total
generation is expected to fall from 13.5% to 11% between 2008 and 2035. The recent events in Japan
may impact these projections. Generation from liquid fuels is projected to decline an average of
2.2% annually to 1.5% of the 2035 generation mix.
We believe that Btu Conversion applications such as CTG and CTL plants represent an avenue for
potential long-term industry growth. Several CTG and CTL facilities are currently under development
in China and India.
We continue to support clean coal technology development toward the ultimate goal of near-zero
emissions, and we are advancing more than a dozen projects and partnerships in the U.S., China and
Australia. Clean coal technology development in the U.S. has funding earmarked under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. In addition, the Interagency Task Force on Carbon Capture
and Storage was formed to develop a comprehensive and coordinated federal strategy surrounding the
commercial development of commercial CCS projects.
38
Table of Contents
Enactment of laws or passage of regulations regarding emissions from the combustion of coal by
the U.S. or some of its states or by other countries, or other actions to limit such emissions,
could result in electricity generators switching from coal to other fuel sources. The potential
financial impact on us of future laws or regulations will depend upon the degree to which any such
laws or regulations force electricity generators to diminish their reliance on coal as a fuel
source. That, in turn, will depend on a number of factors, including the specific requirements
imposed by any such laws or regulations, the time periods over which those laws or regulations
would be phased in and the state of commercial development and deployment of CCS technologies. In
view of the significant uncertainty surrounding each of these factors, it is not possible for us to
reasonably predict the impact that any such laws or regulations may have on our results of
operations, financial condition or cash flows.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Capital Resources
Our primary sources of cash include sales of our coal production to customers, cash generated
from our trading and brokerage activities, sales of non-core assets and financing transactions.
Along with cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments, our liquidity includes the
available balances from our revolving credit facility (the Revolver) under our unsecured credit
facility (Credit Facility), accounts receivable securitization program and a bank overdraft
facility in Australia. Our available liquidity includes $1.5 billion available for borrowing under
the Revolver, net of outstanding letters of credit, and available capacity under our accounts
receivable securitization program of $20.4 million, net of outstanding letters of credit and
amounts drawn. Our liquidity is also impacted by activity under certain bilateral cash
collateralization arrangements. As of March 31, 2011, we had cash and cash equivalents of $1.3
billion, short-term investments of $100.0 million and our total available liquidity was $2.8
billion.
We currently expect that our available liquidity and cash flow from operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated capital requirements during the next 12 months and for the
foreseeable future, as described below in ‘Capital Requirements.’ In addition to the above items,
alternative sources of liquidity include the ability to offer and sell securities under our shelf
registration statement filed with the SEC.
As part of our trading and brokerage activities, we may be required to post margin with an
exchange or one of our counterparties. The amount and timing of margin posted can vary with the
volume of trades and market price volatility. For the three months ended March 31, 2011, cash
outflows for margin were $50.0 million, while for the three months ended March 31, 2010 margin
activities resulted in a cash inflow of $21.0 million.
Capital Requirements
Our primary uses of cash include our cash costs of coal production, capital expenditures, coal
reserve lease and royalty payments, debt service costs (interest and principal), lease obligations,
take or pay obligations and costs related to past mining obligations. Future dividends and share
repurchases, among other restricted items, are subject to limitations imposed by the covenants of
certain of our debt instruments. We generally fund our capital expenditure requirements with cash
generated from operations.
Capital Expenditures
. Capital expenditures for 2011 are anticipated to be $900 to $950
million; including $500 to $550 million earmarked for new mines, expansion and extension projects.
Approximately 70% of the growth and expansion capital is targeted for various Australian projects
for metallurgical and thermal coal, with the remainder in the U.S. Estimated capital expenditures
also include funding for our share of construction costs for Prairie State.
Prairie State
. We spent $8.9 million during the three months ended March 31, 2011 representing
our 5.06% share of the construction costs. Included in “Investments and other assets” in the
condensed consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are costs of
$211.4 million and $202.5 million, respectively. Our share of total construction costs for Prairie
State is expected to be approximately $250 million, with most of the remaining funding expected in
2011.
There were no other material changes to our Capital Requirements from the information provided
in Item 7 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
39
Table of Contents
Total Indebtedness.
