NORTHWEST PIPE CO - Quarter Report: 2005 June (Form 10-Q)

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549
FORM 10-Q

þ           QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended: June 30, 2005
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: 0-27140

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

200 S.W. Market Street
Suite 1800
Portland, Oregon 97201
(Address of principal executive offices and zip code)

503-946-1200
(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       Noo

     Indicate by check whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act): Yes þ       No o

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY
FORM 10-Q
INDEX

1

Table of Contents

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

2

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except per share amounts)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

3

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

4

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

1. Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited financial statements as of and for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. The financial information as of December 31, 2004 is derived from the audited financial statements presented in the Northwest Pipe Company (the "Company") Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. Certain information or footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles have been condensed or omitted, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. In the opinion of management, the accompanying financial statements include all adjustments necessary (which are of a normal and recurring nature) for the fair statement of the results of the interim periods presented. The accompanying financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, as presented in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Operating results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the entire fiscal year ending December 31, 2005 or any portion thereof.

2. Earnings per Share

Basic earnings per share is computed using the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share is computed using the weighted average number of shares of common stock and dilutive common equivalent shares outstanding during the period. Incremental shares of 247,621 and 121,092 for the three months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively, and incremental shares of 280,644 and 114,564 for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively, were used in the calculations of diluted earnings per share. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, no options were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share because the exercise price of the options was less than the average market price of the underlying common stock during these periods and thus no options would be antidilutive. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, options to purchase 311,636 and 311,688, respectively, were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share because the exercise price of the options was greater than the average market price of the underlying common stock during these periods and thus the options would be antidilutive.

3. Inventories

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Finished goods are stated at standard cost, which approximates the first-in, first-out method of accounting. Materials and supplies, and Tubular Products raw materials are stated at standard cost. Water Transmission steel inventory is valued on a specific identification basis and coating and lining materials are stated on a moving average cost basis. Inventories consist of the following:

5

4. Asset Held for Sale

The Company has an agreement to sell the Riverside facility and has included the related property, plant and equipment as an asset held for sale in current assets.

5. Segment Information

The Company has adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 131, "Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information" which requires disclosure of financial and descriptive information about the Company’s reportable operating segments. The operating segments reported below are based on the nature of the products sold by the Company and are the segments of the Company for which separate financial information is available and is regularly evaluated by executive management to make decisions about resources to be allocated to the segment and assess its performance. Management evaluates segment performance based on segment gross profit. There were no material transfers between segments in the periods presented.

6. Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, "Inventory Costs—An Amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4" ("SFAS 151"). SFAS 151 amends the guidance in ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, "Inventory Pricing, " to clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted material (spoilage). Among other provisions, the new rule requires that items such as idle facility expense, excessive spoilage, double freight, and rehandling costs be recognized as current-period charges regardless of whether they meet the criterion of "so abnormal" as stated in ARB No. 43. Additionally, SFAS 151 requires that the allocation of fixed production overhead to the costs of conversion be based on the normal capacity of the production facilities. SFAS 151 is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company is currently evaluating the effect that the adoption of SFAS 151 will have on the results of operations or financial position, but does not expect SFAS 151 to have a material effect.

In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, "Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets—An Amendment of APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions" ("SFAS 153"). SFAS 153 eliminates the exception from fair value measurement for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets in paragraph 2l(b) of APB Opinion No. 29, "Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions,” and replaces it with an exception for exchanges that do not have commercial substance. SFAS 153 specifies that a nonmonetary exchange has commercial substance if the future cash flows of the entity are expected to change significantly as a result of the exchange. SFAS 153 is effective for the fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005. The adoption of SFAS 153 is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123(R), "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation" ("SFAS No. 123(R)"). SFAS No. 123(R) establishes standards for the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services. This Statement focuses primarily on accounting for transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment transactions. SFAS No. 123(R) requires that the fair value of such equity instruments be recognized as an expense in the historical financial statements as services are

6

performed. Prior to SFAS No. 123(R), only certain pro forma disclosures of fair value were required. The provisions of this Statement are effective for the first annual reporting period that begins after June 15, 2005. Accordingly, the Company will adopt SFAS No. 123(R) commencing with the quarter ending March 31, 2006. The Company estimates the impact of adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) will approximate the impact of the adjustments made to determine pro forma net income and pro forma earnings per share under Statement No. 123.

