USA TRUCK INC - Annual Report: 2009 (Form 10-K)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
Form
10-K
(Mark
One)
[ X ] ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2009
OR
[ ] TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For the
transition period from __________ to __________
0-19858
(Commission
file number)
USA
Truck, Inc.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
71-0556971
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
3200
Industrial Park Road
|
|
Van
Buren, Arkansas
|
72956
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
Code)
|
(479)
471-2500
|
|
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
|
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
Title
of each class
|
Name
of each exchange on which registered
|
Common
Stock, $0.01 Par Value
|
The
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
(NASDAQ
Global Select Market)
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act
|
|
None
|
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes [ ] No [ X
]
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes
[ ] No [ X ]
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 [ X ] No
[ ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate website, 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 No
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. [ ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated
filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act. (Check one):
Large
Accelerated
Filer____ Accelerated Filer
__X__ Non-Accelerated
Filer _____ Smaller Reporting
Company____
(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
[ ] No [ X ]
The
aggregate market value of the voting stock held by nonaffiliates of the
registrant computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was
last sold as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently
completed second quarter was $106,241,930 (in making this calculation the
registrant has assumed, without admitting for any purpose, that all executive
officers, directors and affiliated holders of more than 10% of the registrant’s
outstanding common stock, and no other persons, are affiliates).
The
number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock, par value $0.01,
as of March 11, 2010 is 10,505,162.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Document
|
Part
of Form 10-K into which the Document is Incorporated
|
|
Portions
of the Proxy Statement to be sent to stockholders
|
Part
III
|
|
in
connection with the 2010 Annual Meeting
|
USA
TRUCK, INC.
|
||||
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
||||
Item
No.
|
Caption
|
Page
|
||
PART
I
|
||||
1.
|
Business
|
2 | ||
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
10 | ||
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
16 | ||
2.
|
Properties
|
16 | ||
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
16 | ||
4.
|
Reserved
|
16 | ||
PART
II
|
||||
5.
|
Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
17 | ||
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
19 | ||
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
20 | ||
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk
|
34 | ||
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
35 | ||
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
|
56 | ||
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
56 | ||
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
58 | ||
PART
III
|
||||
10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
58 | ||
11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
58 | ||
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
|
58 | ||
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence
|
58 | ||
14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
58 | ||
PART
IV
|
||||
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
59 | ||
Signatures
|
60 |
PART
I
Item
1.
|
BUSINESS
|
We are a truckload carrier providing transportation of general
commodities throughout the continental United States, into and out of Mexico and
into and out of portions of Canada. Generally, we transport full dry
van trailer loads of freight from origin to destination without intermediate
stops or handling. To complement our General Freight operations, we provide
dedicated, brokerage and rail intermodal services. For shipments into
Mexico, we transfer our trailers to tractors operated by Mexican trucking
companies at a facility in Laredo, Texas, which is operated by the Company’s
wholly-owned subsidiary. Through our asset based and non-asset based
capabilities, we transport many types of freight for a diverse customer base in
industries such as industrial machinery and equipment, rubber and plastics,
retail stores, paper products, durable consumer goods, metals, electronics and
chemicals.
Our
truckload freight services utilize equipment we own or equipment owned by owner
operators for the pick-up and delivery of freight. The Trucking
segment of our operations provides these services through three service
offerings. Our General Freight service offering transports freight
over irregular routes as a short- to medium-haul common carrier. Our
Dedicated Freight service offering provides similar transportation services, but
does so pursuant to agreements whereby we make our equipment available to a
specific customer for shipments over particular routes at specified
times. Our Trailer-on-Flat-Car rail intermodal service offering,
which we began offering in December 2007, provides a rail transit option to
transport freight to the extent Company equipment is used in providing the
service. At December 31, 2009, our Trucking fleet consisted of
2,328 in service tractors and 7,214 trailers and our average length-of-haul was
599 miles.
Through
our Freight Brokerage and our Container-on-Flat-Car rail intermodal service
offerings, which comprise our Strategic Capacity Solutions operating segment, we
provide services such as transportation scheduling, routing and mode selection,
which typically do not involve the use of our equipment or owner-operator
equipment. In the past, we provided these services primarily as
supplemental services to customers who had also engaged us to provide truckload
freight services.
For
reporting purposes, we aggregate the financial data for our Trucking operating
segment and our Strategic Capacity Solutions operating segment. The
discussion of our business in this Item 1 focuses primarily on Trucking, which
is our dominant segment, producing 95.7% of our total base revenue in
2009.
We were
incorporated in Delaware in September 1986 as a wholly owned subsidiary of ABF
Freight System, Inc. and the Company was purchased by management in December
1988. The initial public offering of our common stock was completed
in March 1992.
Our
principal offices are located at 3200 Industrial Park Road, Van Buren, Arkansas
72956, and our telephone number is (479) 471-2500.
This
Annual Report on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, our current
reports on Form 8-K, and all other reports filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”) pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) can be obtained free of
charge by visiting our website at
http://www.usa-truck.com. Information contained on our website is not
incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and you should not consider
information contained on our website to be part of this report.
Additionally,
you may read all of the materials that we file with the SEC by visiting the
SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.
20549. If you would like information about the operation of the
Public Reference Room, you may call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. You
may also visit the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. This site contains
reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding our
Company and other companies that file electronically with the SEC.
Strategic
and Operating Objectives
We have
studied our business carefully to determine the best path to narrowing the
current and historic disparity between our stock’s valuation and the stocks of
our peers. Going forward, we are continuing to pursue three primary
strategic objectives:
·
|
Continue to manage our
financial returns. Our goal is to produce a return on capital
that meets or exceeds 10% while simultaneously managing our cost of
capital below that 10% threshold, thus adding economic value for our
stockholders. Over the years, we have consistently injected
capital into our business but have not generally been satisfied with the
return on that capital. We are now utilizing our own internal cost
of capital as the basis for establishing internal rates of return
objectives on various business activities.
|
2
·
|
Improve earnings consistency
relative to the Standard & Poor’s 500. Since our initial
public stock offering, our earnings per share results have been
inconsistent, which we believe has contributed to a disparity in
valuations between our common stock and that of our peers. There are
many factors that have contributed to this inconsistency, including
unpredictable insurance and claims costs and our relatively low
outstanding share count. However, the most fundamental factor is the
volatility inherent in our traditional business
model.
|
Our
traditional model, which was primarily medium length-of-haul, produced
industry-leading operating margins when freight demand was plentiful, but we
struggled under that model when freight demand was scarce. A significant
majority of our revenue is now derived from a shorter length-of-haul, as we
adjusted our business model in order to meet these strategic
objectives. These business model changes are described in Item 7,
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations – Results of Operations - Executive Overview.”
While our
revenue production has been volatile throughout the economic cycles, our cost
discipline has not. We are consistently one of the lowest cost operators
in the truckload industry. Maintaining our cost discipline will be
crucial to successfully achieving our objective of improved earnings
consistency.
·
|
Position USA Truck for
long-term revenue growth. Our objective is to create enough
operating margin to consistently produce a 10% return on capital.
Once we consistently produce that rate of return, profitable top-line
revenue growth will again be our primary vehicle to grow stockholder
value. By adjusting our operating model and maintaining our cost
discipline, we are laying the foundation to position ourselves for future
growth opportunities.
|
The
attainment of our strategic direction and objectives is dependent upon the
execution of our operating plan and its supporting initiatives that we call VEVA
(Vision for Economic Value Added). VEVA is a detailed,
quarter-by-quarter operating plan designed to expand our Common Stock valuation
multiples by earning a 10% return on capital and simultaneously driving our
weighted average cost of capital below 10%. VEVA calls for the
expansion of our Common Stock valuation multiples beyond our truckload peer
group’s mean by sustaining or improving our capital management targets and
leveraging a more diversified business model to produce a 10% compounded annual
earnings growth rate.
VISION. Our primary
long-term strategic objectives – to expand the value of our Common Stock through
improved returns on capital and to improve the consistency of our earnings
growth – precipitated the need to make two fundamental changes within our
Company. First, deep organizational change was necessary to retool
USA Truck to maximize returns on capital and de-emphasize our historical
strategy of persistently growing our tractor fleet. Second, a fresh
operational approach was necessary to break our long-term reliance upon
long-haul freight and instead focus on freight network yield. Thus, a
clear vision for USA Truck’s future emerged.
PLANNING. Transforming
that vision into results required a well-conceived plan. Our team
went to work assessing marketplace realities and internal
capabilities. We identified eight major initiatives that we believed
were essential to effecting the fundamental change needed within the Company to
achieve our long-term strategic objectives.
Our
internal assessment indicated needs for a stronger technology platform and more
effective personnel capabilities. Two initiatives were designed to
turn those opportunities into competitive advantages.
Project Tech. For
a variety of reasons we have lost the competitive advantage once afforded by our
legacy mainframe computer platform. To strengthen our ability to make
more timely decisions our evolving business model demanded, we began a process
to migrate our legacy mainframe platform and internally-developed software
applications to server-based platforms. To supplement and enhance our
efforts, we are purchasing off-the-shelf products for our core software needs,
and developing value-added decision-support software applications
internally.
Project People. We
recognize that aligning the interests and efforts of every employee at USA Truck
is essential to achieving our long-term strategic objectives. In that
regard, we have instituted several programs designed to facilitate that
alignment. From job descriptions to performance evaluations to talent
cultivation, we have challenged, empowered and rewarded our employees for
performance. We endeavored to improve the productivity of our
non-driver personnel by using a combination of performance-driven management and
a more focused, process-driven approach to managing our business. We
believe that is the best path to service our customers, produce results for our
stockholders and reward our employees.
3
As the
vast majority of our revenue comes from our truckload operations, we believe
most of our initiatives should be focused on improving the returns on capital
and earnings consistency within those operations. Historically, we
focused on a 900-mile length-of-haul as our primary trucking
strategy. Late in 2008, for the first time in our Company’s history,
we designed a freight network to maximize yield, which we define as the optimal
combination of tractor utilization, pricing, empty miles and variable operating
costs. We now know the specific traffic lanes in which we want to
move freight, and the required volumes and prices necessary to maximize yield in
those lanes. As a result of those efforts, we believe that by
bringing this defined freight network to life through the following four
initiatives, launched during 2008, we will be well-positioned to achieve our
long-term strategic objectives.
Project
Velocity. The marketplace for truckload freight has
changed. The proliferation of retail distribution centers and the
growing rail intermodal market share in long-haul lanes have led to a
significant reduction in truckload freight volume in those long-haul
lanes. The marketplace is forcing truckload carriers into
shorter-haul markets, but operational execution in those markets is very
challenging and requires tremendous intensity and discipline. Though
we are targeting network yield (not length-of-haul), we recognize that our model
will be shorter-haul biased simply because that market is where the freight
volumes are. Thus, it was imperative for us to position the Company
to execute in the shorter-haul environment. Our Project Velocity has
been designed to do just that.
Yield
Management. The concept of freight network yield was foreign
to us prior to 2008, so it was necessary to launch an initiative to educate our
people about yield and to start incorporating it into our business processes and
performance measurements. Our Yield Management initiative laid the
foundation for the development of our defined freight network. We
recognize that yield is not driven exclusively by pricing, so we are also
monitoring our tractor fleet size to help us attain acceptable pricing
levels. We are committed to managing our freight operations to
maximize yield.
Cost
Discipline. USA Truck has long been an industry leader in
operating cost per mile. However, cost is such a critical component
for network yield that we revisited our entire cost structure during
2008. We now manage costs weekly, and we look at it in two buckets:
variable costs per mile and total fixed costs. Our primary goal is
obviously to keep costs as low as possible, but we also want to improve the
flexibility within the cost structure so it can be quickly adjusted as economic
conditions change. We have also devoted considerable attention to
fuel costs, gross margins in our Brokerage and Intermodal service offerings
(asset-light service offerings) and an assortment of fixed costs including
non-driver wages.
War on
Accidents. Another area where we see potential for meaningful
cost reduction is insurance and claims. In late 2007, we implemented
our War on Accidents safety initiative which led to a complete overhaul of our
safety program. In connection with this initiative, we have increased
the safety focus of our drivers and staff personnel and instituted an
organizational emphasis on hiring safe drivers, training them effectively,
holding them accountable for performance and rewarding them for
successes. There are many moving parts to this initiative, but recent
results reflect that the basic formula is working.
We have
determined that bringing our freight network design to life and successfully
implementing all of the above six initiatives will not be enough for us to
consistently grow our earnings or to produce returns on capital exceeding our
cost of capital through the ups and downs of our cyclical
industry. In order for us to grow our business, we will need to meet
the increasing demands of our customers to provide an integrated bundle of
services. To meet these demands, our plan calls for two asset-light
service offerings, which we provide through our Strategic Capacity Solutions
(“SCS”) operating segment. SCS will allow us to boost our returns on
capital, to provide another source of sustainable earnings growth and offer our
customers flexible capacity for their transportation needs in a variety of
service and cost levels.
Rail Intermodal
Service. In late December 2007, we moved our first load of
rail intermodal freight. We are committed to continue incorporating
intermodal into our trucking operations to make the integration as seamless as
possible for our customers. We continue to penetrate new markets and
broaden our customer base with our Trailer-on-Flat-Car and Container-on-Flat-Car
Intermodal service offerings.
Brokerage
Service. Our Freight Brokerage service offering matches
customer shipment needs with available equipment of other carriers, including
our own. As we continue to expand our knowledge of the brokerage
business, we are incorporating that knowledge into our developing brokerage
model. This has allowed us to expand existing branches, establish new
branches around the United States and we are continuing to expand our customer
base and relationships with third-party broker carriers.
4
EXECUTION. We have
painstakingly identified the key performance indicators (KPI) for VEVA, set
targets for each of them and assigned ownership to individual employees who have
accepted responsibility for them and are held accountable for results
daily. Executive management is providing resources, removing barriers
and working closely with middle management and front-line personnel to ensure
that those targets are met. While our return on capital and earnings
growth goals are ambitious, the individual KPI targets are
attainable. By focusing on those individual KPI targets, we believe
that we can reach our long-term strategic objectives.
Industry
and Competition
The
trucking industry includes both private fleets and for-hire
carriers. Private fleets consist of trucks owned and operated by
shippers that move their own goods. For-hire carriers include both
truckload and less-than-truckload operations. Truckload carriers
dedicate an entire trailer to one customer from origin to
destination. Less-than-truckload carriers pick up multiple shipments
from multiple shippers on a single truck and then route the goods through
terminals or service centers, where freight may be transferred to other trucks
with similar destinations for delivery. Truckload carriers typically
transport shipments weighing more than 10,000 pounds, while less-than-truckload
carriers typically transport shipments weighing less than 10,000
pounds.
We
operate primarily in the highly fragmented for-hire truckload segment of the
market. The for-hire segment is highly competitive and includes
thousands of carriers, none of which dominates the market. This
segment is characterized by many small carriers having revenues of less than $1
million per year and relatively few carriers with revenues exceeding $100
million per year. According to Transport Topics, measured by annual
revenue, the 40 largest truckload carriers accounted for approximately $26.2
billion of the for-hire truckload market in 2008. We were ranked
number 16 of the largest truckload carriers based on total revenue for
2008. The industry continues to undergo consolidation. In
addition, the recent challenging economic times have contributed to the failure
of many trucking companies and made entry into the industry more
difficult.
We
compete primarily with other truckload carriers, private fleets and, to a lesser
extent, railroads and less-than-truckload carriers. A number of
truckload carriers have greater financial resources, own more revenue equipment
and carry a larger volume of freight than we do. We also compete with
truckload and less-than-truckload carriers for qualified drivers.
The
principal means of competition in the truckload segment of the industry are
service and price, with rate discounting being particularly intense during
economic downturns. Although we compete more on the basis of service
rather than rates, rate discounting continues to be a factor in obtaining and
retaining business. Furthermore, a depressed economy tends to
increase both price and service competition from alternative modes such as
less-than-truckload carriers, as well as intermodal carriers. We
believe that successful truckload carriers are likely to grow primarily by
offering additional services to their customers and acquiring greater market
share and, to a lesser extent, through an increase in the size of the
market.