Our total indebtedness as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010,
consisted of the following:
| March 31, | December 31, | |||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||
|
Term Loan
|
$ | 487.5 | $ | 493.8 | ||||
|
5.875% Senior Notes due April 2016
|
218.1 | 218.1 | ||||||
|
7.375% Senior Notes due November 2016
|
650.0 | 650.0 | ||||||
|
6.5% Senior Notes due September 2020
|
650.0 | 650.0 | ||||||
|
7.875% Senior Notes due November 2026
|
247.2 | 247.2 | ||||||
|
Convertible Junior Subordinated Debentures due 2066
|
373.8 | 373.3 | ||||||
|
6.34% Series B Bonds due December 2014
|
12.0 | 12.0 | ||||||
|
6.84% Series C Bonds due December 2016
|
33.0 | 33.0 | ||||||
|
Capital Lease Obligations
|
66.0 | 69.6 | ||||||
|
Fair value hedge adjustment
|
2.1 | 2.2 | ||||||
|
Other
|
0.7 | 0.8 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total Debt
|
$ | 2,740.4 | $ | 2,750.0 | ||||
|
|
||||||||
We were in compliance with all of the covenants of the Credit Facility, the 5.875% Senior
Notes, the 7.375% Senior Notes, the 6.5% Senior Notes, the 7.875% Senior Notes and the Debentures
as of March 31, 2011.
On April 15, 2011, we used cash on hand to redeem our $218.1 million aggregate principal
5.875% Senior Notes due in April 2016 (the 5.875% Notes). In compliance with the terms of the
indenture governing the 5.875% Notes, the redemption price was equal to 100.979% of the aggregate
principal amount of the notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest to April 15, 2011. We recognized
costs of $1.7 million associated with the redemption.
Historical Cash Flows
| Three Months Ended | Increase (Decreas e) | |||||||||||||||
| March 31, | To Cash Flow | |||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | $ | % | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
$ | 220.6 | $ | 171.8 | $ | 48.8 | 28.4 | % | ||||||||
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
(211.2 | ) | (112.7 | ) | (98.5 | ) | (87.4 | )% | ||||||||
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
(31.4 | ) | (22.5 | ) | (8.9 | ) | (39.6 | )% | ||||||||
Operating Activities.
The changes from the prior year were driven by the following:
| • | Increased operating cash flows generated from our Australian Mining operations driven by higher pricing combined with strong accounts receivable collections in the current year; partially offset by | ||
| • | Increased net margin posted for our Trading and Brokerage derivative instruments in the current year that resulted from the coal and freight price volatility experienced in the first quarter of 2011; and | ||
| • | Lower utilization of our accounts receivable securitization program in the current year. |
Investing Activities.
The changes from the prior year were driven by the following:
| • | Current year purchases of short-term investments of $100.0 million; and | ||
| • | Higher current year capital spending of $18.8 million related primarily to our organic growth projects in the U.S and Australia; partially offset by | ||
| • | Prior year acquisition of a $15.0 million equity investment. |
Financing Activities.
The increase in cash used compared to the prior year was due to the
following:
| • | Current year increase in payments of long-term debt of $7.4 million primarily related to a scheduled quarterly payment on our term loan facility; and | ||
| • | Increased dividends paid of $4.7 million due to a higher dividend rate in the current year. |
40
Table of Contents
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
In the normal course of business, we are a party to certain off-balance sheet arrangements.
These arrangements include guarantees, indemnifications, financial instruments with off-balance
sheet risk, such as bank letters of credit, bank guarantees and surety bonds and our accounts
receivable securitization program. Assets and liabilities related to these arrangements are not
reflected in our condensed consolidated balance sheets, and we do not expect any material adverse
effects on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows to result from these
off-balance sheet arrangements.
Accounts Receivable Securitization.