In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, "Accounting Changes and Error Corrections—a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3" ("SFAS No. 154"). SFAS 154 replaces APB Opinion No. 20, "Accounting Changes", and FASB Statement No. 3, "Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim Financial Statements", and changes the requirements for the accounting for and reporting of a change in accounting principle. This Statement applies to all voluntary changes in accounting principle. It also applies to changes required by an accounting pronouncement in the unusual instance that the pronouncement does not include specific transition provisions. When a pronouncement includes specific transition provisions, those provisions should be followed. SFAS 154 is effective for accounting changes and corrections of errors made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. The adoption of SFAS 154 is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

7. Contingencies

The Company was a defendant in a suit brought by Foothill/DeAnza Community College in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in July 2000. DeAnza represented a class of plaintiffs who purchased small diameter, thin walled fire sprinkler pipe who alleged that the pipe leaked necessitating replacement of the fire sprinkler system and further alleged that the leaks caused damage to other property as well as loss of use. The Company settled with the plaintiffs, the insurance companies, and the former owner. Pursuant to the settlement, the Company’s payment obligations do not begin until the remaining insurance funds of approximately $2.4 million are exhausted. During the second year and years four through fifteen, the Company would be obligated only to pay qualifying claims and administrative costs up to a limit of $500,000 per year. The Company has no payment obligations in years one and three. The Company also would have no payment obligation in any other year in which there are no qualifying claims. In the event any qualifying claims remain unpaid after fifteen years, the Company would have to pay such claims as follows: (1) if the excess claims are between $0 and $1.5 million, the Company would pay the amount of the claims; (2) if the excess claims are between $1.5 million and $6.0 million, the Company would pay $1.5 million; and (3) if the excess claims exceed $6.0 million, the Company would pay $1.5 million plus 25 percent of the amount over $6.0 million, up to a cap of $3.0 million; provided, that in no event would the Company be obligated to pay any more than $1.0 million in any of years sixteen, seventeen or eighteen.

The Company’s manufacturing facilities are subject to many federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations related to the protection of the environment. Some of the Company’s operations require environmental permits to control and reduce air and water discharges or manage other environmental matters, which are subject to modification, renewal and revocation by government authorities. The Company believes that it is in material compliance with all environmental laws, regulations and permits, and it does not anticipate any material expenditures to meet current or pending environmental requirements. However, it could incur operating costs or capital expenditures in complying with future or more stringent environmental requirements or with current requirements if it is applied to its facilities in a way it does not anticipate.

In November 1999, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) requested that the Company perform a preliminary assessment of its plant located at 12005 N. Burgard in Portland, Oregon. The primary purpose of the assessment is to determine whether the plant has contributed to sediment contamination in the Willamette River. The Company entered into a voluntary letter agreement with the department in mid-August 2000. In 2001, groundwater containing elevated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was identified in one localized area of the property furthest from the river. Assessment work in 2002 and 2003 to further characterize the groundwater is consistent with the initial conclusion that a source of the VOCs is located off site. There is no evidence at this time showing a connection between detected VOCs in groundwater and Willamette River sediments. Also, there is no evidence to date that stormwater from the plant has adversely impacted Willamette River sediments. However, DEQ recommended a remedial investigation and feasibility study for further evaluation of both groundwater and stormwater at the plant. In February 2005, the Company and DEQ entered in to a voluntary agreement for remedial investigation and source control measures to follow up on, complete and formalize the results of the previous assessments and investigations. Assessment work is ongoing.

7

In December 2000, a six-mile section of the lower Willamette River known as the Portland Harbor was included on the National Priorities List at the request of the EPA. The EPA currently describes the site as the areal extent of contamination, and all suitable areas in proximity to the contamination necessary for the implementation of the response action, at, from and to the Portland Harbor Superfund Site Assessment Area from approximately River Mile 3.5 to River Mile 9.2, including uplands portions of the site that contain sources of contamination to the sediments. The Company’s plant is not located on the Willamette River; it lies in what may be the upland portion of the site. However, a final determination of the areal extent of the site will not be determined until EPA issues a record of decision describing the remedial action necessary to address Willamette River sediments. EPA and the DEQ have agreed to share responsibility for investigation and cleanup of the site. The DEQ has the lead responsibility for conducting the upland work, and EPA is the Support Agency for that work. EPA has the lead responsibility for conducting in-water work, and the DEQ is the Support Agency for that work.