Marketing
and Sales
We focus
the majority of our marketing efforts on customers with premium service
requirements and who have heavy shipping needs within our primary operating
areas. This permits us to position available equipment strategically
so that we can be more responsive to customer needs. It also helps us
achieve premium rates and develop long-term, service-oriented
relationships. Our employees have a thorough understanding of the
needs of shippers in many industries. These factors allow us to
provide reliable, timely service to our customers. For 2009,
approximately 95.2% of our total revenue was derived from customers that were
customers prior to 2009, and we have provided services to our top 10 customers
for an average of approximately14 years. We provided service to 791
customers in 2009, and approximately 36.4 % of our total revenue for 2009 was
derived from Standard & Poor’s 500 companies.
The table
below shows the percentage of our total revenue attributable to our top ten and
top five customers and largest customer for the periods indicated.
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||
Top
10 customers
|
32%
|
32%
|
34%
|
||
Top
5 customers
|
20%
|
21%
|
22%
|
||
Largest
customer
|
4%
|
6%
|
6%
|
Our Sales
Department solicits and responds to customer orders and maintains close customer
contact regarding service requirements and rates. We typically
establish rates through individual negotiations with customers. For
our Dedicated Freight services, rates are fixed under contracts tailored to the
specific needs of shippers.
While we
prefer direct relationships with our customers, we recognize that obtaining
shipments through other providers of transportation or logistics services is a
significant marketing opportunity. Securing freight through a third
party enables us to provide services for high-volume shippers to which we might
not otherwise have access because many of them require their carriers to conduct
business with their designated third party logistics provider.
We
require customers to have credit approval before dispatch. We bill
customers at or shortly after delivery and, during 2009, receivables collection
averaged approximately 31 days from the billing date.
Operations
While we
provide our services throughout the continental United States, we conduct most
of our freight transport operations east of the Rocky Mountains. The
following table shows our total Company average length-of-haul and the average
length-of-haul for two of the service offerings in our Trucking segment, in
miles, for the periods indicated.
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||
Total
Company
|
599
|
718
|
784
|
||
Trucking
service offerings:
|
|||||
General
Freight
|
618
|
769
|
827
|
||
Dedicated
Freight
|
471
|
406
|
493
|
Our
Operations Department consists primarily of our fleet managers and freight
coordinators. Each fleet manager supervises between approximately 45
and 60 drivers in our various service offerings and our fleet managers are the
primary contacts with our drivers. They monitor the location of
equipment and direct its movement in the safest, most efficient and most
practicable manner. Freight coordinators assign all available units
and loads in a manner that maximizes profit and minimizes costs. The
Operations Department focuses on making trucks available for dispatch, selecting
profitable freight and efficiently matching that freight to available trucks,
all of which must be achieved without sacrificing customer service, equipment
utilization, driver retention or safety.
Safety
We are
committed to continually improving our safety performance. The Safety
Department’s mission is to focus our efforts on creating the safest possible
environment for our drivers and the motoring public, provide the safest possible
service to our customers, reduce insurance and claims costs and foster a
top-to-bottom culture of safety throughout the Company.
We
emphasize safe work habits as a core value throughout our organization, and we
engage in proactive training and education relating to safety concepts,
processes and procedures for all employees. The evaluation of an
applicant’s safety record is one of several essential criteria we use when
hiring drivers. We conduct pre-employment, random, reasonable
suspicion and post-accident alcohol and substance abuse testing in accordance
with the U.S. Department of Transportation (“DOT”) regulations.
Safety
training for new drivers begins in orientation, when newly hired employees are
taught safe driving and work techniques that emphasize the importance of our
commitment to safety. Upon completion of orientation, new student
drivers are required to undergo on-the-road training for four to six weeks with
experienced commercial motor vehicle drivers who have been selected for their
professionalism and commitment to safety and who are trained to communicate safe
driving techniques to our new drivers. New drivers who successfully
complete the training period must pass a road test before being assigned to
their own tractor. Additionally, all Company drivers participate in
the Smith System®
training program, a nationally recognized training program for professional
drivers that focuses on collision prevention through hands-on
training.
6
To
continually reinforce and promote safety concepts Company-wide, we conduct two
“live” safety training classes each year and provide other monthly training
courses designed to keep our drivers up-to-date on safety topics and to
reinforce and advance professional driving skills. Additionally, the
Safety Department conducts safety meetings with dispatch personnel to address
specific safety-related issues and concerns.
In
addition to the regular safety meetings, the Safety Department also conducts
“safety blitzes” at our high-traffic terminals. These periodic
blitzes are designed to keep safety at the forefront for our drivers and other
employees, and supplement our regular meetings by targeting specific safety
issues such as proper backing techniques, DOT inspections or mirror check
stations. Active participation is required from the
drivers.
We also
have in place a corrective action program designed to evaluate each driver’s
safety record to help determine whether a driver needs additional training and
whether the driver is eligible for continued employment. We have a
Company-wide communication network designed to facilitate rapid response to
safety issues and a driver counseling and retraining system to assist drivers
who need additional assistance or training.
In 2008,
we established an economic awards program to reward those drivers who have
achieved specified safety milestones. Drivers are recognized at the
President’s Million Mile Banquet and outstanding drivers are also recognized in
Company-wide publications and media releases announcing the driver’s
achievements. Driver safety achievements are also noted with special
uniform patches, caps, letters of recognition and other awards that identify the
driver as having reached a safety milestone.
We
maintain a modern fleet of tractors and trailers. This factor, in
conjunction with the regular safety inspections that our drivers and our
Maintenance Department conduct on our equipment, assists us in our goal of
having equipment that is well-maintained and safe. Our tractors are
equipped with anti-lock braking systems and electronic governing equipment that
limits the maximum speed of our tractors to no more than 63 miles per hour. In
addition, substantially all tractors added in 2009, 2008 and 2007, with the
exception of those tractors used to train student drivers, are equipped with
automatic transmissions and stability control systems, which assists in further
reducing the potential for accidents.
Insurance
and Claims
The
primary risks for which we obtain insurance are cargo loss and damage, personal
injury, property damage, workers’ compensation and employee medical
claims. We self-insure for a portion of claims exposure in each of
these areas.
We
maintain insurance above the amounts for which we self-insure with licensed
insurance carriers. Although we believe the aggregate insurance
limits should be sufficient to cover reasonably expected claims, it is possible
that one or more claims could exceed our aggregate coverage
limits. Insurance carriers have raised premiums for many businesses,
including trucking companies, although we have received premium reductions over
the past four years. As a result, our insurance and claims expense
could increase, or we could raise our self-insured retention when our policies
are renewed. If these expenses increase, if we experience a claim in
excess of our coverage limits, or if we experience a claim for which coverage is
not provided, our results of operations and financial condition could be
materially and adversely affected.
Drivers
and Other Personnel
Driver
recruitment and retention are vital to success in our
industry. Recruiting drivers is challenging given our high standards
and because enrollment levels in driving schools are
volatile. Retention is difficult because of wage and job fulfillment
considerations. Driver turnover, especially in the early months of
employment, is a significant problem in our industry, and the competition for
qualified drivers is intense. Although we have had significant driver
turnover during certain periods in the past, we have been able to attract and
retain a sufficient number of qualified drivers to support our
operations. In order to attract and retain drivers we must continue
to provide safe, attractive and comfortable equipment, direct access to
management and
competitive wages and benefits designed to encourage longer-term
employment.
Driver
pay is calculated primarily on the basis of miles driven, and increases based on
tenure and driver performance. We believe our current pay scale is
competitive with industry peers.
7
On March
11, 2010, we had approximately 3,000 employees, including
approximately 2,350 drivers. We do not have any employees
represented by a collective bargaining unit. In the opinion of management, our
relationship with our employees is good.
Revenue
Equipment and Maintenance
Our
policy is to replace most tractors within 36 to 45 months and most trailers
within 84 to 120 months from the date of
purchase. Because maintenance costs increase as equipment ages, we
believe these trade intervals allow us to more closely control our maintenance
costs and to economically balance those costs with the equipment’s expected sale
or trade values. Such trade intervals also permit us to maintain
substantial warranty coverage throughout our period of ownership.
We make
equipment purchasing and replacement decisions based on a number of factors,
including new equipment prices, the used equipment market, demand for our
freight services, prevailing interest rates, technological improvements,
regulatory changes, fuel efficiency, equipment durability, equipment
specifications and the availability of drivers. Therefore, depending
on the circumstances, we may accelerate or delay the acquisition and disposition
of our tractors or trailers from time to time. In that regard, in an
effort to protect our pricing yield and equipment utilization, during the fourth
quarter of 2008, we reduced the number of Company-owned tractors we had in
service by approximately 250 tractors or 10.3%, and designated them for
disposition. The reduction targeted those tractors with the highest
miles and resulted in a fourth quarter 2008 impairment charge of approximately
$0.03 per share as their book value had to be adjusted down to their market
value. This write down of approximately $0.5 million is included in
Other operating expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of
operations. At December 31, 2009, we have replaced all 250 tractors
with new tractors and have disposed of all but one of those that we took out of
service. In conjunction with our strategic objective of positioning
the Company for long-term revenue growth, we will add equipment as the freight
market and driver availability dictate. Generally, our primary
business strategy of earning greater returns on capital requires that we improve
the profitability of our existing tractors before we consider materially adding
to the fleet size.
The
following table shows the number of units and average age of revenue equipment
that we owned or operated under capital leases as of the indicated
dates.
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||
Tractors:
|
|||||
Acquired
|
460
|
786
|
442
|
||
Disposed
|
451
|
786
|
495
|
||
End
of period total
|
2,508
|
2,499
|
2,499
|
||
Average
age at end of period (in months)
|
27
|
24
|
25
|
||
Trailers:
|
|||||
Acquired
|
--
|
450
|
583
|
||
Disposed
|
137
|
123
|
329
|
||
End
of period total
|
7,214
|
7,351
|
7,024
|
||
Average
age at end of period (in months)
|
63
|
51
|
42
|
To
simplify driver and mechanic training, control the cost of spare parts and tire
inventory and provide for a more efficient vehicle maintenance program, we
purchase tractors and trailers manufactured to our specifications. In
deciding which equipment to purchase, a number of factors are considered,
including safety, fuel economy, expected resale value, trade terms and driver
comfort. We have a strict preventive maintenance program designed to
minimize equipment downtime and enhance sale or trade-in values.
We
finance revenue equipment purchases through our Senior Credit Facility, capital
lease-purchase arrangements, proceeds from sales or trades of used equipment and
cash flows from operations. Substantially all of our tractors and
trailers are pledged to secure our obligations under financing
arrangements.
In
addition to tractors that we own, we contract with owner-operators for the use
of their tractors and drivers in our operations. During the third
quarter of 2007, we introduced a lease-purchase program to drivers interested in
owning their own equipment and becoming owner operators. The program
offers qualified drivers the opportunity to purchase their own tractors through
a third party financing program. The drivers may purchase tractors
directly from us or from outside sources. At December 31, 2009, 165
owner-operator tractors were under contract with us, which included 33
lease-purchase operators.
8
Beginning
January 1, 2007, all newly manufactured heavy-duty truck engines were required
to comply with new, more stringent emission standards mandated by the
Environmental Protection Agency. To address the risk of buying new
engines without adequate internal testing and to delay the cost impact of these
new emission standards, we accelerated our revenue equipment acquisition program
and trade intervals before January 1, 2007. In addition,
approximately 87% of the tractors we purchased in 2007 were equipped with
engines produced prior to January 2007. Beginning January 1,
2010, new federal emissions requirements became effective for all heavy-duty
engines. These new requirements further limit the levels of specified emissions
from new heavy-duty engines manufactured in or after 2010, and will result in
cost increases when acquiring these engines. In order to comply with the
standards, new emissions control technologies, such as selective catalytic
reduction strategies and advanced exhaust gas recirculation systems, are being
utilized. In anticipation of an increase in the purchase price of new
equipment related to the new 2010 emissions requirements, we accelerated the
purchase of 100 replacement tractors in 2009 and contractually committed to
purchase another 300 pre-2010 emission regulated replacement tractors
during the first and second quarters of 2010.
Technology
We
maintain a data center using several different computing platforms ranging from
personal computers to an IBM mainframe system. Historically, we have
developed the majority of our software applications internally, including
payroll, billing, dispatch, accounting and maintenance programs. In
order to enhance the service we provide our customers, we determined that our
mainframe software applications needed to be replaced. Accordingly,
we are currently replacing those applications with off-the-shelf, server-based
products. During 2009, we converted both our Intermodal and Brokerage
service offerings to a server-based operating system and during the first
quarter of 2010 we converted our payroll and accounting systems to a
server-based product. We continue to use our internal development
capabilities to create customized decision-support tools for our operating
personnel. Our computer systems are monitored 24 hours a day by
experienced information systems professionals. While we employ many
preventive measures, including daily back-up of our information systems
processes, we do not currently have a wholly redundant backup for our
information systems as a part of our catastrophic business continuity
plan.
The
technology we use in our business enhances the efficiency of all aspects of our
operations and enables us to consistently deliver superior service to our
customers. We are able to closely monitor the location of all our
tractors and to communicate with our drivers in real time through the use of a
Qualcomm satellite-based equipment tracking and driver communication
system. This enables us to efficiently dispatch drivers in response
to customers’ requests, to provide real-time information to our customers about
the status of their shipments and to provide documentation supporting our
assessorial charges, which are charges to customers for additional services such
as loading, unloading or equipment delays. We have also implemented
load optimization software, which is designed to match available equipment with
shipments in a way that best satisfies criteria such as empty miles, the
driver’s available hours of service and home-time needs. This
licensed software assists us in planning for transfers of loaded trailers
between our tractors, allowing us to further enhance efficient allocation of our
equipment, improve customer service and take full advantage of our drivers’
available hours of service.
Regulation
Our
operations are regulated and licensed by various government agencies, including
the DOT. Our Canadian business activities are subject to similar
requirements imposed by the laws and regulations of Canada, as well as its
provincial laws and regulations. The DOT, through the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration (“FMCSA”), imposes safety and fitness regulations
on us and our drivers. The Company currently has a satisfactory DOT
safety rating, which is the highest available rating. New rules that limit
driver hours-of-service were adopted effective January 4, 2004, and then
modified effective October 1, 2005 (“2005 Rules”). In July 2007, a
federal appeals court vacated portions of the 2005 Rules. Two of the
key portions that were vacated include the expansion of the driving day from 10
hours to 11 hours, and the “34-hour restart”, which allowed drivers to restart
calculations of the weekly on-duty time limits after the driver had at least 34
consecutive hours off duty. The court indicated that, in addition to
other reasons, it vacated these two portions of the 2005 Rules because FMCSA
failed to provide adequate data supporting its decision to increase the driving
day and provide for the 34-hour restart. In November 2008, following
the submission of additional data by FMCSA and a series of appeals and related
court rulings, FMCSA published its Final Rule, which retains the 11 hour driving
day and the 34-hour restart. However, advocacy groups have continued
to challenge the Final Rule, and the hours of service rules are once again under
review by the FMCSA. The FMCSA currently expects to issue a new
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 2010 and a new final rule is required by law to
be issued by 2012. We are unable to predict what form the new rule
may take, how a court may address challenges to such rule and to what extent the
FMCSA might attempt to materially revise the rules under the current
presidential administration. On the whole, however, we believe any
modifications to the current rule will decrease productivity and cause some loss
of efficiency, as drivers and shippers may need to be retrained, computer
programming may require modifications, additional drivers may need to be
employed or engaged, additional equipment may need to be acquired, and some
shipping lanes may need to be reconfigured.
9
The FMCSA’s new
Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010 initiative introduces a new enforcement and
compliance model, which implements driver standards in addition to the Company
standards currently in place. Under the new regulations, the
methodology for determining a carrier’s DOT safety rating will be expanded to
include the on-road safety performance of the carrier’s
drivers. Implementation of the new regulation is scheduled for July
1, 2010, and enforcement will begin in late 2010. As a result of new
regulations, including the expanded methodology for determining a carrier’s DOT
safety rating, there may be an adverse effect on our DOT safety
rating. A conditional or unsatisfactory DOT safety rating could
adversely affect our business, because some of our customer contracts may
require a satisfactory DOT safety rating. The new regulations may
also result in a reduced number of eligible drivers. If current or
potential drivers are eliminated due to the Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010
initiative, we may have difficulty attracting and retaining qualified
drivers.