We have an accounts receivable securitization program
(securitization program) with a maximum capacity of $275.0 million through our wholly-owned,
bankruptcy-remote subsidiary (Seller). At March 31, 2011, we had $20.4 million available under the
securitization program, net of outstanding letters of credit and amounts drawn. Under the
securitization program, we contribute, on a revolving basis, trade receivables of most of our U.S.
subsidiaries to the Seller, which then sells the receivables in their entirety to a consortium of
unaffiliated asset-backed commercial paper conduits (the Conduits). After the sale we, as servicer
of the assets, collect the receivables on behalf of the Conduits for a nominal servicing fee. We
utilize proceeds from the sale of our accounts receivable as an alternative to short-term
borrowings under our Credit Facility, effectively managing our overall borrowing costs and
providing an additional source for working capital. The securitization program extends to May 2012,
while the letter of credit commitment that supports the commercial paper facility underlying the
securitization program must be renewed annually.
The Seller is a separate legal entity whose assets are available first and foremost to satisfy
the claims of its creditors. Of the receivables sold to the Conduits, a portion of the amount due
to the Seller is deferred until the ultimate collection of the underlying receivables. During the
three months ended March 31, 2011, we received total consideration of $1,186.1 million related to
accounts receivable sold under the securitization program, including $952.4 million of cash up
front from the sale of the receivables, an additional $76.7 million of cash upon the collection of
the underlying receivables, and $157.0 million that had not been collected at March 31, 2011 and
was recorded at fair value which approximates carrying value. The reduction in accounts receivable
as a result of securitization activity with the Conduits was $150.0 million at March 31, 2011 and
2010.
The securitization activity has been reflected in the condensed consolidated statements of
cash flows as operating activity because both the cash received from the Conduits upon sale of
receivables as well as the cash received from the Conduits upon the ultimate collection of
receivables are not subject to significantly different risks given the short-term nature of our
trade receivables. We recorded expense associated with securitization transactions of $0.6 million
and $0.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Other Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.
During 2011, we entered into a bilateral cash
collateralization agreement in support of certain letters of credit whereby we posted cash
collateral in lieu of utilizing our Credit Facility. The capacity under this new agreement is
$37.0 million, all of which was posted as collateral at March 31, 2011. As of March 31, we had a
total of $79.7 million posted as collateral under such agreements. The cash collateral is
classified within cash and cash equivalents given our ability to substitute letters of credit at
any time for this cash collateral.
See Note 11 to our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for a discussion of
our guarantees.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and
capital resources is based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance
with U.S. GAAP. We are also required under U.S. GAAP to make estimates and judgments that affect
the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates. We base our
estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe are reasonable
under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the
carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual
results may differ from these estimates.
Our critical accounting policies are discussed in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010. Our critical accounting policies remained unchanged at March 31, 2011. The
following provides additional information about Level 3 fair value measurements.
41
Table of Contents
Level 3 Fair Value Measurements.
In accordance with the “Fair Value Measurements and
Disclosures” topic of the Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification,
we evaluate the quality and reliability of the assumptions and data used to measure fair value in
the three level hierarchy, Levels 1, 2 and 3. Commodity swaps and options and physical commodity
purchase/sale contracts transacted in less liquid markets or contracts, such as long-term
arrangements, with limited price availability were classified in Level 3. Indicators of less liquid
markets are those with periods of low trade activity or when broker quotes reflect wide pricing
spreads. Generally, our Level 3 instruments or contracts are valued using internally generated
models that include bid/ask price quotations, other market assessments obtained from multiple,
independent third-party brokers or other transactional data. While we do not anticipate any
decrease in the number of third-party brokers or market liquidity, such events could erode the
quality of market information and therefore the valuing of its market positions should the number
of third-party brokers decrease or if market liquidity is reduced. Our valuation techniques also
include basis adjustments for heat rate, sulfur and ash content, port and freight costs, and credit
and nonperformance risk. We validate our valuation inputs with third-party information and
settlement prices from other sources where available. We also consider credit and nonperformance
risk in the fair value measurement by analyzing the counterparty’s exposure balance, credit rating
and average default rate, net of any counterparty credit enhancements (e.g., collateral), as well
as our own credit rating for financial derivative liabilities.
We have consistently applied these valuation techniques in all periods presented, and believe
we have obtained the most accurate information reasonably available for the types of derivative
contracts held. Valuation changes from period to period for each level will increase or decrease
depending on: (i) the relative change in fair value for positions held, (ii) new positions added,
(iii) realized amounts for completed trades, and (iv) transfers between levels. Our coal trading
strategies utilize various swaps and derivative physical contracts. Periodic changes in fair value
for purchase and sale positions, which are executed to lock in coal trading spreads, occur in each
level and therefore the overall change in value of our coal-trading platform requires consideration
of valuation changes across all levels.