Also, in December 2000, EPA notified the Company and 68 other parties by general notice letter of potential liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act with respect to the Portland Harbor Superfund Site. In its letter, EPA inquired whether parties receiving the letter were interested in volunteering to enter negotiations to perform a remedial investigation and feasibility study at the site. No action was required by EPA of recipients of the general notice letter. In the last week of December 2000, the Company responded to EPA’s inquiry stating that it was working with the DEQ to determine whether its plant had any impact on Willamette River sediments or was a current source of releases to the Willamette River sediments. That work is continuing as noted previously. To date, no further communication has been received from EPA on this matter.

The Company operates under numerous governmental permits and licenses relating to air emissions, stormwater run-off, and other matters. The Company is not aware of any current material violations or citations relating to any of these permits or licenses. It has a policy of reducing consumption of hazardous materials in its operations by substituting non-hazardous materials when possible. The Company’s operations are also governed by many other laws and regulations, including those relating to workplace safety and worker health, principally the Occupational Safety and Health Act and regulations thereunder which, among other requirements, establish noise and dust standards. The Company believes that it is in material compliance with these laws and regulations and does not believe that future compliance with such laws and regulations will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations or financial condition.

From time to time, the Company is involved in litigation relating to claims arising out of its operations in the normal course of its business. The Company maintains insurance coverage against potential claims in amounts that it believes to be adequate. Management believes that it is not presently a party to any other litigation, the outcome of which would have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

8. Stock-based Compensation

The Company accounts for stock-based employee compensation arrangements in accordance with the provisions of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, "Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees" ("APB No. 25") and complies with the disclosure provisions of SFAS No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation" and SFAS No. 148, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation – Transition and Disclosure – an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123" (SFAS 148). Under APB No. 25, compensation expense is based on the difference, if any, on the date of the grant, between the fair value of the Company's stock and the exercise price of the option. The Company accounts for stock, stock options and warrants issued to non-employees in accordance with the provisions of emerging Issues Task Force ("EITF") Issue No. 96-18, "Accounting for Equity Instruments that are Issued to Other than Employees for Acquiring or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services." Compensation and services expenses are recognized over the vesting period of the options or warrants or the periods the related services are rendered, as appropriate.

At June 30, 2005, the Company has one stock-based compensation plan. No stock-based employee compensation cost is reflected in net income, as all options granted under this plan had an exercise price equal to the market value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant. The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share as if the Company had applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to stock-based compensation.

8

9. Note Payable to Financial Institution and Long Term Debt

On May 20, 2005, we replaced our $38.5 million and $7.5 million credit agreements with a new $65.0 million credit agreement that expires on May 20, 2010. Also on May 20, 2005, the Note Purchase and Private Shelf Agreement was amended to increase the amount available from $40.0 million to $60.0 million in Term Notes.

10. Related Party Transactions

The Company has ongoing business relationships with certain affiliates of Wells Fargo & Company ("Wells Fargo"). Wells Fargo, together with certain of its affiliates, is the Company’s largest shareholder. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, the Company made the following payments to affiliates of Wells Fargo: (i) capital and operating lease payments pursuant to which the Company leases certain equipment from such affiliates, (ii) payments of interest and fees pursuant to letters of credit originated by such affiliates, (iii) payments of principal and interest on an industrial development revenue bond, and (iv) payments of principal, interest and related fees in connection with loan agreements between the Company and such affiliates. Payments made by the Company to Wells Fargo and its affiliates amounted to $2.3 million and $3.1 million, respectively, for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2005, and $945,000 and $2.1 million, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004. Net borrowings and payments on the credit agreement have not been included in the amounts above. Balances due to Wells Fargo and its affiliates were $1.7 million and $30.9 million at June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively.