The
Environmental Protection Agency adopted emissions control regulations that
require progressive reductions in exhaust emissions from diesel engines
manufactured on or after October 1, 2002. More stringent reductions
became effective on January 1, 2007 for engines manufactured on or after that
date, and further reductions became effective on January 1,
2010. Compliance with the regulations has increased the cost of our
new tractors and operating expenses while reducing fuel economy, and it is
anticipated that the 2010 changes may further adversely impact those
areas.
We
believe that we are in substantial compliance with applicable federal, state,
provincial and local environmental laws and regulations and costs of such
compliance will not have a material adverse effect on our competitive position,
operations or financial condition or require a material increase in currently
anticipated capital expenditures.
Seasonality
See “Item
7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations─Seasonality.”
Forward-Looking
Statements
This
Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain statements that
may be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A
of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements, other than
statements of historical fact, are statements that could be deemed
forward-looking statements, including without limitation: any projections of
earnings, revenues, or other financial items; any statement of plans,
strategies, and objectives of management for future operations; any statements
concerning proposed new services or developments; any statements regarding
future economic conditions or performance; and any statements of belief and any
statement of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. Such
statements may be identified by their use of terms or phrases such as “expects,”
“estimates,” “projects,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “goals,”
“may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “potential,” “continue,” “future” and similar
terms and phrases. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject
to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified,
which could cause future events and actual results to differ materially from
those set forth in, contemplated by, or underlying the forward-looking
statements. Readers should review and consider the factors discussed
under the heading “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K,
along with various disclosures in our press releases, stockholder reports, and
other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
All
forward-looking statements attributable to us, or persons acting on our behalf,
are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary
statement.
References
to the “Company,” “we,” “us,” “our” and words of similar import refer to USA
Truck, Inc. and its subsidiary.
Item
1A.
|
RISK
FACTORS
|
In
addition to the other information set forth in this report, you should carefully
consider the following risks and uncertainties which could cause our actual
results to differ materially from the results contemplated by the
forward-looking statements contained in this report and in our other filings
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
10
Our
business is subject to economic, credit and business factors affecting the
trucking industry that are largely out of our control, any of which could have a
material adverse effect on our operating results.
The
factors that have negatively affected us, and may do so in the future, include
volatile fuel prices, excess capacity in the trucking industry, surpluses in the
market for used equipment, higher interest rates, higher license and
registration fees, increases in insurance premiums, higher self-insurance
levels, increases in accidents and adverse claims and difficulty in attracting
and retaining qualified drivers and independent contractors.
We are
also affected by recessionary economic cycles and downturns in customers’
business cycles. Economic conditions may adversely affect our
customers and their ability to pay for our services. It is not
possible to predict the effects of armed conflicts or terrorist attacks and
subsequent events on the economy or on consumer confidence in the United States,
or the impact, if any, on our future results of operations.
There has
been on-going concern over the credit markets and their effect on the economy.
If the economy and credit markets weaken or more restrictive regulatory changes
implemented, our business, financial results, and results of operations could be
materially and adversely affected, especially if consumer confidence declines
and domestic spending decreases. Additionally, the stresses in the
credit market have caused uncertainty in the equity markets. Although
some stability has returned to the equity markets, there still exists economic
uncertainty, and that could cause the market price of our securities to be
volatile.
If the
credit markets continue to erode, we also may not be able to access our current
sources of credit and our lenders may not have the capital to fund those
sources. We may need to incur additional indebtedness or issue debt or
equity securities in the future to refinance existing debt, fund working capital
requirements, make investments, or for general corporate purposes. As a result
of contractions in the credit market, as well as other economic trends in the
credit market industry, we may not be able to secure financing for future
activities on satisfactory terms, or at all.
Our Amended and Restated Senior Credit Facility matures on September 1,
2010. Accordingly, during the quarter ended September 30, 2009, we
reclassified that debt from long-term to short-term. The
proposed new facility has materially higher spreads than our current
spreads due to widely reported dislocations in the credit markets. We
have a term sheet in place and are now working on definitive
documents.
If we are
not successful in finalizing the definitive documents or obtaining financing
because we are unable to access the capital markets on financially economical or
feasible terms, it could impact our ability to provide services to our customers
and may materially and adversely affect our business, financial results, current
operations, results of operations, and potential investments.
We
operate in a highly competitive and fragmented industry, and our business may
suffer if we are unable to adequately address downward pricing pressures and
other factors that may adversely affect our ability to compete with other
carriers.
Numerous
competitive factors could impair our ability to maintain our current
profitability. These factors include:
·
|
We
compete with many other truckload carriers of varying sizes and, to a
lesser extent, with less-than-truckload carriers and railroads, some of
which have more equipment or greater capital resources, or other
competitive advantages.
|
·
|
Some
of our competitors periodically reduce their freight rates to gain
business, especially during times of reduced growth rates in the economy,
which may limit our ability to maintain or increase freight rates,
maintain our margins or maintain growth in our
business.
|
·
|
Many
customers reduce the number of carriers they use by selecting so-called
“core carriers” as approved service providers, and in some instances we
may not be selected.
|
·
|
Many
customers periodically accept bids from multiple carriers for their
shipping needs, and this process may depress freight rates or result in
the loss of some of our business to
competitors.
|
·
|
The
trend toward consolidation in the trucking industry may create large
carriers with greater financial resources and other competitive advantages
relating to their size, and we may have difficulty competing with these
larger carriers.
|
·
|
Advances
in technology require increased investments to remain competitive, and our
customers may not be willing to accept higher freight rates to cover the
cost of these investments.
|
11
·
|
Competition
from internet-based and other logistics and freight brokerage companies
may adversely affect our customer relationships and freight
rates.
|
·
|
Economies
of scale that may be passed on to smaller carriers by procurement
aggregation providers may improve their ability to compete with
us.
|
Ongoing
insurance and claims expenses could significantly reduce our
earnings.
If the
number or severity of claims increases or if the costs associated with claims
otherwise increase, our operating results will be adversely
affected. The time that such costs are incurred may significantly
impact our operating results for a particular quarter, as compared to the
comparable quarter in the prior year. In addition, if we were to lose
our ability to self-insure for any significant period of time, our insurance
costs would materially increase and we could experience difficulty in obtaining
adequate levels of coverage.
We could
experience increases in our insurance premiums in the future if we have an
increase in coverage, a reduction in our self-retention level or if our claims
experience deteriorates. If our insurance or claims expense
increases, and we are unable to offset the increase with higher freight rates,
our earnings could be materially and adversely affected.
We
have significant ongoing capital requirements that could affect our
profitability if we are unable to generate sufficient cash from
operations.
The
trucking industry is very capital intensive. If we are unable to
generate sufficient cash from operations in the future, we may have to limit our
growth, enter into additional financing arrangements or operate our revenue
equipment for longer periods, any of which could have a material adverse effect
on our profitability.
We
depend on the proper functioning and availability of our information
systems.
We depend
on the proper functioning and availability of our communications and data
processing systems in operating our business. Our information systems
are protected through physical and software safeguards. However, they
are still vulnerable to fire, storm, flood, power loss, telecommunications
failures, physical or software break-ins and similar events. We do
not have a formal catastrophic disaster recovery plan or a fully redundant
alternate processing capability. If any of our critical information
systems fail or become otherwise unavailable, we would have to perform the
functions manually, which could temporarily impact our ability to manage our
fleet efficiently, to respond to customers’ requests effectively, to maintain
billing and other records reliably and to bill for services accurately or in a
timely manner. Our business interruption insurance may be inadequate
to protect us in the event of a catastrophe. Any system failure,
security breach or other damage could interrupt or delay our operations, damage
our reputation and cause us to lose customers, any of which could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
We have
begun a multi-year process to migrate our legacy mainframe platform and
internally developed software applications to server-based
platforms. We will purchase off-the-shelf products for our core
software needs, and develop value-added decision-support software applications
internally. Any delays, complications or additional costs associated
with, or the failure of, this project could have a material adverse effect on
our business and operating results.
We
depend on our major customers, the loss of one or more of which could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
A
significant portion of our revenue is generated from our major customers. For
fiscal year 2009, our top 10 customers accounted for approximately 32% of our
revenue, our top five customers accounted for approximately 20% of our revenue
and our largest customer accounted for approximately 4% of our
revenue. Generally, we do not have long-term contracts with our major
customers and we cannot assure you that our customer relationships will continue
as presently in effect. A reduction in or termination of our services
by one or more of our major customers could have a material adverse effect on
our business and operating results.
If
we are unable to retain our key executives, our business, financial condition
and results of operations could be harmed.
We are
dependent upon the services of our executive management team. We do
not maintain key-person life insurance on any members of our management
team. The loss of their services could have a material adverse effect
on our operations and future profitability. We must continue to
develop and retain a core group of managers if we are to realize our goal of
expanding our operations, improve our earnings consistency and position the
Company for long-term revenue growth.
12
We
operate in a highly regulated industry and increased costs of compliance with,
or liability for violation of, existing or future regulations could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
The DOT
and various state agencies exercise broad powers over our business, generally
governing such activities as authorization to engage in motor carrier
operations, safety, insurance requirements and financial
reporting. We may also become subject to new or more restrictive
regulations relating to fuel emissions and ergonomics. Our Canadian
business activities are subject to similar requirements imposed by the laws and
regulations of Canada and its provincial laws and regulations. Compliance with
such regulations could substantially reduce equipment productivity, and the
costs of compliance could increase our operating expenses. Our
employee drivers and independent contractors also must comply with the safety
and fitness regulations promulgated by the DOT, including those relating to drug
and alcohol testing and hours of service. The Transportation Security
Administration of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security now require all
drivers who haul hazardous materials to undergo background checks by the Federal
Bureau of Investigation upon renewal of their licenses. While we have
historically required all of our drivers to obtain this qualification, these
regulations could reduce the availability of qualified drivers, which could
require us to adjust our driver compensation package, limit the growth of our
fleet or let equipment sit idle. These regulations could also
complicate the process of matching available equipment with shipments that
include hazardous materials, thereby increasing the time it takes us to respond
to customer orders and increasing our empty miles.
In July
2007, a federal appeals court vacated portions of the 2005 Hours-of-Service
Rules. Two of the key portions that were vacated include the
expansion of the driving day from 10 hours to 11 hours, and the “34-hour
restart,” which allowed drivers to restart calculations of the weekly on-duty
time limits after the driver had at least 34 consecutive hours off
duty. The court indicated that, in addition to other reasons, it
vacated these two portions of the 2005 Rules because FMCSA failed to provide
adequate data supporting its decision to increase the driving day and provide
for the 34-hour restart. In November 2008, following the submission
of additional data by FMCSA and a series of appeals and related court rulings,
FMCSA published its Final Rule, which retains the 11 hour driving day and the
34-hour restart. However, advocacy groups have continued to challenge
the Final Rule and on October 26, 2009, the FMCSA agreed pursuant to a
settlement agreement with certain advocacy groups that the Final Rule on
drivers’ hours of service would not take effect pending the publication of a new
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
Under the
settlement agreement, the FMCSA will submit the draft Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking to the Office of Management and Budget by July 2010 and the FMCSA
will issue a Final Rule by 2012. The current hours of service rules, adopted in
2005, will remain in effect during the rulemaking proceedings. In
December of 2009, the FMCSA issued a notice soliciting data and research
information for the FMCSA’s consideration in drafting the forthcoming Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
We are
unable to predict what form the new hours of service rules may take, how a court
may rule on such challenges to such rules and to what extent the FMCSA might
attempt to materially revise the rules under the current presidential
administration. On the whole, however, we believe that any
modifications to the current rules will decrease productivity and cause some
loss of efficiency, as drivers and shippers may need to be retrained, computer
programming may require modifications, additional drivers may need to be
employed or engaged, additional equipment may need to be acquired, and some
shipping lanes may need to be reconfigured. We are also unable to
predict the effect of any new rules that might be proposed if the Final Rule is
stricken by a court, but any such proposed rules could increase costs in our
industry or decrease productivity. Failures to comply with DOT safety
regulations or downgrades in our safety rating could have a material adverse
impact on our operations or financial condition. A downgrade in our
safety rating could cause us to lose the ability to self-insure. The
loss of our ability to self-insure for any significant period of time would
materially increase our insurance costs. In addition, we may experience
difficulty in obtaining adequate levels of coverage in that event.
On
December 26, 2007, FMCSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the
Federal Register regarding minimum requirements for entry level driver
training. Under the 2007 proposed rule, a commercial driver’s license
applicant would be required to present a valid driver training certificate
obtained from an accredited institution or program. Entry-level
drivers applying for a Class A commercial driver’s license would be required to
complete a minimum of 120 hours of training, consisting of 76 classroom hours
and 44 driving hours. The current regulations do not require a
minimum number of training hours and require only classroom
education. Drivers who obtain their first commercial driver’s license
during the three-year period after FMCSA issues a Final Rule would be
exempt. FMCSA has not established a deadline for issuing the Final
Rule, but the comment period expired on May 23, 2008. If the rule is
approved as written in the 2007 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, this rule could
materially impact the number of potential new drivers entering the industry and,
accordingly, negatively impact our results of operations.
13
The
FMCSA’s new Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010 initiative introduces a new
enforcement and compliance model, which implements driver standards in addition
to the Company standards currently in place. Under the new
regulations, the methodology for determining a carrier’s DOT safety rating will
be expanded to include the on-road safety performance of the carrier’s
drivers. Implementation of the new regulation is scheduled for July
1, 2010, and enforcement will begin in late 2010. As a result of
these new regulations, including the expanded methodology for determining a
carrier's DOT safety rating, there may be an adverse effect on our DOT safety
rating. A conditional or unsatisfactory DOT safety rating could
adversely affect our business, because some of our customer contracts may
require a satisfactory DOT safety rating. The new regulations may
also result in a reduced number of eligible drivers. If current or
potential drivers are eliminated due to the Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010
initiative, we may have difficulty attracting and retaining qualified
drivers.
Decreases
in the availability of new tractors and trailers could have a material adverse
effect on our operating results.
From time
to time, some tractor and trailer vendors have reduced their manufacturing
output due, for example, to lower demand for their products in economic
downturns or a shortage of component parts. As conditions changed,
some of those vendors have had difficulty fulfilling the increased demand for
new equipment. There have been periods when we were unable to
purchase as much new revenue equipment as we needed to sustain our desired
growth rate and to maintain a late-model fleet. We may experience
similar difficulties in future periods. Also, to meet the more restrictive
Environmental Protection Agency emissions standards in 2007 and in January 2010,
vendors have had to introduce new engine technology. An inability to
continue to obtain an adequate supply of new tractors or trailers could have a
material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial
condition.
Fluctuations
in the price or availability of fuel, hedging activities, the volume and terms
of diesel fuel purchase commitments, surcharge collection and surcharge policies
approved by customers may increase our costs of operation, which could
materially and adversely affect our profitability.
Fuel is
one of our largest operating expenses. Diesel fuel prices fluctuate greatly due
to economic, political, and other factors beyond our control. Fuel
also is subject to regional pricing differences. From time-to-time we
may use hedging contracts and volume purchase arrangements to attempt to limit
the effect of price fluctuations. If we do hedge, we may be forced to make cash
payments under the hedging arrangements. We use a fuel surcharge program to
recapture a portion of the increases in fuel prices over a base rate negotiated
with our customers. Our fuel surcharge program does not protect us
from full effect of increases in fuel prices. The terms of each
customer’s fuel surcharge program vary and certain customers have sought to
modify the terms of their fuel surcharge programs to minimize recoverability for
fuel price increases. Over the past year, the failure to recover fuel
price increases resulted in a materially negative impact to our results of
operations. A failure to improve our fuel price protection through these
measures, further increases in fuel prices, or a shortage of diesel fuel, could
materially and adversely affect our results of operations.
Increases
in driver compensation or difficulty in attracting and retaining qualified
drivers could adversely affect our profitability.
Like many
truckload carriers, we experience substantial difficulty in attracting and
retaining sufficient numbers of qualified drivers, including independent
contractors. In addition, due in part to current economic conditions,
including the higher cost of fuel, insurance, and tractors, the available pool
of independent contractor drivers has been
declining. Regulatory requirements, including the new
Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010 initiative, could also reduce the number of
eligible drivers. Because of the shortage of qualified drivers and intense
competition for drivers from other trucking companies, we expect to continue to
face difficulty increasing the number of our drivers, including independent
contractor drivers. The compensation we offer our drivers and
independent contractors is subject to market conditions, and we may find it
necessary to continue to increase driver and independent contractor compensation
in future periods. In addition, we and our industry suffer from a high driver
turnover rate. Our high turnover rate requires us to continually
recruit a substantial number of drivers in order to operate existing revenue
equipment. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain a
sufficient number of drivers, we could be required to adjust our compensation
packages, let tractors sit idle, or operate with fewer tractors and face
difficulty meeting shipper demands, all of which would adversely affect our
growth and profitability.