Our Level 3 net financial assets represented approximately 1% and 3% of our total net
financial assets as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively. See Notes 5 and 6 to our
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for additional information regarding fair
value measurements.
Newly Adopted Accounting Standards and Accounting Standards Not Yet Implemented
See Note 2 to our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for a discussion of
newly adopted accounting standards and accounting standards not yet implemented.
The potential for changes in the market value of our coal and freight trading, crude oil,
diesel fuel, natural gas, explosives, interest rate and currency portfolios is referred to as
“market risk.” Market risk related to our coal trading and freight portfolio, which includes
bilaterally-settled and exchange-settled over-the-counter trading as well as brokerage trading, is
evaluated using a value at risk (VaR) analysis. VaR analysis is not used to evaluate our
non-trading interest rate, diesel fuel, explosives and currency hedging portfolios or coal trading
activities we employ in support of coal production (as discussed below). A description of each
market risk category is set forth below. We attempt to manage market risks through
diversification, controlling position sizes and executing hedging strategies. Due to lack of
quoted market prices and the long-term, illiquid nature of the positions, we have not quantified
market risk related to our non-trading, long-term coal supply agreement portfolio.
Coal Trading Activities
Coal Price Risk Monitored Using VaR
. We engage in direct and brokered trading of coal, ocean
freight and fuel-related commodities in over-the-counter markets. These activities give rise to
commodity price risk, which represents the potential loss that can be caused by an adverse change
in the market value of a particular commitment. We actively measure, monitor and adjust traded
position levels to remain within risk limits prescribed by management. For example, we have
policies in place that limit the amount of risk, as measured by VaR, that we may assume at any
point in time on trading and brokerage activities.
42
Table of Contents
We account for coal trading using the fair value method, which requires us to reflect
financial instruments with third parties at market value in our consolidated financial statements.
Our trading portfolio included forwards, swaps and options as of March 31, 2011.
We perform a VaR analysis on our coal trading portfolio, which includes bilaterally-settled
and exchange-settled over-the-counter and brokerage coal trading. The use of VaR allows us to
quantify in dollars, on a daily basis, a measure of price risk inherent in our trading portfolio.
VaR represents the expected loss in portfolio value due to adverse market movements over a defined
time horizon (liquidation period) within a specified confidence level. Our VaR model is based on a
variance/co-variance approach. This captures our exposure related to forwards, swaps and options
positions. Our VaR model assumes a 5 to 15-day holding period and a 95% one-tailed confidence
interval. This means that there is a one in 20 statistical chance that the portfolio would lose
more than the VaR estimates during the liquidation period. Our volatility calculation incorporates
an exponentially weighted moving average algorithm based on the previous 60 market days, which
makes our volatility more representative of recent market conditions, while still reflecting an
awareness of historical price movements. VaR does not estimate the maximum loss expected in the 5%
of the time the portfolio value exceeds measured VaR.
The use of VaR allows us to aggregate pricing risks across products in the portfolio, compare
risk on a consistent basis and identify the drivers of risk. We use historical data to estimate
price volatility as an input to VaR. Given our reliance on historical data, we believe VaR is
reasonably effective in characterizing risk exposures in markets in which there are not sudden
fundamental changes or shifts in market conditions. Due to the subjectivity in the choice of the
liquidation period, reliance on historical data to calibrate the models and the inherent
limitations in the VaR methodology, we perform regular stress and scenario analyses to estimate the
impacts of market changes on the value of the portfolio. Additionally, back-testing is regularly
performed to monitor the effectiveness of our VaR measure. The results of these analyses are used
to supplement the VaR methodology and identify additional market-related risks. An inherent
limitation of VaR is that past changes in market risk factors may not produce accurate predictions
of future market risk.
During the three months ended March 31, 2011, the actual low, high, and average VaR for our
coal trading portfolio was $14.6 million, $30.6 million and $22.5 million, respectively.
Other Risk Exposures.