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Forward Looking Statements

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and other sections of this Report contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 that are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about our business, management’s beliefs, and assumptions made by management. Words such as "expects," "anticipates," "intends," "plans," "believes," "seeks," "estimates," "should," and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in such forward-looking statements due to numerous factors including changes in demand for our products, product mix, bidding activity, the timing of customer orders and deliveries, the price and availability of raw materials, excess or shortage of production capacity, international trade policy and regulations and other risks discussed from time to time in our other Securities and Exchange Commission filings and reports, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. In addition, such statements could be affected by

9

general industry and market conditions and growth rates, and general domestic and international economic conditions. Such forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made and we do not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Report. If we do update or correct one or more forward-looking statements, investors and others should not conclude that we will make additional updates or corrections with respect thereto or with respect to other forward-looking statements.

Overview

We have Water Transmission manufacturing facilities in Portland, Oregon; Denver, Colorado; Adelanto and Riverside, California; Parkersburg, West Virginia; and Saginaw, Texas. We have Tubular Products manufacturing facilities in Portland, Oregon; Atchison, Kansas; Houston, Texas; Bossier City, Louisiana; and Monterrey, Mexico.

We believe that the Tubular Products business, in conjunction with the Water Transmission business, provide a significant degree of market diversification, because the principal factors affecting demand for water transmission products are different from those affecting demand for tubular products. Demand for water transmission products is generally based on population growth and movement, changing water sources and replacement of aging infrastructure. Demand can vary dramatically within our market area since each population center determines its own waterworks requirements. Construction activity and general economic conditions influence demand for tubular products.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to revenue recognition and allowance for doubtful accounts. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. A description of our critical accounting policies and related judgments and estimates that affect the preparation of our consolidated financial statements is set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 6 of the Consolidated Financial Statements for a description of recent accounting pronouncements, including the expected dates of adoption and estimated effects on results of operations and financial position.

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, certain financial information regarding costs and expenses expressed as a percentage of total net sales and net sales of our business segments.

10

Three Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005 Compared to Three Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2004

Net Sales. Net sales increased 24.1% to $86.4 million in the second quarter of 2005, from $69.6 million in the second quarter of 2004, and increased 21.1% to $165.2 million in the first six months of 2005, from $136.4 million in the first six months of 2004.

Water Transmission sales increased 59.4% to $60.0 million in the second quarter of 2005 from $37.6 million in the second quarter of 2004, and increased 56.9% to $116.0 million in the first six months of 2005 from $73.9 million in the first six months of 2004. Net sales for the three months and the six months ended June 30, 2005, increased over the same periods last year as a result of increased volume, which is attributable to strong market conditions. Our Water Transmission business is impacted by infrastructure improvements; as municipal water agencies initiate improvements, we generally experience an increase in demand for our products. In addition to increased sales, the stronger demand resulted in an improved backlog at June 30, 2005 of $150.0 million, as compared to the backlog of $128.9 million at the beginning of 2005 and $101.9 at June 30, 2004. We expect continued strong bidding and booking activity in the second half of the year. Bidding activity, backlog and sales resulting from the award of new projects, or the production of current projects, may vary significantly from period to period.

Tubular Products sales decreased by 17.4% to $26.5 million in the second quarter of 2005 from $32.0 million in the second quarter of 2004 and decreased 21.2% to $49.2 million in the first six months of 2005 from $62.4 million in the first six months of 2004. The decrease in net sales in the second quarter and the first six months of 2005 over the same periods last year resulted from both exiting certain product lines in 2004 and declining sales volume in our continuing product lines. Additionally, we saw a drop in sales volume as our customers turned to imported products. Sales are expected to improve slightly in the third quarter of 2005, due to an expected increase in demand, but decrease in the fourth quarter of 2005 as a result of normal seasonal slowing of some of our product lines.

No single customer accounted for 10% or more of net sales in the second quarter or first six months of 2005 or 2004.

Gross Profit. Gross profit increased 15.6% to $13.7 million (15.9% of total net sales) in the second quarter of 2005 from $11.9 million (17.0% of total net sales) in the second quarter of 2004 and increased 27.7% to $25.9 million (15.7% of total net sales) in the first six months of 2005 from $20.3 million (14.9% of total net sales) in the first six months of 2004.