Our
operations are subject to various environmental laws and regulations, the
violation of which could result in substantial fines or penalties.
We are
subject to various environmental laws and regulations dealing with the hauling
and handling of hazardous materials, fuel storage tanks, air emissions from our
vehicles and facilities, engine idling, and discharge and retention of storm
water. We operate in industrial areas, where truck terminals and
other industrial activities are located, and where groundwater or other forms of
environmental contamination may have occurred. Our operations involve
the risks of fuel spillage or seepage, environmental damage, and hazardous waste
disposal, among others. We also maintain above-ground bulk fuel storage tanks
and fueling islands at five of our facilities. A small percentage of
our freight consists of low-grade hazardous substances, which subjects us to a
wide array of regulations. Although we have instituted programs to monitor and
control environmental risks and promote compliance with applicable environmental
laws and regulations, if we are involved in a spill or other accident involving
hazardous substances, if there are releases of hazardous substances we
transport, or if we are found to be in violation of applicable laws or
regulations, we could be subject to liabilities, including substantial fines or
penalties or civil and criminal liability, any of which could have a
materially adverse effect on our business and operating results.
Regulations
limiting exhaust emissions became effective in 2002 and became progressively
more restrictive in 2007 and January 2010. Engines manufactured after
October 2002 generally cost more, produce lower fuel mileage, and require
additional maintenance compared with earlier models. All of our
tractors are equipped with these engines. We expect additional cost
increases and possibly degradation in fuel mileage from the 2010
engines. These adverse effects, combined with the uncertainty as to
the reliability of the newly designed diesel engines and the residual values of
these vehicles, could increase our costs or otherwise adversely affect our
business or operations.
If
we cannot effectively manage the challenges associated with doing business
internationally, our revenues and profitability may suffer.
An
integral component of our operations is the business we conduct in Mexico and,
to a lesser extent Canada, and we are subject to risks of doing business
internationally, including fluctuations in foreign currencies, changes in the
economic strength of the countries in which we do business, difficulties in
enforcing contractual obligations and intellectual property rights, burdens of
complying with a wide variety of international and United States export and
import laws, and social, political, and economic
instability. Additional risks associated with our foreign operations,
including restrictive trade policies and imposition of duties, taxes, or
government royalties by foreign governments, are present but largely mitigated
by the terms of NAFTA.
Seasonality
and the impact of weather affect our operations and profitability.
Our
tractor productivity decreases during the winter season because inclement
weather impedes operations, and some shippers reduce their shipments after the
winter holiday season. Revenue can also be affected by bad weather
and holidays, since revenue is directly related to available working days of
shippers. At the same time, operating expenses increase, with fuel
efficiency declining because of engine idling and harsh weather creating higher
accident frequency, increased claims, and more equipment repairs. We
could also suffer short-term impacts from weather-related events such as
hurricanes, blizzards, ice storms, and floods that could harm our results or
make our results more volatile.
Increased
prices, reduced productivity, and restricted availability of new revenue
equipment may adversely affect our earnings and cash flows.
We are
subject to risk with respect to prices for new tractors. Prices may
increase, for among other reasons, due to government regulations applicable to
newly manufactured tractors and diesel engines and due to commodity prices and
pricing power among equipment manufacturers. More restrictive
Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, emissions standards that began in 2002
with additional new requirements implemented in 2007 and January 2010 have
required vendors to introduce new engines. Our business could be
harmed if we are unable to continue to obtain an adequate supply of new tractors
and trailers. As of December 31, 2009, approximately 60% of our
tractor fleet was comprised of tractors with engines that met the EPA mandated
clean air standards that became effective January 1, 2007. Tractors
that meet the 2007 and 2010 standards are more expensive than non-compliant
tractors, and we expect to continue to pay increased prices for equipment as we
continue to increase the percentage of our fleet that meets the EPA mandated
clean air standards.
In
addition, a decreased demand for used revenue equipment could adversely affect
our business and operating results. We rely on the sale and trade-in
of used revenue equipment to partially offset the cost of new revenue
equipment. When the supply of used revenue equipment exceeds the
demand for used revenue equipment, as it did during 2009, the general market
value of used revenue equipment decreases. Should this current
condition continue, it would increase our capital expenditures for new revenue
equipment, decrease our gains on sale of revenue equipment, or increase our
maintenance costs if management decides to extend the use of revenue equipment
in a depressed market, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our
operating results.
15
UNRESOLVED STAFF
COMMENTS
|
There are
no unresolved written SEC staff comments regarding our periodic or current
reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 received 180 days or more
before the end of the fiscal year to which this annual report on Form 10-K
relates.
Item
2.
|
PROPERTIES
|
Our
executive offices and headquarters are located on approximately 104 acres in Van
Buren, Arkansas. This facility consists of approximately 117,000
square feet of office, training and driver facilities and approximately 30,000
square feet of maintenance space within two structures. The facility
also has approximately 11,000 square feet of warehouse space and two other
structures with approximately 22,000 square feet of office and warehouse space
which is leased to another party.
We
operate a network of ten additional facilities, which includes brokerage
offices and one terminal facility in Laredo, Texas, operated by a wholly-owned
subsidiary, International Freight Services, Inc., which is one of the largest
inland freight gateway cities between the U.S. and Mexico. As of December 31, 2009,
our facilities were located in or near the following cities:
Shop
|
Driver
Facilities
|
Fuel
|
Office
(1)
|
Own
or
Lease
|
||||||
Van
Buren, Arkansas
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Own
|
|||||
West
Memphis, Arkansas
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Own/Lease
|
|||||
Springdale,
Arkansas
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
Lease
|
|||||
Burns
Harbor, Indiana
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
Lease
|
|||||
Shreveport,
Louisiana
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Own
|
|||||
Vandalia,
Ohio
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Own
|
|||||
Spartanburg,
South Carolina
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
Own
|
|||||
Laredo,
Texas
|
Yes
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
Own/Lease
|
|||||
Roanoke,
Virginia
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Lease
|
|||||
Atlanta,
Georgia
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
Lease
|
|||||
Post
Falls, Idaho
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
Lease
|
(1)
|
Includes
administrative and shop personnel office
facilities.
|
Effective
February 1, 2010, we leased a facility in Chicago, Illinois. This
leased facility includes a shop, driver facility and office.
During
the fourth quarter of 2009, the Company sold a facility, which was not being
used, in the Dayton, Ohio market.
Item
3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
We are a
party to routine litigation incidental to our business, primarily involving
claims for personal injury and property damage incurred in the transportation of
freight. Though we believe these claims to be routine and immaterial
to our long-term financial position, adverse results of one or more of these
claims could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results
of operations or cash flow.
On May
22, 2006, a former independent sales agent filed a lawsuit against us entitled
All-Ways Logistics, Inc. v.
USA Truck, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Arkansas, Jonesboro Division, alleging, among other things, breach of contract,
breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, and tortious interference
with business relations. The plaintiff alleged that we breached and
wrongfully terminated our commission sales agent agreement with it and
improperly interfered with its business relationship with certain of its
customers. In early August 2007, the jury returned an
unfavorable verdict in this contract dispute. The jury held that we
breached the contract and awarded the plaintiff damages of approximately $3.0
million, which was accrued during the quarter ended September 30,
2007. In its December 4, 2007 order, the court denied substantially
all of USA Truck’s motions for post-trial relief and granted the plaintiff’s
motions for pre-judgment interest, attorney’s fees and costs in an amount
totaling approximately $1.7 million, which was accrued during the fourth quarter
of 2007. The court’s order also awarded the plaintiff post-judgment
interest, of which we accrued approximately $0.2 million and $0.2 million for
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. On January
2, 2008, we filed an appeal of the verdict and the court’s order, and on
September 25, 2008, we presented an oral argument before the 8th
Circuit United States Court of Appeals seeking to overturn the
verdict. On October 1, 2009, the Court of Appeals entered an order
affirming the decision of the District Court. The total award in the
amount of $5.1 million was paid on October 19, 2009. On October 20,
2009, the Court issued its final mandate, effectively concluding the
litigation.
Item
4. RESERVED
Item
5.
|
MARKET FOR
REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES
|
Our
Common Stock is quoted on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol
“USAK.” The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated,
the high and low sale prices of our Common Stock as reported by the NASDAQ
Global Select Market.
Price
Range
|
|||||
High
|
Low
|
||||
Year
Ended December 31, 2009
|
|||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
$
|
13.45
|
$
|
10.78
|
|
Third
Quarter
|
15.31
|
12.10
|
|||
Second
Quarter
|
16.09
|
12.13
|
|||
First
Quarter
|
14.97
|
11.73
|
|||
Year
Ended December 31, 2008
|
|||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
$
|
17.05
|
$
|
11.53
|
|
Third
Quarter
|
19.53
|
9.50
|
|||
Second
Quarter
|
13.42
|
11.60
|
|||
First
Quarter
|
15.89
|
11.26
|
As of
March 11, 2010, there were 222 holders of record (including brokerage firms
and other nominees) of our Common Stock. We estimate that there were
approximately 1,650 beneficial owners of the Common Stock as of that
date. On March 11, 2010, the last reported sale price of our Common
Stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Market was $15.49 per share.
Dividend
Policy
We have
not paid any dividends on our Common Stock to date, and we do not anticipate
paying any dividends at the present time. We currently intend to
retain all of our earnings, if any, for use in the expansion and development of
our business. The covenants of our Senior Credit Facility would
prohibit us from paying dividends if such payment would cause us to be in
violation of any of the covenants in that Facility.
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The
following table provides information about our equity compensation plans as of
December 31, 2009. The equity compensation plans that have been
approved by our stockholders are our 2004 Equity Incentive Plan and our 2003
Restricted Stock Award Plan. We do not have any equity compensation
plans under which equity awards are outstanding or may be granted that have not
been approved by our stockholders.
Plan
Category
|
Number
of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants
and Rights
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
|
Number
of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity
Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column
(a))
|
|||
(a)
|
(b)
|
(c)
|
||||
Equity
Compensation Plans Approved by Security Holders
|
201,446(1)
|
$16.25(2)
|
450,419(3)
|
|||
Equity
Compensation Plans Not Approved by Security Holders
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
|||
Total
|
201,446
|
$16.25
|
450,419
|
(1)
|
Includes
only 201,446 of Common Stock subject to outstanding stock options and does
not include: (a) 204,000 unvested shares of restricted stock, which will
vest in annual increments, subject to the attainment of specified
performance goals, and which do not require the payment of exercise prices
and (b) 21,810 unvested shares of restricted stock, which will vest in
annual increments, and which do not require the payment of exercise
prices.
|
The above
number excludes 4,000 shares of performance based restricted stock, which was
deemed to be forfeited at September 30, 2009. The forfeiture will
become effective March 1, 2010.
17
(2)
|
Excludes
shares of restricted stock, which do not require the payment of exercise
prices.
|
(3)
|
Pursuant
to the terms of our 2004 Equity Incentive Plan, on the day of each annual
meeting of our stockholders for a period of nine years, beginning with the
2005 Annual Meeting and ending with the 2013 Annual Meeting, the maximum
number of shares of Common Stock available for issuance under this plan
(including shares issued prior to each such adjustment) is automatically
increased by a number of shares equal to the lesser of (i) 25,000 shares
or (ii) such lesser number of shares (which may be zero or any number less
than 25,000) as determined by our Board of Directors. Pursuant
to this adjustment provision, the maximum number of shares available for
issuance under this plan will increase from 1,025,000 to 1,050,000 on May
5, 2010, the date of our 2010 Annual Meeting. The share numbers
included in the table do not reflect this adjustment or any future
adjustments. The 450,419 shares that remain available for
future grants may be granted as stock options under our 2004 Equity
Incentive Plan, or alternatively, be issued as restricted stock, stock
units, performance shares, performance units or other incentives payable
in cash or stock.
|
Repurchase
of Equity Securities
|
|
On
January 24, 2007, we publicly announced that our Board of Directors authorized
the repurchase of up to 2,000,000 shares of our outstanding Common Stock over a
three-year period ending January 24, 2010. We may make Common Stock
purchases under this program on the open market or in privately negotiated
transactions at prices determined by our Chairman of the Board or
President. During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, no
shares of our Common Stock were repurchased.
On
October 21, 2009, the Board of Directors of the Company approved an
authorization for the repurchase of up to 2,000,000 shares of the Company’s
Common Stock expiring on October 21, 2012. Subject to applicable
timing and other legal requirements, repurchases under this authorization may be
made on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions on terms
approved by the Company’s Chairman of the Board or
President. Repurchased shares may be retired or held in treasury for
future use for appropriate corporate purposes including issuance in connection
with awards under the Company’s employee benefit plans. The new
authorization is in addition to the existing repurchase
authorization.
Common
Stock repurchases during the quarter ended December 31, 2009 are as
follows:
Period
|
Total
Number of
Shares
(or Units)
Purchased
|
Average
Price Paid
per
Share (or Unit)
|
Total
Number of
Shares
(or Units)
Purchased
as Part
of
Publicly
Announced
Plans
or
Programs
|
Maximum
Number
(or
Approximate
Dollar
Value) of
Shares
(or Units) that
May
Yet Be
Purchased
Under the
Plans
or Programs
|
||||
October 1,
2009 - October 31, 2009
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
3,165,901
|
||||
November 1,
2009 - November 30, 2009
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
3,165,901
|
||||
December 1,
2009 - December 31, 2009
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
3,165,901
|
||||
Total
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
3,165,901
|
SELECTED FINANCIAL
DATA
|
You
should read the following selected consolidated financial data and other
operating information along with “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Item 8. Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data.” We derived the selected
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Balance Sheets data as of
and for each of the five years ended December 31, 2009 from our audited
financial statements.