We also use our coal trading and brokerage platform to support various
coal production-related activities. These transactions may involve coal to be produced from our
mines, coal sourcing arrangements with third-party mining companies, equity/joint venture positions
with producers or offtake agreements with producers. While the support activities (e.g. forward
sale of coal to be produced and/or purchased) may ultimately involve market risk sensitive
instruments, the sourcing of coal in these arrangements does not involve market risk sensitive
instruments and does not encompass the commodity price risks that we monitor through VaR, as
discussed above.
There have been no other material changes in market risk from the information provided in Item
7A. “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to, among other things, provide reasonable
assurance that material information, both financial and non-financial, and other information
required under the securities laws to be disclosed is accumulated and communicated to senior
management, including the principal executive officer and principal financial officer, on a timely
basis. Our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer have evaluated our disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934) as of March 31, 2011, and have concluded that such controls and procedures are
effective to provide reasonable assurance that the desired control objectives were achieved.
Additionally, during the most recent fiscal quarter, there have been no changes to our
internal control over financial reporting that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
43
Table of Contents
PART II — OTHER INFORMATION
See Note 12 to the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements included in Part I,
Item 1 of this report relating to certain legal proceedings, which information is incorporated by
reference herein.
On October 24, 2008, we announced that our Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase
program of up to $1 billion of the then outstanding shares of our common stock. The repurchases
may be made from time to time based on an evaluation of our outlook and general business
conditions, as well as alternative investment and debt repayment options. Our Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer also has the authority to direct us to repurchase up to $100 million of our
common stock outside the share repurchase program. The repurchase program does not have an
expiration date and may be discontinued at any time. Through March 31, 2011, we have made
repurchases of 7.7 million shares at a cost of $299.6 million ($199.8 million and $99.8 million in
2008 and 2006, respectively), leaving $700.4 million available for share repurchases under the
program.
| Maximum Dollar | ||||||||||||||||
| Value that May | ||||||||||||||||
| Total Number of | Yet Be Used to | |||||||||||||||
| Total | Shares Purchased | Repurchase Shares | ||||||||||||||
| Number of | Average | as Part of Publicly | Under the Publicly | |||||||||||||
| Shares | Price per | Announced | Announced Program | |||||||||||||
| Period | Purchased (1) | Share | Program | (In millions) | ||||||||||||
|
January 1 through January 31, 2011
|
228,387 | $ | 63.90 | — | $ | 700.4 | ||||||||||
|
February 1 through February 28, 2011
|
— | — | — | 700.4 | ||||||||||||
|
March 1 through March 31, 2011
|
7,004 | 71.68 | — | 700.4 | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
235,391 | $ | 64.13 | — | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Represents shares withheld to cover the withholding taxes upon the vesting of restricted stock and upon the issuance of common stock related to performance units, which are not a part of the share repurchase program. |
Mine Safety Disclosures
Safety is a core value that is integrated into all areas of our business. Our goal is to
provide a workplace that is incident free. We believe that it is our responsibility to our
employees to provide a superior safety and health environment. We seek to implement this goal by:
training employees in safe work practices; openly communicating with employees; establishing,
following and improving safety standards; involving employees in safety processes; and recording,
reporting and investigating accidents, incidents and losses to avoid reoccurrence. As part of our
training, we collaborate with MSHA and other government agencies to identify and test emerging
safety technologies. We also believe that personal accountability is key. Every employee commits to
our safety goals and governing principles. Managers, frontline supervisors and employees are held
responsible for individual safety and the safety of other employees.
We also partner with several companies and governmental agencies to pursue new technologies
that have the potential to improve our safety performance and provide better safety protections for
our employees. We have signed letters of intent to field test a new mine emergency vehicle under
development by outside companies. We are in the process of installing new communications and
tracking systems at our U.S. underground mines, which will allow persons on the surface to
determine the location of and communicate with all persons underground. In addition, we are
exploring the use of proximity detection and collision avoidance systems to enhance the safety
around our large equipment fleets.