11

Water Transmission gross profit increased 72.5% to $12.5 million (20.8% of segment net sales) in the second quarter of 2005 from $7.2 million (19.2% of segment net sales) in the second quarter of 2004 and increased 64.3% to $22.8 million (19.6% of segment net sales) in the first six months of 2005 from $13.9 million (18.8% of segment net sales) in the first six months of 2004. Water Transmission gross profit percentage increased for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 over the same periods last year primarily due to a combination of improved pricing in the market, higher volumes leveraging fixed costs, and a favorable mix of projects produced during the quarter.

Gross profit from Tubular Products decreased to $1.3 million (4.8% of segment net sales) in the second quarter of 2005 from $4.6 million (14.5% of segment net sales) in the second quarter of 2004 and decreased to $3.1 million (6.4% of segment net sales) in the first six months of 2005 from $6.4 million (10.3% of segment net sales) in the first six months of 2004. Tubular Products gross profit decreased for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 over the same periods last year primarily as a result of lower demand and increased import pressure in some product lines. In addition, the reduction in steel costs that has occurred during the last six months has put pressure on our selling prices, which have dropped faster than our costs have declined. We expect gross profit as a percent of segment sales to improve as steel prices stabilize.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased to $6.4 million (7.5% of total net sales) in the second quarter of 2005 from $5.3 million (7.6% of total net sales) in the second quarter of 2004 and increased to $12.5 million (7.6% of total net sales) in the first six months of 2005 from $10.6 million (7.8% of total net sales) in the first six months of 2004. The increases from the same periods last year are consistent with the increase in sales during the same periods.

Interest Expense, net. Interest expense, net increased to $1.7 million in the second quarter of 2005 from $1.6 million in the second quarter of 2004 and increased to $3.6 million in the first six months of 2005 from $2.9 million in the first six months of 2004. The increase in the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 over the same periods last year resulted from higher average borrowings and a higher average interest rate.

Income Taxes. The provision for income taxes was $3.8 million in the first six months of 2005, based on an expected tax rate of approximately 38.5%, compared to $2.6 million in the first six months of 2004, based on an expected tax rate of approximately 38.5%.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We finance operations with internally generated funds and available borrowings. At June 30, 2005, we had cash and cash equivalents of $160,000.

Net cash used in operating activities in the first six months of 2005 was $13.4 million. This was primarily the result of a decrease in accounts payable of $14.3 million, an increase in costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings of $11.9 million and an increase in trade and other receivables, net of $6.2 million, offset in part by net income of $6.0 million and a decrease in inventories of $9.6 million. In addition, non-cash adjustments for depreciation and amortization of property and equipment of $2.7 million contributed to the offset to net cash used in operating activities. The decrease in accounts payable resulted from timing of vendor payments. The change in costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts, inventories, and trade and other receivables, net resulted from timing differences between production, shipment and invoicing of products.

Net cash used in investing activities in the first six months of 2005 was $11.0 million, which resulted from additions of property and equipment. Capital expenditures are expected to be between $13.0 and $14.0 million in 2005.

Net cash provided by financing activities in the first six months of 2005 was $24.5 million, which included proceeds from a sale-leaseback agreement of $9.5 million and net borrowings under the notes payable to financial institutions of $17.2 million.

We had the following significant components of debt at June 30, 2005: a $65.0 million credit agreement, under which $45.6 million was outstanding; $12.9 million of Series B Senior Notes; $15.0 million of Senior Notes; $15.0 million of Series A Term Note; $10.5 million of Series B Term Notes; $10.0 million of Series C Term Notes; $4.5 million of Series D Term Notes; and capital lease obligations of $169,000.

12

On May 20, 2005, we replaced our $38.5 million and $7.5 million credit agreements with a new $65.0 million credit agreement that expires on May 20, 2010. Also on May 20, 2005, the Note Purchase and Private Shelf Agreement was amended to increase the amount available from $40.0 million to $60.0 million in Term Notes.

The balance outstanding under the new credit agreement bears interest at rates related to LIBOR plus 0.75% to 1.50%, or the lending institution's prime rate, minus 0.5% to 0.0%. We had $45.6 million outstanding under the line of credit, with $15.0 million bearing interest at 4.36%, $11.7 million bearing interest at 6.00%, $10 million bearing interest at 4.58%, and $10.0 million bearing interest at 4.48%, partially offset by $1.1 million in cash receipts that had not been applied to the loan balance. At June 30, 2005 we had an additional net borrowing capacity under the line of credit of $19.4 million.