SELECTED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING INFORMATION
(in
thousands, except per share data and key operating statistics)
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Statements
of Operations Data:
|
||||||||||||||
Revenue:
|
||||||||||||||
Trucking
revenue
|
$
|
317,224
|
$
|
381,055
|
$
|
382,064
|
$
|
370,780
|
$
|
358,522
|
||||
Strategic
Capacity Solutions revenue
|
14,296
|
16,502
|
9,124
|
14,521
|
18,107
|
|||||||||
Total
base revenue
|
331,520
|
397,557
|
391,188
|
385,301
|
376,629
|
|||||||||
Fuel
surcharge revenue
|
50,848
|
138,063
|
90,921
|
80,317
|
63,074
|
|||||||||
Total
revenue
|
382,368
|
535,620
|
482,109
|
465,618
|
439,703
|
|||||||||
Operating
expenses and costs:
|
||||||||||||||
Salaries,
wages and employee benefits
|
128,319
|
157,729
|
162,236
|
152,998
|
143,164
|
|||||||||
Fuel
and fuel taxes
|
93,803
|
189,042
|
153,023
|
138,629
|
121,026
|
|||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
50,152
|
50,919
|
49,093
|
46,739
|
41,890
|
|||||||||
Purchased
transportation
|
44,058
|
40,323
|
18,609
|
19,815
|
24,710
|
|||||||||
Operations
and maintenance
|
26,594
|
27,729
|
25,815
|
21,919
|
21,178
|
|||||||||
Insurance
and claims
|
21,086
|
28,999
|
31,144
|
27,006
|
26,172
|
|||||||||
Operating
taxes and licenses
|
5,642
|
6,456
|
6,368
|
6,610
|
6,224
|
|||||||||
Litigation
verdict
|
--
|
--
|
4,690
|
--
|
--
|
|||||||||
Communications
and utilities
|
3,951
|
4,075
|
3,787
|
3,362
|
3,220
|
|||||||||
Gain
on disposal of assets
|
(7)
|
(19)
|
(395)
|
(541)
|
(1,144)
|
|||||||||
Other
|
15,377
|
18,220
|
19,429
|
22,677
|
19,766
|
|||||||||
Total
operating expenses and costs
|
388,975
|
523,473
|
473,799
|
439,214
|
406,206
|
|||||||||
Operating
(loss) income
|
(6,607)
|
12,147
|
8,310
|
26,404
|
33,497
|
|||||||||
Other
expenses (income):
|
||||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
3,030
|
4,643
|
5,130
|
4,192
|
4,829
|
|||||||||
Other,
net
|
(207)
|
139
|
22
|
(134)
|
(19)
|
|||||||||
Total
other expenses, net
|
2,823
|
4,782
|
5,152
|
4,058
|
4,810
|
|||||||||
(Loss)
income before income taxes
|
(9,430)
|
7,365
|
3,158
|
22,346
|
28,687
|
|||||||||
Income
tax (benefit) expense
|
(2,253)
|
4,225
|
3,018
|
9,905
|
13,119
|
|||||||||
Net
(loss) income
|
$
|
(7,177)
|
$
|
3,140
|
$
|
140
|
$
|
12,441
|
$
|
15,568
|
||||
Per
share information:
|
||||||||||||||
Average
shares outstanding (Basic)
|
10,240
|
10,220
|
10,596
|
11,353
|
10,034
|
|||||||||
Basic
(loss) earnings per share
|
$
|
(0.70)
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
1.10
|
$
|
1.55
|
||||
Average
shares outstanding (Diluted)
|
10,240
|
10,238
|
10,651
|
11,561
|
10,328
|
|||||||||
Diluted
(loss) earnings per share
|
$
|
(0.70)
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
1.08
|
$
|
1.51
|
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING INFORMATION
(continued)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
Financial Data:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Operating
ratio (1)
|
102.0
|
%
|
96.9
|
%
|
97.9
|
%
|
93.1
|
%
|
91.1
|
%
|
|||||||||
Cash
flows from operations
|
$
|
32,851
|
$
|
65,869
|
$
|
58,585
|
$
|
76,249
|
$
|
56,552
|
|||||||||
Capital
expenditures, net (2)
|
39,694
|
64,997
|
39,967
|
74,583
|
56,525
|
||||||||||||||
Key
Operating Statistics:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Base
Trucking revenue per tractor per week
|
$
|
2,602
|
$
|
2,869
|
$
|
2,842
|
$
|
2,831
|
$
|
2,936
|
|||||||||
Average
miles per tractor per week
|
1,972
|
2,216
|
2,236
|
2,186
|
2,325
|
||||||||||||||
Empty
mile factor (3)
|
10.9
|
%
|
10.7
|
%
|
11.1
|
%
|
10.3
|
%
|
8.7
|
%
|
|||||||||
Weighted
average number of tractors (4)
|
2,338
|
2,540
|
2,578
|
2,512
|
2,342
|
||||||||||||||
Total
miles (loaded and empty) (in
thousands)
|
240,379
|
294,248
|
300,577
|
286,317
|
283,921
|
||||||||||||||
Average
miles per tractor
|
102,814
|
115,846
|
116,593
|
113,980
|
121,230
|
||||||||||||||
Average
miles per trip (5)
|
599
|
718
|
784
|
837
|
837
|
||||||||||||||
Average
age of tractors, at end of period (in months)
|
27
|
24
|
25
|
21
|
19
|
||||||||||||||
Average
age of trailers, at end of period (in months)
|
63
|
51
|
42
|
36
|
38
|
||||||||||||||
Balance
Sheets Data:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
797
|
$
|
1,541
|
$
|
8,014
|
$
|
7,132
|
$
|
994
|
|||||||||
Total
assets
|
330,700
|
332,268
|
332,938
|
339,494
|
308,079
|
||||||||||||||
Long-term
debt, capital leases and note payable, including current
portion
|
103,592
|
97,605
|
96,162
|
95,406
|
89,232
|
||||||||||||||
Stockholders’
equity
|
140,546
|
146,773
|
143,191
|
159,558
|
149,833
|
||||||||||||||
Total
debt, less cash, to total capitalization ratio
|
42.1
|
%
|
39.3
|
%
|
36.8
|
%
|
34.6
|
%
|
37.4
|
%
|
(1)
|
Operating
ratio is based upon total operating expenses, net of fuel surcharge
revenue, as a percentage of base
revenue.
|
(2)
|
Capital
expenditures, net equals cash purchases of property and equipment plus the
liability incurred for leases on revenue equipment less proceeds from the
sale of property and equipment.
|
|
(3)
|
The
empty mile factor is the number of miles traveled for which we are not
typically compensated by any customer as a percentage of total miles
traveled.
|
|
(4)
|
Weighted
average number of tractors includes Company-operated tractors in-service
plus owner-operator tractors.
|
|
(5)
|
Average
miles per trip is based upon loaded miles divided by the number of
Trucking shipments.
|
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
Overview
The
following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations (or MD&A) is intended to help the reader understand
USA Truck, Inc., our operations and our present business
environment. MD&A is provided as a supplement to and should be
read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto
and other financial information that appears elsewhere in this
report. This overview summarizes the MD&A, which includes the
following sections:
Our Business – a general
description of our business, the organization of our operations and the service
offerings that comprise our operations.
20
Results of Operations – an
analysis of our consolidated results of operations for the three years presented
in our consolidated financial statements and a discussion of seasonality, the
potential impact of inflation and fuel availability and cost.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements –
a discussion of significant financial arrangements, if any, that are not
reflected on our balance sheet.
Liquidity and Capital
Resources – an analysis of cash flows, sources and uses of cash, debt,
equity and contractual obligations.
Critical Accounting Estimates
– a discussion of accounting policies that require critical judgment and
estimates.
Our
Business
We
operate in the for-hire truckload segment of the trucking
industry. Customers in a variety of industries engage us to haul
truckload quantities of freight, with the trailer we use to haul that freight
being assigned exclusively to that customer’s freight until
delivery. We have various service offerings, which we combine into
two operating segments, through which we provide transportation
services. We aggregate the financial data for these operating
segments into one reportable segment for purposes of our public
reporting.
Our
business is classified into the Trucking operating segment and the Strategic
Capacity Solutions operating segment, which we previously designated as
operating divisions. Our Trucking operating segment provides
transportation services in which we use Company-owned tractors and
owner-operator tractors, as well as Trailer-on-Flat-Car rail intermodal
service. Our Strategic Capacity Solutions operating segment, which we
previously referred to as USA Logistics, consists of services such as freight
brokerage, transportation scheduling, routing and mode selection, as well as
Container-on-Flat-Car rail intermodal service, which typically do not involve
the use of Company-owned or owner-operator equipment. Both Trucking
and Strategic Capacity Solutions have similar economic characteristics and are
impacted by virtually the same economic factors as discussed elsewhere in this
report. Accordingly, they have been aggregated into one segment for
financial reporting purposes.
Substantially
all of our base revenue from both segments is generated by transporting, or
arranging for the transportation of, freight for customers, and is predominantly
affected by the rates per mile received from our customers and similar operating
costs. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, Trucking
base revenue represented 95.7%, 95.8% and 97.7% of total base revenue,
respectively, with remaining base revenue being generated through Strategic
Capacity Solutions.
We
generally charge customers for our services on a per-mile basis. The
main factors that impact our profitability on the expense side are the variable
costs of transporting freight for our customers. The variable costs include fuel
expense, insurance and claims and driver-related expenses, such as wages and
benefits.
Trucking. Trucking
includes the following primary service offerings provided to our
customers:
·
|
General
Freight. Our General Freight service offering provides
truckload freight services as a short- to medium-haul common
carrier. We have provided General Freight services since our
inception and we derive the largest portion of our revenues from these
services. Beginning with the first quarter of 2008, we began
including our regional freight operations as part of our General Freight
service offering for reporting
purposes.
|
·
|
Dedicated
Freight. Our Dedicated Freight service offering is a
variation of our General Freight service, whereby we agree to make our
equipment and drivers available to a specific customer for shipments over
particular routes at specified times. In addition to serving
specific customer needs, our Dedicated Freight service offering also aids
in driver recruitment and
retention.
|
·
|
Trailer-on-Flat-Car. During
December 2007, we began including rail intermodal service revenue to the
extent Company equipment is used in providing the service. Our
Trailer-on-Flat-Car service offering provides our customers cost savings
over General Freight with a transit speed slightly slower. It
also allows us to reposition our equipment to maximize our freight network
yield.
|
Strategic Capacity
Solutions. Strategic Capacity Solutions includes the following
primary service offerings provided to our customers:
·
|
Freight Brokerage. Our
Freight Brokerage service offering matches customer shipment needs with
available equipment of other carriers, including our
own.
|
21
·
|
Container-on-Flat-Car. During
December 2007, we began including rail intermodal service revenue to the
extent Company equipment is not used in providing the
service. Our Container-on-Flat-Car service offering matches
customer shipments with available containers of other carriers when it is
not feasible to use our own equipment.
|
Our
Strategic Capacity Solutions service offerings provide services that complement
our Trucking operations. We provide these services primarily to our
existing Trucking customers, many of whom prefer to rely on a single carrier, or
a small group of carriers, to provide all of their transportation
needs. To date, a majority of the customers of Strategic Capacity
Solutions have also engaged us to provide services through one or more of our
Trucking service offerings.
During
December 2007, we began offering rail intermodal services. Intermodal
shipping is a method of transporting freight using multiple modes of
transportation between origin and destination, with the freight remaining in a
trailer or special container throughout the trip. Our rail intermodal
service offerings involve transporting, or arranging the transportation of,
freight on trucks to a third party who uses a different mode of transportation,
specifically rail, to complete the other portion of the shipment. For
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, rail intermodal service offerings
generated approximately 2.4% and 1.2%, respectively, of total base
revenue.
Results
of Operations
Executive
Overview
We are
glad to see 2009 draw to a close. It was by far the most difficult
environment in which we have ever operated. Demand for truckload
freight services fell precipitously, and excess capacity stubbornly remained in
the marketplace, bolstered by falling fuel prices early in the year and by
lenient lenders later in the year. The result was too many trucks
chasing too little freight, which predictably lead to deteriorating
pricing.
In
retrospect, USA Truck sealed its fate for 2009 during the first quarter, when we
failed to secure adequate load volumes during the most active freight bid season
in the industry’s history. That occurred just as our shortening
length-of-haul increased our need for additional loads. As the
current recession reached its trough during the middle of the year, we simply
could not ramp up our volumes to a level sufficient for
profitability. The result was a net loss of $0.70 per share for the
year.
However,
we still made steady progress under the surface. Practically every
area of our business model showed improvement during 2009, but we simply did not
produce enough revenue to show those improvements on the bottom
line. We produced free cash flow (net cash flow from operations, less
net cash used in investing activities) during 2009, thus protecting our strong
balance sheet and enabling us to continue aggressively implementing our
long-term strategic plan, VEVA (Vision for Economic Value Added).
In late
2007, we undertook a complete review of our corporate strategy. We
studied dozens of transportation and logistics stocks to find what truly drives
stock performance in our industry, and we studied our industry to find what
truly drives operational performance. We found that earning a
sufficient return on capital is the most important factor in creating
stockholder value, followed closely by consistent earnings growth. We
also found in order to create desirable stockholder value, our focus would need
to shift as today’s truckload industry requires its participants to operate in a
shorter length-of-haul environment and to offer a more diversified menu of
services to an increasingly more sophisticated customer base. The
result of that research was our VEVA strategic plan.
Historically,
USA Truck participated in the long-haul segment of the truckload
industry. Shifting to a shorter length-of-haul required a completely
different mindset and approach to trucking. It was necessary for us
to fundamentally reposition our business from the ground up. To build
a solid foundation to support VEVA, we launched several initiatives during 2008
designed to improve the number of times we load our tractors each week, the
discipline and intensity levels of our personnel, our safety performance and our
technological capabilities. We launched initiatives to build
intermodal and brokerage services that could complement our trucking operations
and bolster our return on capital. We also set out to improve our
cost structure that has long been among the industry’s best.
We have
made substantial progress in each initiative:
·
|
We
removed approximately $9.0 million from our fixed cost structure during
2009 when compared to 2008, saving approximately $0.54 per share in
earnings.
|
22
·
|
We
reduced the frequency of Department of Transportation reportable accidents
by 25.2% since 2007, resulting in a 90 basis point reduction in insurance
and claims expense in 2009 compared to 2008 for a savings of approximately
$0.18 per share.
|
·
|
We
reduced our non-driver headcount by over 20% since the end of 2007, the
cost savings of which are reflected in the fixed cost savings discussed
above, when we employed just 3.1 drivers for every staff
employee. Today, we have improved that ratio to
4.0:1.0.
|
·
|
We
grew our base Intermodal revenue to $7.8 million in 2009, a 68.6% increase
over 2008.
|
·
|
Our
base Brokerage revenue decreased to $13.7 million in 2009, a reduction of
13.4% from 2008. However, we completely overhauled our
operating model in Brokerage during 2009 and began to see year-over-year
growth in the fourth quarter (which has carried over into the early months
of 2010).
|
·
|
We
have transitioned our Brokerage and Intermodal services to a new
technology platform along with several of our administrative
applications. We also internally developed and deployed a host
of decision support software to our operating
personnel.
|
·
|
We
improved our fleet Velocity (number of times we load our fleet each week)
by 6.4% in 2009 compared to 2008. However, our length-of-haul
also declined by 16.6%, which increased the number of loads we
needed.
|
·
|
Despite
the severe pressure on truckload pricing, we increased our Trucking base
revenue per loaded mile to $1.48, a 2.2% improvement when compared to the
same period of 2008. The improvement is not the result of price
increases to our customers, but rather is attributable to better
management of our freight network as the aforementioned reduction in
length of haul.
|
Those
last two bullet points are the keys to our prospects in 2010. The
progress on all the other bullet points has served to provide a solid foundation
on which to build VEVA, but Velocity and pricing are the critical components
required to actually bringing VEVA to fruition.
We marked
the beginning of transition to the execution phase of VEVA late in third quarter
2009 by the introduction of our Spider Web freight network, which has been
meticulously designed to target specific traffic lanes based on the pricing and
volumes associated with those lanes. The main reason we did not
secure an adequate amount of freight during the first quarter 2009 bid season
was that we did not yet have a cohesive strategy for our freight network, which
meant that we did not have an adequate blueprint to help us discern good freight
from bad freight during the bidding process. The Spider Web network
is specifically designed to remedy that shortcoming.
We spent
over a year researching freight flows throughout the United
States. Using that data, we developed a freight network optimizing
the flow of trucks between specific markets to maximize operating
margin. We tested our assumptions and revised the model over 130
times before we declared it complete. That declaration came in August
2009, and since then we have worked diligently to implement the network
design.
Our goal
is to transition our freight volume to Spider Web lanes. During the
first half of 2009, only 34% of our total load count moved in Spider Web lanes,
but that had improved to approximately 39% by the second half of
December. We expect to end 2010 with that percentage being between
45% and 50% assuming no further deteriorations in the freight
market. It is not realistic to expect that we can achieve 100%
compliance with the Spider Web, and we think it will take a full business cycle
for us to maximize our compliance rate.
Operationally,
we believe USA Truck is stronger today than we were a year ago. We
need freight volume in Spider Web lanes to show the effect of that strength on
the bottom line. We are much better positioned to add that freight
volume today than a year ago because the Spider Web network design tells us
exactly what freight we need to win through customer bids, and our entire
organization is focused on winning it.
While
freight conditions appear to have stabilized across most of the markets and
industries that we serve, and we believe that the worst of the economic
recession is behind us, industry conditions still remain very
challenging. We also believe that industry capacity will gradually
tighten throughout 2010 as struggling trucking companies finally exhaust their
working capital. However, regardless of macroeconomic trends, we will
continue pursuing our VEVA objectives because that is the best path for USA
Truck to follow in order to maximize stockholder value.
Note
Regarding Presentation
By
agreement with our customers, and consistent with industry practice, we add a
graduated surcharge to the rates we charge our customers as diesel fuel prices
increase above an agreed upon baseline price per gallon. The
surcharge is designed to approximately offset increases in fuel costs above the
baseline. Fuel prices are volatile, and the fuel surcharge increases
our revenue at different rates for each period. We believe that
comparing operating costs and expenses to total revenue, including the fuel
surcharge, could provide a distorted comparison of our operating performance,
particularly when comparing results for current and prior
periods. Therefore, we have used base revenue, which excludes the
fuel surcharge revenue, and instead taken the fuel surcharge as a credit against
the fuel and fuel taxes and purchased transportation line items in the table
setting forth the percentage relationship of certain items to base revenue
below.