44
Table of Contents
As discussed above, our goal is to operate free of injuries, occupational illnesses, property
damage and near misses. One of the ways we monitor safety performance is by incidence rate. We
compute the incidence rate as the number of injuries (MSHA injury degree code 1 to 6) divided by
employee hours worked, multiplied by 200,000 hours. Our incidence rate excludes the injuries and
hours associated with office workers. The following table reflects our incidence rates:
| Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | |||||||
|
U.S.
|
1.34 | 1.74 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Australia
|
2.88 | 2.60 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Total Peabody Energy Corporation
|
1.90 | 2.04 | ||||||
|
|
||||||||
For the U.S., the comparable MSHA incidence rate is from MSHA’s Mine Injury and Worktime
Operators report and represents the all incidence rate for all U.S. coal mines, excluding the
impact of office workers (“All Incidence Rate”). As of May 4, 2011, MSHA’s Mine Injury and
Worktime Operators report for the three months ended March 31, 2011 had not yet been published. The
All Incidence Rate for the three months ended March 31, 2010 was 3.49.
We monitor MSHA compliance using violations per inspection day (in the U.S. only). We measure
one inspection day for each visit to one of our mines by a MSHA inspector. For the three months
ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, our violations per inspection day were 1.07 and 0.85, respectively.
The following disclosures are provided pursuant to the recently enacted Dodd-Frank Act, which
requires certain disclosures by companies required to file periodic reports under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that operate coal mines regulated under the Federal Mine Safety
and Health Act of 1977 (the Mine Act). The disclosures reflect U.S. mining operations only as the
requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act do not apply to our mines operated outside the U.S. Under the
Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC is authorized to issue rules and regulations to carry out the purposes of
these provisions. In December 2010, the SEC issued a proposed rule for the mine safety
disclosures. With the comment period completed, a final rule is expected from the SEC in the
second half of 2011.
Mine Safety Information.
Whenever MSHA believes that a violation of the Mine Act, any health
or safety standard, or any regulation has occurred, it may issue a citation which describes the
violation and fixes a time within which the operator must abate the violation. In some situations,
such as when MSHA believes that conditions pose a hazard to miners, MSHA may issue an order
removing miners from the area of the mine affected by the condition until hazards are corrected.
Whenever MSHA issues a citation or order, it generally proposes a civil penalty, or fine, as a
result of the violation that the operator is ordered to pay. Citations and orders can be contested
and appealed, and as part of that process, are often reduced in severity and amount, and are
sometimes dismissed. The number of citations, orders and proposed assessments vary depending on the
size and type (underground or surface) of the mine as well as by the MSHA inspector(s) assigned to
that mine. Since MSHA is a branch of the U.S. Department of Labor, its jurisdiction applies only to
our U.S. mines. While our Australian mines are not required to report safety information to MSHA,
in 2008 we modified our injury reporting processes such that our Australian operations began
capturing safety data using the same criteria as that of our U.S. operations. However, the safety
data for our Australian mines does not include MSHA issued citations, orders and proposed
assessments. As such, the mine safety disclosures below contain no information for our Australian
mines.
The table that follows reflects citations and orders issued to us by MSHA during the three
months ended March 31, 2011, as reflected in our systems. Due to timing and other factors, our data
may not agree with the mine data retrieval system maintained by MSHA. The proposed assessments for
the three months ended March 31, 2011 were taken from the MSHA
system as of May 3, 2011.
Additional information follows about MSHA references used in the table.