The Series A Term Note in the principal amount of $15.0 million matures on February 25, 2014 and requires annual payments in the amount of $2.1 million that begin February 25, 2008 plus interest of 8.75% paid quarterly on February 25, May 25, August 25 and November 25. The Series B Term Notes in the principal amount of $10.5 million mature on June 21, 2014 and require annual payments in the amount of $1.5 million that begin June 21, 2008 plus interest of 8.47% paid quarterly on March 21, June 21, September 21 and December 21. The Series C Term Notes in the principal amount of $10.0 million mature on October 26, 2014 and require annual payments of $1.4 million that begin October 26, 2008 plus interest of 7.36% paid quarterly on January 26, April 26, July 26 and October 26. The Series D Term Notes in the principal amount of $4.5 million mature on January 24, 2015 and require annual payments of $643,000 that begin January 24, 2009 plus interest of 7.32% paid quarterly on January 24, April 24, July 24 and October 24. The Series B Senior Notes in the principal amount of $12.9 million mature on April 1, 2008 and require annual payments of $4.3 million plus interest at 6.91% paid quarterly on January 1, April 1, July 1 and October 1. The Senior Notes in the principal amount of $15.0 million mature on November 15, 2007 and require annual payments in the amount of $5.0 million plus interest of 6.87% paid quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15, and November 15. The Senior Notes and Series B Senior Notes (together, the "Notes") also include supplemental interest from 0.0% to 1.5% (0.00% at June 30, 2005), based on our total minimum net earnings before tax plus interest expense (net of capitalized interest expense), depreciation expense and amortization expense ("EBITDA") to total debt leverage ratio, which is paid with the required quarterly interest payments. The Notes, the Series A Term Note, the Series B Term Notes, the Series C Term Notes, and the Series D Term Notes (together, the "Term Notes") and the credit agreement are collateralized by all accounts receivable, inventory and certain plant and equipment.

We lease certain plant equipment. The average interest rate on the capital leases is 6.9%.

We have operating leases with respect to certain manufacturing equipment that require us to pay property taxes, insurance and maintenance. Under the terms of the operating leases we sold the equipment to an unrelated third party (the "lessor") who then leased the equipment to us. These leases, along with our other debt instruments already in place, and an operating line of credit, best meet our near term financing and operating capital requirements compared to other available options.

Upon termination or expiration of the operating leases, we must either purchase the equipment from the lessor at a predetermined amount that does not constitute a bargain purchase, return the equipment to the lessor, or renew the lease arrangement. If the equipment is returned to the lessor, we have agreed to pay the lessor an amount up to the difference between the purchase amount and the residual value guarantee. The majority of the operating leases contain the same covenants as our credit agreement discussed below.

We have entered into stand-by letters of credit that total approximately $5.6 million as of June 30, 2005. The stand-by letters of credit relate to workers’ compensation and general liability insurance. In conjunction with the new credit agreement, we also entered into a temporary replacement letter of credit that totals approximately $5.3 million as of June 30, 2005 to cover the exposure during the time it will take to replace the existing letters of credit. Due to the nature of these arrangements and our historical experience, we do not expect to make any significant payments under these arrangements. Therefore, they have been excluded from our aggregate commitments identified above.

The $65.0 million credit agreement, the Notes, the Term Notes and operating leases all require compliance with the following financial covenants: minimum consolidated tangible net worth; maximum consolidated total debt to consolidated EBITDA; minimum consolidated fixed charge coverage test and a maximum asset coverage ratio. These and other covenants included in our financing agreements impose certain

13

requirements with respect to our financial condition and results of operations, and place restrictions on, among other things, our ability to incur certain additional indebtedness and to create liens or other encumbrances on assets. A failure by us to comply with the requirements of these covenants, if not waived or cured, could permit acceleration of the related indebtedness and acceleration of indebtedness under other instruments that include cross-acceleration or cross-default provisions. At June 30, 2005, we were in compliance with the covenants in our debt agreements.