23
We do not
believe that a reconciliation of the information presented on this basis and
corresponding information comparing operating costs and expenses to total
revenue would be meaningful. Data regarding both total revenue, which
includes the fuel surcharge, and base revenue, which excludes the fuel
surcharge, is included in the consolidated statements of operations included in
this report.
Base
revenues from our Strategic Capacity Solutions operating segment, consisting
primarily of base revenues from our Freight Brokerage service offering, have
fluctuated in recent periods. This service offering does not involve
the use of our tractors and trailers. Therefore, an increase in these
revenues tends to cause expenses related to our operations that do involve our
equipment—including fuel expense, depreciation and amortization expense,
operations and maintenance expense, salaries, wages and employee benefits and
insurance and claims expense—to decrease as a percentage of base revenue, and a
decrease in these revenues tends to cause those expenses to increase as a
percentage of base revenue with a related change in purchased transportation
expense. Since changes in Strategic Capacity Solutions revenues
generally affect all such expenses, as a percentage of base revenue, we do not
specifically mention it as a factor in our discussion of increases or decreases
in those expenses in the period-to-period comparisons below. Base
revenues from our Strategic Capacity Solutions operating segment decreased
approximately 13.4% from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009 and increased
approximately 80.9% from December 31, 2007 to December 31,
2008. However, base revenues from our Strategic Capacity Solutions
operating segment represented only 4.3%, 4.2% and 2.3%, of total base revenue
for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Relationship
of Certain Items to Base Revenue
The
following table sets forth the percentage relationship of certain items to base
revenue for the years indicated. The period-to-period comparisons
below should be read in conjunction with this table and our consolidated
statements of operations and accompanying notes.
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Base
revenue
|
100.0
|
%
|
100.0
|
%
|
100.0
|
%
|
||
Operating
expenses and costs:
|
||||||||
Salaries,
wages and employee
benefits
|
38.7
|
39.7
|
41.5
|
|||||
Fuel
and fuel taxes (1)
(2)
|
13.9
|
13.8
|
16.3
|
|||||
Depreciation
and
amortization
|
15.1
|
12.8
|
12.4
|
|||||
Purchased
transportation
(2)
|
12.4
|
9.2
|
4.4
|
|||||
Operations
and
maintenance
|
8.0
|
7.0
|
6.6
|
|||||
Insurance
and
claims
|
6.4
|
7.3
|
8.0
|
|||||
Operating
taxes and
licenses
|
1.7
|
1.5
|
1.6
|
|||||
Litigation
verdict
|
--
|
--
|
1.2
|
|||||
Communications
and
utilities
|
1.2
|
1.0
|
1.0
|
|||||
Gain
on disposal of revenue equipment, net
|
--
|
--
|
(0.1)
|
|||||
Other
|
4.6
|
4.6
|
5.0
|
|||||
Total
operating expenses and
costs
|
102.0
|
96.9
|
97.9
|
|||||
Operating
(loss) income
|
(2.0)
|
3.1
|
2.1
|
|||||
Other
expenses:
|
||||||||
Interest
expense
|
0.9
|
1.2
|
1.3
|
|||||
Other,
net
|
(0.1)
|
--
|
--
|
|||||
Total
other expenses,
net
|
0.8
|
1.2
|
1.3
|
|||||
(Loss)
income before income
taxes
|
(2.8)
|
1.9
|
0.8
|
|||||
Income
tax (benefit) expense
|
(0.7)
|
1.1
|
0.8
|
|||||
Net
(loss) income
|
(2.1)
|
%
|
0.8
|
%
|
--
|
%
|
(1)
|
Net
of fuel surcharges.
|
(2)
|
For
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company allocated fuel
surcharge revenue to the Trucking and the Strategic Capacity Solutions
operating segments. For purposes of this table, fuel surcharge
revenue is netted against fuel and fuel taxes and purchased transportation
expense. Percentages for 2007 have been recalculated to reflect
this reclassification.
|
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
2008
Results
of Operations – Combined Services
Our base
revenue decreased 16.6% from $397.6 million to $331.5 million, for the reasons
addressed in the Trucking and the Strategic Capacity Solutions sections,
below.
Net loss
for all service offerings was $7.2 million as compared to a net income of $3.1
million for 2008.
Overall,
our operating ratio increased by 5.1 percentage points of base revenue to 102.0%
as a result of the following factors:
·
|
Salaries,
wages and employee benefits decreased by 1.0 percentage point of base
revenue due to a 54.5% increase in the average number of owner-operator
tractors to 153, a 2.1% increase in base revenue per mile and to a lesser
extent a 2.1% decrease in driver pay per mile. If we are able
to continue to increase owner-operator tractors as a percentage of our
total fleet, we would expect salaries, wages and employee benefits would
continue to decrease as a percentage of base revenue absent offsetting
increases in those expenses.
|
·
|
Although
fuel and fuel tax expense net of fuel surcharge revenue as a percent of
base revenue remained relatively flat from 2008 to 2009, quarterly
fluctuations throughout 2009 significantly impacted our interim
results. For example, fuel prices were falling dramatically
during the fourth quarter of 2008, but were climbing throughout the fourth
quarter of 2009. As diesel fuel prices increase above an
agreed-upon baseline price per gallon, we add a graduated surcharge to the
rates we charge our customers. The surcharge is designed to
approximately offset increases in fuel costs above the
baseline. However, because our fuel surcharge recovery lags
behind changes in actual diesel prices, we generally do not recover the
increased cost we are paying for fuel when prices are rising (as in the
most recent quarter). Conversely, we generally collect excess
fuel surcharge revenue when prices are declining. While the
diesel price volatility tends to equalize over time, it can have a
profound impact on an individual
quarter.
|
25
·
|
Depreciation
and amortization increased by 2.3 percentage points of base revenue
primarily due to a 11.0% decrease in miles per tractor per week and an
8.2% increase in depreciation per tractor. This was partially
offset by the above-mentioned increase in the average number of
owner-operator tractors, which bear their own depreciation and
amortization expense. Prices for new tractors have risen in
recent years due to Environmental Protection Agency mandates on engine
emissions, and they are expected to rise again with the introduction of
the 2010 emissions standards.
|
·
|
Insurance
and claims decreased by 0.9 percentage point of base revenue primarily due
to a decrease in adverse claims experience and a reduction in the
frequency of accidents. Department of Transportation reportable
accidents fell approximately 24.2% in 2009. If we are able to
continue to successfully execute our “War on Accidents” safety initiative
we would expect insurance and claims expense to gradually decrease over
the long term, though remaining volatile from
period-to-period.
|
·
|
Operations
and maintenance increased by 1.0 percentage point of base revenue due to
an increase in the percentage of our total freight volume residing in the
Northeast, which has a higher number of toll roads. The
average age of our tractor fleet has increased from 23.7 months in
2008 to 27.1 in 2009 and our trailer fleet increased from 51.5 months in
2008 to 62.6 months in 2009. As the age of tractors and
trailers increase, the cost to maintain the equipment generally
rises. However, as the number of miles per tractor decreases
due to a shorter length-of-haul, this may allow us to keep the tractors
for longer periods of time.
|
·
|
Purchased
transportation increased by 3.2 percentage points of base revenue due
primarily to the above-mentioned increase in owner-operator tractors and
an increase in carrier expense associated with our Strategic Capacity
Solutions operating segment. We expect this expense will
continue to increase when compared to prior periods if we can achieve our
goals to grow our owner-operator tractor fleet and increase the revenue of
our Strategic Capacity Solutions operating
segment.
|
·
|
Our
effective tax rate decreased from 57.4% in 2008 to 23.9% in
2009. Income tax expense varies from the amount computed by
applying the federal tax rate to income before income taxes primarily due
to state income taxes, net of federal income tax effect and due to
permanent differences, the most significant of which is the effect of the
per diem pay structure for drivers. Due to the partially
nondeductible effect of per diem payments, our tax rate will vary in
future periods based on fluctuations in earnings and in the number of
drivers who elect to receive this pay
structure.
|
Results
of Operations – Trucking
Key
Operating Statistics:
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Total
miles (in
thousands) (1)
|
240,379
|
294,248
|
|||||
Empty
mile factor (2)
|
10.9
|
%
|
10.7
|
%
|
|||
Weighted
average number of tractors (3)
|
2,338
|
2,540
|
|||||
Average
miles per tractor per period
|
102,814
|
115,846
|
|||||
Average
miles per tractor per week
|
1,972
|
2,216
|
|||||
Average
miles per trip (4)
|
599
|
718
|
|||||
Base
Trucking revenue per tractor per week
|
$
|
2,602
|
$
|
2,869
|
|||
Number
of tractors at end of period (3)
|
2,328
|
2,392
|
|||||
Operating
ratio (5)
|
102.0
|
%
|
96.9
|
%
|
(1)
|
Total
miles include both loaded and empty
miles.
|
26
(2)
|
The
empty mile factor is the number of miles traveled for which we are not
typically compensated by any customer as a percentage of total miles
traveled.
|
(3) Tractors
include Company-operated tractors currently in service plus owner-operator
tractors.
(4) Average
miles per trip is based upon loaded miles divided by the number of Trucking
shipments.
|
(5)
Operating
ratio is based upon total operating expenses, net of fuel surcharge
revenue, as a percentage of base revenue.
|
|
Base
Revenue
|
Base
revenue from Trucking decreased by 16.8% to $317.2 million. The
decrease was the result of several factors:
·
|
Our
miles per tractor per week decreased 11.0% and the weighted average number
of tractors decreased 8.0%.
|
·
|
General
Freight revenue decreased 15.5% and Dedicated Freight decreased
43.5%. The Trucking base revenue decrease was partially offset
by the 81.8% increase in our Trailer-on-Flat-Car Intermodal service
offering (from $4.0 million to $7.2
million).
|
·
|
Depressed
freight volumes and excess competition for available loads drove down our
revenue per tractor per week by approximately 9.3%. However, we
did improve our Trucking base revenue per loaded mile 2.2%, and our
improved operational efficiency was evident in the 6.4% increase in
Velocity (defined as the number of times we load our fleet each
week).
|
Results
of Operations – Strategic Capacity Solutions
We
finished the year with base revenue from Strategic Capacity Solutions of $14.3
million, a decrease of 13.4%, which was almost entirely due to a decrease in our
Freight Brokerage base revenue. Base revenue from our
Container-on-Flat-Car service offering fell slightly from $0.64 million to $0.56
million. As indicated above, the remaining portion of our rail
intermodal service offerings is classified into our Trucking operating
segment.
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared to Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
2007
Results
of Operations – Combined Services
Our base
revenue grew 1.6% from $391.2 million to $397.6 million, for the reasons
addressed in the Trucking and the Strategic Capacity Solutions sections,
below.
Net
income for all service offerings was $3.1 million as compared to $0.1 million
for 2007.
Overall,
our operating ratio improved by 1.0 percentage points of base revenue to 96.9%
as a result of the following factors:
·
|
Salaries,
wages and employee benefits decreased by 1.8 percentage points of base
revenue due to a 160.5% increase in the average number of owner-operator
tractors and a 3.8% increase in base revenue per
mile. If we are able to continue to increase owner-operator
tractors as a percentage of our total fleet, we would expect salaries,
wages and employee benefits would continue to decrease as a percentage of
base revenue absent offsetting increases in those
expenses.
|
·
|
Fuel
and fuel taxes decreased by 2.5 percentage points of base revenue
primarily due to a 7.8% decrease in the net price paid for diesel fuel, a
1.1 percentage point decrease in out-of-route miles and, as mentioned
above, an increase in the average number of owner-operator tractors, which
bear their own fuel expenses.
|
·
|
Insurance
and claims decreased by 0.7 percentage point of base revenue primarily due
to a decrease in adverse claims experience and a reduction in the
frequency of accidents. DOT reportable accidents fell
approximately 23.1% in 2008. If we are able to continue to
successfully execute our “War on Accidents” safety initiative we would
expect insurance and claims expense to gradually decrease in the long
term, though remaining volatile from
period-to-period.
|
·
|
Operations
and maintenance increased by 0.4 percentage points of base revenue as
direct repair costs on our tractors and trailers increased 5.0% due to a
7.1% increase in the average age of the tractor fleet for the year from
22.1 months in 2007 to 23.7 months in 2008 and a 30.5% increase in the
average age of our trailer fleet for the
year.
|
27
·
|
Purchased
transportation increased by 4.8 percentage points of base revenue due
primarily to the increase in carrier expense associated with our Strategic
Capacity Solutions operating segment and the above-mentioned increase in
owner-operator tractors. We expect this expense will continue
to increase when compared to prior periods if we can achieve our goals to
grow our owner-operator fleet and increase the revenue of our Strategic
Capacity Solutions operating
segment.
|
·
|
Other
operating expenses decreased by 0.4 percentage points of base revenue
primarily due to a decrease in driver recruiting costs of
13.8%. The reduction in driver recruiting costs resulted from
lower driver turnover (-8.3%) and an accommodating market for hiring
drivers.
|
·
|
Our
effective tax rate decreased from 95.6% in 2007 to 57.4% in
2008. Income tax expense varies from the amount computed by
applying the federal tax rate to income before income taxes primarily due
to state income taxes, net of federal income tax effect and due to
permanent differences, the most significant of which is the effect of the
per diem pay structure for drivers. Due to the partially
nondeductible effect of per diem payments, our tax rate will vary in
future periods based on fluctuations in earnings and in the number of
drivers who elect to receive this pay
structure.
|
Results
of Operations – Trucking
Key
Operating Statistics:
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31,
|
|||||||
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Total
miles (in
thousands) (1)
|
294,248
|
300,577
|
|||||
Empty
mile factor (2)
|
10.7
|
%
|
11.1
|
%
|
|||
Weighted
average number of tractors (3)
|
2,540
|
2,578
|
|||||
Average
miles per tractor per period
|
115,846
|
116,593
|
|||||
Average
miles per tractor per week
|
2,216
|
2,236
|
|||||
Average
miles per trip (4)
|
718
|
784
|
|||||
Base
Trucking revenue per tractor per week
|
$
|
2,869
|
$
|
2,842
|
|||
Number
of tractors at end of period (3)
|
2,392
|
2,557
|
|||||
Operating
ratio (5)
|
96.9
|
%
|
97.9
|
%
|
(1) Total
miles include both loaded and empty miles.
(2)
|
The
empty mile factor is the number of miles traveled for which we are not
typically compensated by any customer as a percentage of total miles
traveled.
|
(3) Tractors
include Company-operated tractors currently in service plus owner-operator
tractors.
(4)
Average miles per trip is based upon loaded miles divided by the number of
Trucking shipments.
|
(5)
|
Operating
ratio is based upon total operating expenses, net of fuel surcharge
revenue, as a percentage of base
revenue.
|
|
Base
Revenue
|
Base
revenue from Trucking decreased by 0.3% to $381.1 million. The
decrease was the result of several factors:
·
|
A
decrease in the miles per tractor per week (-0.9%) and a decrease in the
weighted average number of tractors
(-1.5%).
|
·
|
General
Freight revenue decreased 1.6%. This decrease was partially
offset by the addition of our Trailer-on-Flat-Car Intermodal service
offering (from zero to $4.0 million) and a 1.7% increase in Dedicated
Freight base revenue.
|
·
|
Although
diesel fuel prices declined during the second half of 2008, the decline
was not enough to offset deteriorating freight demand. We
believe these lower diesel prices provided a working capital boost to
marginal carriers, thus allowing them to continue their operations thereby
exacerbating the imbalance between industry truck supply and freight
demand.
|
28
·
|
The
deterioration in the freight environment took its toll on our performance
this year. The most significant impact of the deterioration was
a reduction in Trucking base revenue, which resulted in a 0.9% decline in
our tractor utilization. Operating margin was squeezed as
Trucking base revenue declined at a faster rate than fixed costs could be
removed from our system. The reduced utilization muted the
effects of the falling fuel prices during the second half of the year
(since lower fuel prices are only relevant if we are running
miles).
|
·
|
Depressed
freight volumes and increased competition for available loads drove down
our revenue per tractor per week. However, we did improve our
Trucking base revenue per loaded mile 1.4%, and our improved operational
efficiency was evident in the 8.6% increase in Velocity (defined as the
number of times we load our fleet each
week).
|
Results
of Operations – Strategic Capacity Solutions
We have
strategically targeted Freight Brokerage and Rail Intermodal for
growth. We established goals for 2008 to double the size of our
Freight Brokerage base revenue to approximately $18 million and to establish a
presence in the rail intermodal market with $2 million of related base revenue
in 2008. We finished the year with base revenue from Strategic
Capacity Solutions that increased 80.9% to $16.5 million primarily due to an
86.8% increase in our Freight Brokerage base revenue, short of our 2008
objective. Base revenue from our Container-on-Flat-Car service
offering grew from zero to $0.6 million. As indicated above, the
remaining portion of our rail intermodal service offerings is classified into
our Trucking operating segment.