| • | Section 104 Citations : The total number of violations received from MSHA under section 104 of the Mine Act, which includes citations for health or safety standards that could significantly and substantially contribute to a serious injury if left unabated. |
45
Table of Contents
| • | Section 104(b) Orders : The total number of orders issued by MSHA under section 104(b) of the Mine Act, which represents a failure to abate a citation under section 104(a) within the period of time prescribed by MSHA. This results in an order of immediate withdrawal from the area of the mine affected by the condition until MSHA determines that the violation has been abated. | ||
| • | Section 104(d) Citations and Orders : The total number of citations and orders issued by MSHA under section 104(d) of the Mine Act for unwarrantable failure to comply with mandatory health or safety standards. | ||
| • | Section 110(b)(2) Violations : The total number of flagrant violations issued by MSHA under section 110(b)(2) of the Mine Act. | ||
| • | Section 107(a) Orders : The total number of orders issued by MSHA under section 107(a) of the Mine Act for situations in which MSHA determined an imminent danger existed. | ||
| • | Proposed MSHA Assessments: The total dollar value of proposed assessments from MSHA. | ||
| • | Fatalities: The total number of related fatalities. |
| Section | Section | ($) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section | Section | 104(d) | 104(e) | Section | Section | Proposed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 | 104 | 104(b) | Citations and | Potential Pattern | 110(b)(2) | 107(a) | MSHA | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mine (1) | Citations | Orders | Orders | of Violations | Violations | Orders | Assessments | Fatalities | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Western U.S. Mining
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Caballo
|
1 | — | — | — | — | — | 0.1 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
El Segundo
|
13 | — | — | — | — | — | 3.5 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Kayenta
|
31 | — | — | — | — | — | 28.4 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lee Ranch
|
11 | — | — | — | — | — | 5.8 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
North Antelope Rochelle
|
3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Twentymile (Foidel Creek)
|
96 | — | 1 | — | — | — | 19.4 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Midwestern U.S. Mining
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Air Quality (Air Quality Mine and South
Wash Plant)
|
136 | 1 | 1 | — | — | 1 | 147.3 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cottage Grove (Wildcat Hills-Cottage
Grove Pit)
|
3 | — | — | — | — | — | 0.2 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Farmersburg
(2)
|
1 | — | — | — | — | — | 0.2 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Francisco Underground
|
114 | — | 1 | — | — | — | 56.7 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Francisco Surface
(3)
|
6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gateway
|
60 | — | — | — | — | — | 38.2 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Viking (Viking-Corning and Knox Pit)
|
11 | — | — | — | — | — | 11.5 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wild Boar
|
3 | — | — | — | — | — | 0.3 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wildcat Hills Underground
|
60 | — | — | — | — | — | 32.7 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Willow Lake (Willow Lake Portal
and Central Preparation Plant)
|
266 | 1 | 6 | — | — | — | 192.5 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | The definition of mine under section 3 of the Mine Act includes the mine, as well as other items used in, or to be used in, or resulting from, the work of extracting coal, such as land, structures, facilities, equipment, machines, tools, and coal preparation facilities. Unless otherwise indicated, any of these other items associated with a single mine have been aggregated in the totals for that mine. Also, there are instances where the mine name per the MSHA system differs from the mine name utilized by us. Where applicable, we have parenthetically listed the name(s) of the mine per the MSHA system. | |
| (2) | The Farmersburg Mine was closed in the fourth quarter of 2010. | |
| (3) | The Francisco Surface Mine was closed in the fourth quarter of 2009. |
Pattern or Potential Pattern of Violations.
During the three months ended March 31, 2011,
none of the mines operated by us received written notice from MSHA of (a) a pattern of violations
of mandatory health or safety standards that are of such nature as could have significantly and
substantially contributed to the cause and effect of coal mine health or safety hazards under
section 104(e) of the Mine Act or (b) the potential to have such a pattern.
46
Table of Contents
On November 19, 2010, we received a written notice from MSHA that a potential pattern of
violations existed at our Willow Lake Mine. On March 15, 2011, the Willow Lake Mine was notified
by MSHA that it will not be considered for a Pattern of Violation notice pursuant to section
104(e)(1) of the Mine Act as a result of the mine’s progress during the evaluation period.
Pending Legal Actions.
The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (the Commission)
is an independent adjudicative agency that provides administrative trial and appellate review of
legal disputes arising under the Mine Act. These cases may involve, among other questions,
challenges by operators to citations, orders and penalties they have received from MSHA, or
complaints of discrimination by miners under Section 105 of the Mine Act. The following is a brief
description of the types of legal actions that may be brought before the Commission.