We anticipate that our existing cash and cash equivalents, cash flows expected to be generated by operations and amounts available under our credit agreement will be adequate to fund our working capital and other capital requirements for at least the next twelve months. To the extent necessary, we may also satisfy capital requirements through additional bank borrowings, senior notes, term notes and capital and operating leases, if such resources are available on satisfactory terms. We have from time to time evaluated and continue to evaluate opportunities for acquisitions and expansion. Any such transactions, if consummated, may use a portion of our working capital or necessitate additional bank borrowings.

Related Party Transactions

We have ongoing business relationships with certain affiliates of Wells Fargo & Company ("Wells Fargo"). Wells Fargo, together with certain of its affiliates, is our largest shareholder. During the six months ended June 30, 2005, we made the following payments to affiliates of Wells Fargo: (i) capital and operating lease payments pursuant to which the Company leases certain equipment from such affiliates, (ii) payments of interest and fees pursuant to letters of credit originated by such affiliates, and (iii) payments of principal, interest and related fees in connection with loan agreements between the Company and such affiliates. Payments made by us to Wells Fargo and its affiliates amounted to $2.3 million and $3.1 million, respectively, for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2005, and $945,000 and $2.1 million, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004. Balances due to Wells Fargo and its affiliates were $1.7 million and $30.9 million at June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively.

14

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk

We use derivative financial instruments from time to time to reduce exposure associated with potential foreign currency rate changes occurring between the contract date and the date when the payments are received. These instruments are not used for trading or for speculative purposes. We have six Foreign Exchange Agreements ("Agreements") at the end of June in the aggregate amount of $7.3 million. The Agreements minimize any changes in the exchange rate between the rate used in the contract bid amount and the amount ultimately collected. As of June 30, 2005, $6.4 million was still open and the Agreements are expected to be completed by December 2005. We believe our current risk exposure to exchange rate movements to be immaterial.

We are exposed to cash flow and fair value risk due to changes in interest rates with respect to certain portions of our debt. The debt subject to changes in interest rates is our $65.0 million revolving credit line ($45.6 million outstanding as of June 30, 2005). We believe risk exposure resulting from interest rate movements to be immaterial.

Additional information required by this item is set forth in "Item 2 - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Liquidity and Capital Resources."

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

As of June 30, 2005, the end of the period covered by this report, our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer reviewed and evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)), which are designed to ensure that material information we must disclose in our report filed or submitted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act") is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported on a timely basis. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer have concluded that as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

During the six months ended June 30, 2005, there has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.

Part II – Other Information

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

We were a defendant in a suit brought by Foothill/DeAnza Community College in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in July 2000. DeAnza represented a class of plaintiffs who purchased small diameter, thin walled fire sprinkler pipe who alleged that the pipe leaked necessitating replacement of the fire sprinkler system and further alleged that the leaks caused damage to other property as well as loss of use. We have settled with the plaintiffs, the insurance companies, and the former owner. Pursuant to the settlement, our payment obligations do not begin until the remaining insurance funds of approximately $2.4 million are exhausted. During the second year and years four through fifteen, we would be obligated only to pay qualifying claims and administrative costs up to a limit of $500,000 per year. We have no payment obligations in years one and three. We also would have no payment obligation in any other year in which there are no qualifying claims. In the event any qualifying claims remain unpaid after fifteen years, we would have to pay such claims as follows: (1) if the excess claims are between $0 and $1.5 million, we would pay the amount of the claims; (2) if the excess claims are between $1.5 million and $6.0 million, we would pay $1.5 million; and (3) if the excess claims exceed $6.0 million, we would pay $1.5 million plus 25 percent of the amount over $6.0 million, up to a cap of $3.0 million; provided, that in no event would we be obligated to pay any more than $1.0 million in any of years sixteen, seventeen or eighteen.

Our manufacturing facilities are subject to many federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations related to the protection of the environment. Some of our operations require environmental permits to control and reduce air and water discharges or manage other environmental matters, which are subject to modification, renewal and revocation by government authorities. We believe that we are in material compliance with all environmental laws, regulations and permits,

15

and we do not anticipate any material expenditures to meet current or pending environmental requirements. However, we could incur operating costs or capital expenditures in complying with future or more stringent environmental requirements or with current requirements if they are applied to our facilities in a way we do not anticipate.