Seasonality
In the
trucking industry, revenues generally decrease as customers reduce shipments
during the winter holiday season and as inclement weather impedes
operations. At the same time, operating expenses increase, due
primarily to decreased fuel efficiency and increased maintenance
costs. Future revenues could be impacted if our customers,
particularly those with manufacturing operations, reduce shipments due to
temporary plant closings. Historically, many of our customers have
closed their plants for maintenance or other reasons during January and
July.
Inflation
Although
most of our operating expenses are inflation sensitive, the effect of inflation
on revenue and operating costs has been minimal over the past three
years. The effect of inflation-driven cost increases on our overall
operating costs would not be expected to be greater for us than for our
competitors.
Fuel
Availability and Cost
The motor
carrier industry is dependent upon the availability of fuel. Fuel
shortages or increases in fuel taxes or fuel costs have adversely affected our
profitability and will continue to do so. Fuel prices have fluctuated
widely and fuel taxes have generally increased in recent years. We
have not experienced difficulty in maintaining necessary fuel supplies, and in
the past we generally have been able to partially offset increases in fuel costs
and fuel taxes through increased freight rates and through a fuel surcharge that
increases incrementally as the price of fuel increases above a certain baseline
price. Typically, we are not able to fully recover increases in fuel
prices through rate increases and fuel surcharges, primarily because those items
do not provide any benefit with respect to empty and out-of-route miles, for
which we do not typically receive compensation from customers. We do
not have any long-term fuel purchase contracts and we have not entered into any
hedging arrangements that protect us against fuel price
increases. Overall, the market fuel prices per gallon were lower in
2009 than they were in 2008 and 2007.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
We do not
currently have off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely
to have a material current or future effect on our consolidated financial
condition, revenue or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital
expenditures or capital resources. From time to time, we enter into
operating leases relating to facilities and office equipment that are not
reflected in our balance sheet.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The
continued growth of our business has required significant investments in new
revenue equipment. We have financed new tractor and trailer purchases
predominantly with cash flows from operations, the proceeds from sales or trades
of used equipment, borrowings under our Senior Credit Facility and capital
lease-purchase arrangements. We have historically met our working
capital needs with cash flows from operations and with borrowings under our
Facility. During 2009, the maximum amount borrowed under the
Facility, including letters of credit was approximately 57.8% of the total
amount available and we ended the year with outstanding borrowings, including
letters of credit equal to approximately 48.5% of the total amount
available. We use the Facility to minimize fluctuations in cash flow
needs and to provide flexibility in financing revenue equipment
purchases. At December 31, 2009, we had approximately $51.5 million
available under our Facility and $40.0 million of availability for new capital
leases under existing lease facilities. The Facility matures on
September 1, 2010. Accordingly,
during the quarter ended September 30, 2009, we reclassified that debt from
long-term to short-term. The proposed new facility has
materially higher spreads than our current spreads due to widely reported
dislocations in the credit markets. We have a term sheet in place
and are now working on definitive documents. Management is not
aware of any known trends or uncertainties that would cause a significant change
in our sources of liquidity. We expect our principal sources of
capital to be sufficient to finance our operations, annual debt maturities,
lease commitments, letter of credit commitments, stock repurchases and capital
expenditures over the next twelve months. There can be no assurance,
however, that such sources will be sufficient to fund our operations and all
expansion plans for the next several years, or that any necessary additional
financing will be available, if at all, in amounts required or on terms
satisfactory to us.
29
Our
balance sheet debt, less cash, represents just 42.1% of our total
capitalization, and we have no material off-balance sheet debt. We
have financed approximately $15.7 million of our 2009 tractor purchases with
42-month, fixed-rate capital leases. Our capital leases currently
represent 53.9 % of our total debt and carry an average fixed rate of
3.8%. Not only does that provide us with a natural hedge against
recent London Interbank Offered Rate volatility, but it has also freed up
availability on our revolving credit line on which we could currently borrow up
to an additional $51.5 million without violating any of our current financial
covenants. Despite a heavy tractor trading program, we produced $8.8
million in free cash flow (cash flow from operations less cash used in investing
activities) during 2009, which was $30.8 million less than that of
2008. We expect our 2010 capital expenditures to be greater than the
2009 levels. In summary, based on our operating results, anticipated
future cash flows, and current availability under our Facility and capital
lease-purchase arrangements that we expect will be available to us, we do not
expect to experience significant liquidity constraints in the foreseeable
future.
If the
credit markets continue to erode, we also may not be able to access our current
sources of credit and our lenders may not have the capital to fund those
sources. We may need to incur additional indebtedness or issue debt
or equity securities in the future to refinance existing debt, fund working
capital requirements, make investments or for general corporate
purposes. As a result of contractions in the credit market, as well
as other economic trends in the credit market industry, we may not be able to
secure financing for future activities on satisfactory terms, or at
all. If we are not successful in obtaining sufficient financing
because we are unable to access the capital markets on financially economical or
feasible terms, it could impact our ability to provide services to our customers
and may materially and adversely affect our business, financial results, results
of operations and potential investments.
Cash
Flows
|
||||||||
(in
thousands)
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
$
|
32,851
|
$
|
65,869
|
$
|
58,585
|
||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(24,095)
|
(26,359)
|
(16,394)
|
|||||
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
(9,500)
|
(45,983)
|
(41,309)
|
Cash
generated from operations decreased $33.0 million during 2009 as compared to
2008, due to a decrease in net income of $10.3 million, a decrease in cash
provided from accounts receivable of $17.8 million resulting from extended
customer payment terms and improved freight volumes during the fourth quarter,
an increase of $3.3 million in cash used for prepaid expenses due to our change
in accounting for tires, an increase in cash used in trade accounts payable,
accrued expenses and insurance and claims accruals of $8.4 million, the most
significant component of which was the settlement for the All-Ways Logistics
verdict. The increase in the use of cash was partially offset by a
$7.0 million reduction in deferred taxes. During 2008, cash generated from
operations increased $7.3 million, as a result of an increase in net income of
$3.0 million, a decrease in accounts receivable of $8.8 million resulting from
improved collection procedures and decreased freight volumes, an increase in
payables and accrued expenses of $6.6 million the most significant component of
which is a $2.1 million increase in income tax accrual, and a decrease in
insurance and claims accruals of $8.2 million.
Cash used
in investing activities decreased $2.3 million during 2009 as compared to 2008
due to a decrease in net capital expenditures of $2.4 million. The
decline was due to a reduction in revenue equipment purchases resulting from our
equipment trade cycle. During 2008, cash used in investing activities
increased $10.0 million as compared to 2007, due to an increase in expenditures
for revenue equipment in our normal trade cycles.
30
Cash used
in financing activities decreased $36.5 million during 2009 as compared to
2008. Of the $36.5 million decrease, $23.4 million was due to a
change in net borrowing on our Facility; we borrowed $13.5 million in 2009
compared to a $9.9 million pay down in 2008. We used $4.1 million
less cash for principle payments on our capital leases due to less equipment
financed under capital leases in 2009. Bank drafts payable decreased
$8.5 million due to the timing of equipment purchases and reduced
payrolls. Cash used in financing activities increased $4.7 million
during 2008 as compared to 2007. The change was primarily
due to a reduction in net borrowings on our Facility, which was made possible by
a $14.9 million increase in capital leases and a decrease in bank drafts
payable.
Debt
On
September 1, 2005, we entered into an Amended and Restated Senior Credit
Facility, which restated in its entirety and made certain amendments to our
previously amended facility dated as of April 28, 2000. The Facility
was amended to, among other things, increase the maximum borrowing amount to
$100.0 million, subject to a borrowing base calculation. The Facility
includes a sublimit of up to $25.0 million for letters of credit.
The
Facility is collateralized by revenue equipment having a net book value of
approximately $178.5 million at December 31, 2009 and all trade and other
accounts receivable. The Facility provides an accordion feature
allowing us to increase the maximum borrowing amount by up to an additional
$75.0 million in the aggregate in one or more increases no less than six months
prior to the maturity date, subject to certain conditions. At this
time, we do not anticipate the need to exercise the accordion feature or, if
needed, we do not expect to encounter any difficulties in doing
so. The maximum borrowing including the accordion feature may not
exceed $175.0 million without the consent of the lenders. At December
31, 2009, $46.7 million was outstanding under the Facility.
The
Facility bears variable interest based on the type of borrowing and the agent
bank’s prime rate, the federal funds rate plus a certain percentage or the
London Interbank Offered Rate plus a certain percentage, which is determined
based on our attainment of certain financial ratios. For the year
ended December 31, 2009, the effective interest rate was 1.6%. A
quarterly commitment fee is payable on the unused credit line at a rate which is
determined based on our attainment of certain financial ratios. At
December 31, 2009, the rate was 0.2% per annum.
The
Facility contains various covenants, which require us to meet certain quarterly
financial ratios and to maintain a minimum tangible net worth of approximately
$133.9 million at December 31, 2009. In the event we fail to cure an
event of default, the loan can become immediately due and payable. As
of December 31, 2009, we were in compliance with the covenants. We have
entered into leases with lenders who participate in our
Facility. Those leases and the Facility contain cross-default
provisions. We have also entered into leases with other lenders who
do not participate in the Facility. Multiple leases with lenders who
do not participate in our Facility generally contain cross-default
provisions.
The Facility matures on September 1, 2010. Accordingly, during the
quarter ended September 30, 2009, we reclassified that debt from long-term to
short-term. The proposed new facility has materially higher
spreads than our current spreads due to widely reported dislocations in the
credit markets. We have a term sheet in place and are now
working on definitive documents.
We record derivative financial instruments in the balance sheet as either an asset or liability at fair value, with classification as current or long-term depending on the duration of the instrument. Changes in the derivative instrument’s fair value must be recognized currently in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. For cash flow hedges that meet the criteria, the derivative instrument’s gains and losses, to the extent effective, are recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings.
On
October 21, 2008, we entered into an interest rate swap agreement with a
notional amount of $9.0 million with an effective date of October 21,
2008. We designated the $9.0 million interest rate swap as a cash
flow hedge of our exposure to variability in future cash flow resulting from the
interest payments indexed to the three-month London Interbank Offered
Rate. The rate on the swap was fixed at 4.25% until January 20,
2009.
On
February 6, 2009, we entered into a $10.0 million interest rate swap agreement
with an effective date of February 19, 2009. The rate on the swap is fixed
at 1.57% until February 19, 2011. The interest rate swap agreement is being
accounted for as a cash flow hedge.
31
Equity
At
December 31, 2009, we had stockholders’ equity of $140.5 million and total debt
including current maturities of $103.6 million, resulting in a total debt, less
cash, to total capitalization ratio of 42.1% compared to 39.3% at December 31,
2008.
Purchases
and Commitments
As of
December 31, 2009, our forecasted capital expenditures, net of proceeds from the
sale of revenue equipment, for 2010 were $70.1 million, approximately $68.3
million of which relates to revenue equipment. We may change the amount of
the capital expenditures based on our operating performance. To the extent further
capital expenditures are feasible based on our debt covenants and operating cash
requirements, we would use the balance of $1.8 million primarily for
improvements and maintenance and office equipment. We
routinely evaluate our equipment acquisition needs and adjust our purchase and
disposition schedules from time to time based on our analysis of factors such as
freight demand, the availability of drivers and the condition of the used
equipment market. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we made
$39.7 million of net capital expenditures, including $39.3 million for revenue
equipment purchases ($15.7 million of which were capital lease obligations) and
a net of $0.4 million was for non-revenue equipment.
The
following table represents our outstanding contractual obligations at December
31, 2009:
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||
Payments
Due By Period
|
||||||||||||||
Total
|
2010
|
2011-2012
|
2013-2014
|
Thereafter
|
||||||||||
Contractual
Obligations:
|
||||||||||||||
Long-term debt obligations (1)
|
$
|
46,718
|
$
|
46,718
|
$
|
--
|
$
|
--
|
$
|
--
|
||||
Capital lease obligations (2)
|
59,437
|
18,644
|
40,056
|
737
|
--
|
|||||||||
Purchase obligations (3)
|
31,745
|
31,745
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
|||||||||
Rental obligations
|
1,485
|
580
|
540
|
43
|
322
|
|||||||||
Total
|
$
|
139,385
|
$
|
97,687
|
$
|
40,596
|
$
|
780
|
$
|
322
|
(1)
|
Long-term
debt obligations, excluding letters of credit in the amount of $1.8
million, consist of our Senior Credit Facility, which matures on September
1, 2010. The primary purpose of this Facility is to provide working
capital for the Company; however, the Facility is also used, as
appropriate, to minimize interest expense on other Company purchases that
could be obtained through other more expensive capital purchase financing
sources. Because the borrowing amounts fluctuate and the
interest rates vary, they are subject to various factors that will cause
actual interest payments to fluctuate over time. Based on these
factors, we have not included in this line item an estimate of future
interest payments.
|
(2)
|
Includes
interest payments not included in the balance
sheet.
|
(3)
|
Purchase
obligations include commitments to purchase approximately $31.7 million of
revenue equipment none of which is cancelable by us upon advance written
notice.
|
Critical
Accounting Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and
accompanying notes. We base our assumptions, estimates and judgments
on historical experience, current trends and other factors that management
believes to be relevant at the time our consolidated financial statements are
prepared. Actual results could differ from those estimates, and such
differences could be material.
The most
significant accounting policies and estimates that affect our financial
statements include the following:
·
|
Revenue recognition and
related direct expenses based on relative transit time in each
period. Revenue generated by Trucking is recognized in
full upon completion of delivery of freight to the receiver’s
location. For freight in transit at the end of a reporting
period, we recognize revenue pro rata based on relative transit time
completed as a portion of the estimated total transit
time. Expenses are recognized as
incurred.
|
Revenue
generated by Strategic Capacity Solutions is recognized upon completion of the
services provided. Revenue is recorded on a gross basis, without
deducting third party purchased transportation costs because we have
responsibility for billing and collecting such revenue.
Management
believes these policies most accurately reflect revenue as earned and direct
expenses, including third party purchased transportation costs, as
incurred.
32
·
|
Selections of estimated useful
lives and salvage values for purposes of depreciating tractors and
trailers. We operate a significant number of tractors
and trailers in connection with our business. We may purchase
this equipment or acquire it under leases. We depreciate
purchased equipment on the straight-line method over the estimated useful
life down to an estimated salvage or trade-in value. We
initially record equipment acquired under capital leases at the net
present value of the minimum lease payments and amortize it on the
straight-line method over the lease term. Depreciable lives of
tractors and trailers range from three years to ten years. We
estimate the salvage value at the expected date of trade-in or sale based
on the expected market values of equipment at the time of
disposal.
|
We make
equipment purchasing and replacement decisions on the basis of various factors,
including, but not limited to, new equipment prices, used equipment market
conditions, demand for our freight services, prevailing interest rates,
technological improvements, fuel efficiency, equipment durability, equipment
specifications and driver availability. Therefore, depending on the
circumstances, we may accelerate or delay the acquisition and disposition of our
tractors and trailers from time to time, based on an operating principle whereby
we pursue trade intervals that economically balance our maintenance costs and
expected trade-in values in response to the circumstances existing at that
time. Such adjustments in trade intervals may cause us to adjust the
useful lives or salvage values of our tractors or trailers. By
changing the relative amounts of older equipment and newer equipment in our
fleet, adjustments in trade intervals also increase and decrease the average age
of our tractors and trailers, whether or not we change the useful lives or
salvage values of any tractors or trailers. We also adjust
depreciable lives and salvage values based on factors such as changes in
prevailing market prices for used equipment. We periodically monitor
these factors in order to keep salvage values in line with expected market
values at the time of disposal. Adjustments in useful lives and
salvage values are made as conditions warrant and when we believe that the
changes in conditions are other than temporary. These adjustments
result in changes in the depreciation expense we record in the period in which
the adjustments occur and in future periods. These adjustments also
impact any resulting gain or loss on the ultimate disposition of the revenue
equipment. Management believes our estimates of useful lives and
salvage values have been materially accurate as demonstrated by the
insignificant amounts of gains and losses on revenue equipment dispositions in
recent periods. However, given the current economic environment,
previously established salvage values need to be more closely monitored to
assure that book values do not exceed market values. We continually
review salvage values to address this issue.