| • | Contests of Citations and Orders — A contest proceeding may be filed with the Commission by operators, miners or miners’ representatives to challenge the issuance of a citation or order issued by MSHA. | ||
| • | Contests of Proposed Penalties (Petitions for Assessment of Penalties) — A contest of a proposed penalty is an administrative proceeding before the Commission challenging a civil penalty that MSHA has proposed for the violation contained in a citation or order. | ||
| • | Complaints for Compensation — A complaint for compensation may be filed with the Commission by miners entitled to compensation when a mine is closed by certain withdrawal orders issued by MSHA. The purpose of the proceeding is to determine the amount of compensation, if any, due miners idled by the orders. | ||
| • | Complaints of Discharge, Discrimination or Interference — A discrimination proceeding is a case that involves a miner’s allegation that he or she has suffered a wrong by the operator because he or she engaged in some type of activity protected under the Mine Act, such as making a safety complaint. | ||
| • | Temporary Reinstatement Proceedings — Temporary reinstatement proceedings involve cases in which a miner has filed a complaint with MSHA stating he or she has suffered discrimination and the miner has lost his or her position. | ||
| • | Emergency Response Plan (ERP) Dispute Proceedings — ERP dispute proceedings are cases brought before the Commission when an operator is issued a citation because it has not agreed to include a certain provision in its ERP. |
47
Table of Contents
The table that follows presents information by mine regarding pending legal actions before the
Commission at March 31, 2011. Each legal action is assigned a docket number by the Commission and
may have as its subject matter one or more citations, orders, penalties or complaints.
| Legal | ||||
| Mine (1) | Actions | |||
|
Western U.S. Mining
|
||||
|
Kayenta
|
6 | |||
|
Lee Ranch
|
1 | |||
|
North Antelope Rochelle
|
12 | |||
|
Rawhide
|
4 | |||
|
Twentymile (Foidel Creek)
|
29 | |||
|
Midwestern U.S. Mining
|
||||
|
Air Quality (Air Quality Mine and South Wash Plant)
|
37 | |||
|
Cottage Grove (Wildcat Hills-Cottage Grove Pit)
|
2 | |||
|
Francisco Underground
|
7 | |||
|
Gateway
|
14 | |||
|
Somerville Central
|
1 | |||
|
Vermilion Grove
|
1 | |||
|
Viking (Viking-Corning and Knot Pit)
|
1 | |||
|
Wildcat Hills Underground
|
1 | |||
|
Willow Lake (Willow Lake Portal and Central Preparation Plant)
|
47 | |||
| (1) | The definition of mine under section 3 of the Mine Act includes the mine, as well as other items used in, or to be used in, or resulting from, the work of extracting coal, such as land, structures, facilities, equipment, machines, tools and coal preparation facilities. Unless otherwise indicated, any of these other items associated with a single mine have been aggregated in the totals for that mine. Also, there are instances where the mine name per the MSHA system differs from the mine name utilized by us. Where applicable, we have parenthetically listed the name(s) of the mine per the MSHA system. |
See Exhibit Index at page 50 of this report.
48
Table of Contents
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
PEABODY ENERGY CORPORATION
|
||||
| Date: May 6, 2011 | By: | /s/ MICHAEL C. CREWS | ||
| Michael C. Crews | ||||
|
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer (On behalf of the registrant and as Principal Financial Officer) |
||||
49
Table of Contents
EXHIBIT INDEX
The exhibits below are numbered in accordance with the Exhibit Table of Item 601 of Regulation S-K.
| Exhibit | ||
| No. | Description of Exhibit | |
|
3.1
|
Third Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant, as amended (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008). | |
|
|
||
|
3.2
|
Amended and Restated By-Laws of the Registrant (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 16, 2008). | |
|
|
||
|
31.1*
|
Certification of periodic financial report by Peabody Energy Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
|
|
||
|
31.2*
|
Certification of periodic financial report by Peabody Energy Corporation’s Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
|
|
||
|
32.1*
|
Certification of periodic financial report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, by Peabody Energy Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer. | |
|
|
||
|
32.2*
|
Certification of periodic financial report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, by Peabody Energy Corporation’s Chief Financial Officer. | |
|
|
||
|
101**
|
Interactive Data File (Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011 furnished in XBRL). Users of this data are advised in accordance with Rule 406T of Regulation S-T promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission that this Interactive Data File is deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, is deemed not filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections. The financial information contained in the XBRL-related documents is “unaudited” and “unreviewed.” |
| * | Filed herewith. | |
| ** | Submitted herewith. |
50
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Item 2. Management S Discussion and Analysis Of Financial Condition and Results Of OperationsItem 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market RiskItem 4. Controls and ProceduresPart II Other InformationItem 1. Legal ProceedingsItem 2. Unregistered Sales Of Equity Securities and Use Of ProceedsItem 5. Other InformationItem 6. Exhibits