In November 1999, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) requested that we perform a preliminary assessment of our plant located at 12005 N. Burgard in Portland, Oregon. The primary purpose of the assessment is to determine whether the plant has contributed to sediment contamination in the Willamette River. We entered into a voluntary letter agreement with the department in mid-August 2000. In 2001, groundwater containing elevated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was identified in one localized area of the property furthest from the river. Assessment work in 2002 and 2003 to further characterize the groundwater is consistent with the initial conclusion that a source of the VOCs is located off site. There is no evidence at this time showing a connection between detected VOCs in groundwater and Willamette River sediments. Also, there is no evidence to date that stormwater from the plant has adversely impacted Willamette River sediments. However, DEQ recommended a remedial investigation and feasibility study for further evaluation of both groundwater and stormwater at the plant. In February 2005, the Company and DEQ entered in to a voluntary agreement for remedial investigation and source control measures to follow up on, complete and formalize the results of the previous assessments and investigations. Assessment work is ongoing.

In December 2000, a six-mile section of the lower Willamette River known as the Portland Harbor was included on the National Priorities List at the request of the EPA. The EPA currently describes the site as the areal extent of contamination, and all suitable areas in proximity to the contamination necessary for the implementation of the response action, at, from and to the Portland Harbor Superfund Site Assessment Area from approximately River Mile 3.5 to River Mile 9.2, including uplands portions of the site that contain sources of contamination to the sediments. Our plant is not located on the Willamette River; it lies in what may be the upland portion of the site. However, a final determination of the areal extent of the site will not be determined until EPA issues a record of decision describing the remedial action necessary to address Willamette River sediments. EPA and the DEQ have agreed to share responsibility for investigation and cleanup of the site. The DEQ has the lead responsibility for conducting the upland work, and EPA is the Support Agency for that work. EPA has the lead responsibility for conducting in-water work, and the DEQ is the Support Agency for that work.

Also, in December 2000, EPA notified us and 68 other parties by general notice letter of potential liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act with respect to the Portland Harbor Superfund Site. In its letter, EPA inquired whether parties receiving the letter were interested in volunteering to enter negotiations to perform a remedial investigation and feasibility study at the site. No action was required by EPA of recipients of the general notice letter. In the last week of December 2000, we responded to EPA’s inquiry stating that we were working with the DEQ to determine whether our plant had any impact on Willamette River sediments or was a current source of releases to the Willamette River sediments. That work is continuing as noted previously. To date, no further communication has been received from EPA on this matter.

We operate under numerous governmental permits and licenses relating to air emissions, stormwater run-off, and other matters. We are not aware of any current material violations or citations relating to any of these permits or licenses. We have a policy of reducing consumption of hazardous materials in our operations by substituting non-hazardous materials when possible. Our operations are also governed by many other laws and regulations, including those relating to workplace safety and worker health, principally the Occupational Safety and Health Act and regulations thereunder which, among other requirements, establish noise and dust standards. We believe that we are in material compliance with these laws and regulations and do not believe that future compliance with such laws and regulations will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

From time to time, we are involved in litigation relating to claims arising out of our operations in the normal course of our business. We maintain insurance coverage against potential claims in amounts that we believe to be adequate. Management believes that we are not presently a party to any other litigation, the outcome of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

16

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

The Company’s annual meeting of shareholders was held on May 10, 2005. The following matter was submitted to shareholders for their consideration:

Item 5. Other Information

On August 1, 2005 we adopted a Long Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) between the Company and certain key employees. The Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors determined that it would be appropriate and in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders to adopt this Plan in order to provide management with financial incentives to remain with the Company and to continue to contribute to the success of the Company. Under the Plan, certain key employees are eligible to receive cash payments if the Company meets average return on asset goals, as established by the Compensation Committee, over a rolling three-year period. Awards are determined at the discretion of the Compensation Committee, but are targeted to range from 0% to 40% of the key employees’ annual base salary, and will vest and be paid over a three-year period. All outstanding awards become vested and payable upon a change in control. A copy of this Plan is filed herein as Exhibit 10.1.

Item 6. Exhibits

(a) The exhibits filed as part of this Report are listed below:

17

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.

Dated: August 8, 2005

18