To the
extent depreciable lives and salvage values are changed, such changes are
recorded in accordance with the applicable generally accepted accounting
principles existing at the time of change.
·
|
Estimates of accrued
liabilities for claims involving bodily injury, physical damage losses,
employee health benefits and workers’ compensation. We
record both current and long-term claims accruals at the estimated
ultimate payment amounts based on information such as individual case
estimates, historical claims experience and an estimate of claims incurred
but not reported. The current portion of the accrual reflects
the amounts of claims expected to be paid in the next twelve
months. In making the estimates, we rely on past experience
with similar claims, negative or positive developments in the case and
similar factors. We do not discount our claims
liabilities.
|
·
|
Stock option
valuation. The assumptions used to value stock options
are dividend yield, expected volatility, risk-free interest rate, expected
life and anticipated forfeitures. As we have not paid any
dividends on our Common Stock, the dividend yield is
zero. Expected volatility represents the measure used to
project the expected fluctuation in our share price. We use the
historical method to calculate volatility with the historical period being
equal to the expected life of each option. This calculation is
then used to determine the potential for our share price to increase over
the expected life of the option. The risk-free interest rate is
based on an implied yield on United States zero-coupon treasury bonds with
a remaining term equal to the expected life of the outstanding
options. Expected life represents the length of time we
anticipate the options to be outstanding before being
exercised. Based on historical experience, that time period is
best represented by the option’s contractual life. Anticipated
forfeitures represent the number of shares under options we expect to be
forfeited over the expected life of the
options.
|
·
|
Accounting for income
taxes. Our deferred tax assets and liabilities represent items
that will result in taxable income or a tax deduction in future years for
which we have already recorded the related tax expense or benefit in our
consolidated statements of operations. Deferred tax accounts
arise as a result of timing differences between when items are recognized
in our consolidated financial statements compared to when they are
recognized in our tax returns. Significant management judgment
is required in determining our provision for income taxes and in
determining whether deferred tax assets will be realized in full or in
part. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using
enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in
which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or
settled. We periodically assess the likelihood that all or some
portion of deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable
income. To the extent we believe recovery is not probable, a
valuation allowance is established for the amount determined not to be
realizable. We have not recorded a valuation allowance at
December 31, 2009, as all deferred tax assets are more likely than not to
be realized.
|
We
believe that we have adequately provided for our future tax consequences based
upon current facts and circumstances and current tax law. During the
year ended December 31, 2009, we made no material changes in our assumptions
regarding the determination of income tax liabilities. However,
should our tax positions be challenged, different outcomes could result and have
a significant impact on the amounts reported through our consolidated statements
of operations.
33
·
|
Prepaid
tires. Effective April 1, 2009, we changed our
method of accounting for tires. Commencing when the tires,
including recaps, are placed into service, we account for them as prepaid
expenses and amortize their cost over varying time periods, ranging from
18 to 30 months depending on the type of tire. Prior to April
1, 2009, the cost of tires was fully expensed when they were placed into
service. We believe the new accounting method more
appropriately matches the tire costs to the period during which the tire
is being used to generate revenue. For the year ended December
31, 2009, this change in estimate effected by a change in principle
resulted in a reduction of operations and maintenance expense on a pre-tax
basis of approximately $3.7 million and on a net of tax basis of
approximately $2.3 million ($0.22 per
share).
|
We
periodically reevaluate these policies as circumstances
dictate. Together these factors may significantly impact our
consolidated results of operations, financial position and cash flow from period
to period.
New
Accounting Pronouncements
See “Item
8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data – Note 1. to the Financial
Statements: New Accounting Pronouncements.”
Item
7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE AND
QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
|
We
experience various market risks, including changes in interest rates, foreign
currency exchange rates and commodity prices.
Interest Rate
Risk. We are exposed to interest rate risk primarily from our
Senior Credit Facility. Our Senior Credit Facility, as amended,
provides for borrowings that bear variable interest based on the agent bank’s
prime rate, the federal funds rate plus a certain percentage or the London
Interbank Offered Rate plus a certain percentage. At December 31,
2009, we had $46.7 million outstanding pursuant to our Senior Credit
Facility. Assuming the outstanding balance at year end remained
constant throughout the upcoming year, a hypothetical one-percentage point
increase in interest rates applicable to the Senior Credit Facility would
increase our annual interest expense by approximately $0.47
million.
On
October 21, 2008, we entered into an interest rate swap agreement with a
notional amount of $9.0 million with an effective date of October 21,
2008. We designated the $9.0 million interest rate swap as a cash
flow hedge of our exposure to variability in future cash flow resulting from the
interest payments indexed to the three-month London Interbank Offered
Rate. The rate on the swap was fixed at 4.25% until January 20,
2009.
On
February 6, 2009, we entered into a $10.0 million dollar interest rate swap
agreement with an effective date of February 19, 2009. The rate on the
swap is fixed at 1.57% until February 19, 2011. The interest rate
swap agreement is being accounted for as a cash flow hedge.
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate
Risk. We require all customers to pay for our services in U.S.
dollars. Although the Canadian government makes certain payments,
such as tax refunds, to us in Canadian dollars, any foreign currency exchange
risk associated with such payments is not material.
Commodity Price
Risk. Fuel prices have fluctuated greatly and have generally
increased in recent years. In some periods, our operating performance
was adversely affected because we were not able to fully offset the impact of
higher diesel fuel prices through increased freight rates and fuel
surcharges. We cannot predict the extent to which high fuel price
levels will continue in the future or the extent to which fuel surcharges could
be collected to offset such increases. We do not have any long-term
fuel purchase contracts, and we have not entered into any hedging arrangements,
that protect us against fuel price increases. Volatile fuel prices
will continue to impact us significantly. A significant increase in
fuel costs, or a shortage of diesel fuel, could materially and adversely affect
our results of operations. These costs could also exacerbate the
driver shortages our industry experiences by forcing independent contractors to
cease operations.
Item
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
USA
TRUCK, INC.
ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K
YEAR
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009
INDEX
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page
|
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
36 |
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008
|
37 |
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
38 |
Consolidated
Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007
|
39 |
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
40 |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
41 |
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors and
Stockholders
of USA Truck, Inc.
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of USA Truck, Inc. (a
Delaware Corporation) and subsidiary (collectively referred to as the “Company”)
as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2009. These financial statements are
the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is
to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our
audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
In our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of USA Truck, Inc. and
subsidiary as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the results of their operations
and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America.
We also
have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), USA Truck, Inc.’s internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO) and our report dated March 16, 2010, expressed
an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting.
/s/ GRANT
THORNTON LLP
Tulsa,
Oklahoma
March
16, 2010
36CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(in
thousands, except share amounts)
|
|||||
December
31,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||
Assets
|
|||||
Current
assets:
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
797
|
$
|
1,541
|
|
Accounts
receivable:
|
|||||
Trade,
less allowance for doubtful accounts of $443 in 2009 and $204 in
2008
|
37,018
|
36,597
|
|||
Income
tax receivable
|
10,498
|
--
|
|||
Other
|
1,070
|
2,261
|
|||
Inventories
|
1,541
|
1,541
|
|||
Deferred
income taxes
|
962
|
4,717
|
|||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
7,931
|
4,381
|
|||
Total
current assets
|
59,817
|
51,038
|
|||
Property
and equipment:
|
|||||
Land
and structures
|
33,819
|
34,650
|
|||
Revenue
equipment
|
364,087
|
354,712
|
|||
Service,
office and other equipment
|
28,846
|
25,374
|
|||
426,752
|
414,736
|
||||
Accumulated
depreciation and amortization
|
(156,331)
|
(133,863)
|
|||
270,421
|
280,873
|
||||
Other
assets
|
462
|
357
|
|||
Total
assets
|
$
|
330,700
|
$
|
332,268
|
|
Liabilities
and stockholders’ equity
|
|||||
Current
liabilities:
|
|||||
Bank
drafts payable
|
$
|
5,678
|
$
|
4,500
|
|
Trade
accounts payable
|
9,847
|
7,533
|
|||
Current
portion of insurance and claims accruals
|
4,356
|
10,106
|
|||
Accrued
expenses
|
9,008
|
12,158
|
|||
Note
payable
|
1,015
|
1,285
|
|||
Current
maturities of long-term debt and capital leases
|
63,461
|
16,956
|
|||
Total
current liabilities
|
93,365
|
52,538
|
|||
Long-term
debt and capital leases, less current maturities
|
39,116
|
79,364
|
|||
Deferred
income taxes
|
53,073
|
48,563
|
|||
Insurance
and claims accruals, less current portion
|
4,600
|
5,030
|
|||
Commitments
and contingencies
|
--
|
--
|
|||
Stockholders’
equity:
|
|||||
Preferred
Stock, $0.01 par value; 1,000,000 shares authorized; none
issued
|
--
|
--
|
|||
Common
Stock, $0.01 par value; authorized 30,000,000 shares; issued 11,834,285
shares in 2009 and 11,777,439 shares in 2008
|
118
|
118
|
|||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
64,627
|
64,171
|
|||
Retained
earnings
|
97,523
|
104,700
|
|||
Less
treasury stock, at cost (1,332,500 shares in 2009 and 1,366,500 shares in
2008)
|
(21,661) | (22,163) | |||
|
|
||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive (loss)
|
(61)
|
(53)
|
|||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
140,546
|
146,773
|
|||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$
|
330,700
|
$
|
332,268
|
See
accompanying notes.
37CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Revenue:
|
||||||||
Trucking
revenue
|
$
|
317,224
|
$
|
381,055
|
$
|
382,064
|
||
Strategic
Capacity Solutions
revenue
|
14,296
|
16,502
|
9,124
|
|||||
Base
revenue
|
331,520
|
397,557
|
391,188
|
|||||
Fuel
surcharge
revenue
|
50,848
|
138,063
|
90,921
|
|||||
Total
revenue
|
382,368
|
535,620
|
482,109
|
|||||
Operating
expenses and costs:
|
||||||||
Salaries,
wages and employee
benefits
|
128,319
|
157,729
|
162,236
|
|||||
Fuel
and fuel
taxes
|
93,803
|
189,042
|
153,023
|
|||||
Depreciation
and
amortization
|
50,152
|
50,919
|
49,093
|
|||||
Purchased
transportation
|
44,058
|
40,323
|
18,609
|
|||||
Operations
and
maintenance
|
26,594
|
27,729
|
25,815
|
|||||
Insurance
and
claims
|
21,086
|
28,999
|
31,144
|
|||||
Operating
taxes and
licenses
|
5,642
|
6,456
|
6,368
|
|||||
Litigation
verdict
|
--
|
--
|
4,690
|
|||||
Communications
and
utilities
|
3,951
|
4,075
|
3,787
|
|||||
Gain
on disposal of
assets
|
(7)
|
(19)
|
(395)
|
|||||
Other
|
15,377
|
18,220
|
19,429
|
|||||
Total
operating expenses and costs
|
388,975
|
523,473
|
473,799
|
|||||
Operating
(loss) income
|
(6,607)
|
12,147
|
8,310
|
|||||
Other
expenses (income):
|
||||||||
Interest
expense
|
|
3,030
|
4,643
|
5,130
|
||||
Other,
net
|
(207)
|
139
|
22
|
|||||
Total
other expenses, net
|
2,823
|
4,782
|
5,152
|
|||||
(Loss) income before income taxes
|
(9,430)
|
7,365
|
3,158
|
|||||
Income
tax (benefit) expense:
|
||||||||
Current
|
(10,523)
|
2,950
|
188
|
|||||
Deferred
|
8,270
|
1,275
|
2,830
|
|||||
Total
income tax (benefit) expense
|
(2,253)
|
4,225
|
3,018
|
|||||
Net
(loss) income
|
$
|
(7,177)
|
$
|
3,140
|
$
|
140
|
||
Net
(loss) income per share:
|
||||||||
Basic
(loss) earnings per
share
|
$
|
(0.70)
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.01
|
||
Diluted
(loss) earnings per
share
|
$
|
(0.70)
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.01
|
See
accompanying notes.
38CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Accumulated
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Common
Stock
|
Additional
|
Other
|
|||||||||||||||||
Par
|
Paid-in
|
Retained
|
Treasury
|
Comprehensive
|
|||||||||||||||
Shares
|
Value
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
Stock
|
Income/(Loss)
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2006
|
11,473
|
$
|
115
|
$
|
62,230
|
$
|
101,420
|
$
|
(4,207)
|
$
|
--
|
$
|
159,558
|
||||||
Exercise
of stock options
|
88
|
1
|
894
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
895
|
||||||||||||
Tax charge on exercise of stock options
|
--
|
--
|
(12)
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
(12)
|
||||||||||||
Purchase of 1,098 shares of Common Stock into treasury
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
(17,403)
|
--
|
(17,403)
|
||||||||||||
Retirement of forfeited restricted stock
|
--
|
--
|
362
|
--
|
(362)
|
--
|
--
|
||||||||||||
Stock based compensation
|
--
|
--
|
13
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
13
|
||||||||||||
Net
income for 2007
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
140
|
--
|
--
|
140
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
11,561
|
$
|
116
|
$
|
63,487
|
$
|
101,560
|
$
|
(21,972)
|
$
|
--
|
$
|
143,191
|
||||||
Exercise
of stock options
|
17
|
--
|
186
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
186
|
||||||||||||
Tax benefit on exercise of stock options
|
--
|
--
|
23
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
23
|
||||||||||||
Stock based compensation
|
--
|
--
|
286
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
286
|
||||||||||||
Retirement of forfeited restricted stock
|
--
|
--
|
191
|
--
|
(191)
|
--
|
--
|
||||||||||||
Change in fair value of interest rate swap, net of income tax benefit of
$(40)
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
(65)
|
(65)
|
||||||||||||
Reclassification of derivative net losses to statement of operations, net
of income tax benefit of $(7)
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
12
|
12
|
||||||||||||
Restricted
stock award grant
|
200
|
2
|
(2)
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
||||||||||||
Net
income for 2008
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
3,140
|
--
|
--
|
3,140
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
11,778
|
$
|
118
|
$
|
64,171
|
$
|
104,700
|
$
|
(22,163)
|
$
|
(53)
|
$
|
146,773
|
||||||
Exercise
of stock options
|
35
|
--
|
391
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
391
|
||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation
|
--
|
--
|
567
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
567
|
||||||||||||
Restricted stock award grant
|
21
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
||||||||||||
Retirement of forfeited restricted stock
|
--
|
--
|
51
|
--
|
(51)
|
--
|
--
|
||||||||||||
Change in fair value of interest rate swap, net of income tax benefit of
$(79)
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
(126)
|
(126)
|
||||||||||||
Reclassification of derivative net losses to statement of operations, net
of income tax of $73
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
118
|
118
|
||||||||||||
Return of forfeited restricted shares upon termination of the 2003
Restricted Stock Award Plan
|
--
|
--
|
(553)
|
--
|
553
|
--
|
--
|
||||||||||||
Net
loss for 2009
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
(7,177)
|
--
|
--
|
(7,177)
|
||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009
|
11,834
|
$
|
118
|
$
|
64,627
|
$
|
97,523
|
$
|
(21,661)
|
$
|
(61)
|
$
|
140,546
|
See
accompanying notes.
39CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Operating
activities
|
||||||||
Net
(loss) income
|
$
|
(7,177)
|
$
|
3,140
|
$
|
140
|
||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
50,152
|
50,919
|
49,093
|
|||||
Provision
for doubtful accounts
|
313
|
134
|
(15)
|
|||||
Deferred
income taxes
|
8,265
|
1,242
|
2,831
|
|||||
Excess
tax benefit from exercise of stock options
|
--
|
(23)
|
(39)
|
|||||
Write
off of tax asset on exercise of stock options
|
--
|
--
|
51
|
|||||
Stock
based compensation
|
567
|
286
|
13
|
|||||
Gain
on disposal of property and equipment
|
(7)
|
(19)
|
(395)
|
|||||
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
(10,041)
|
7,758
|
(1,051)
|
|||||
Inventories,
prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
(3,549)
|
(299)
|
3,573
|
|||||
Trade
accounts payable, accrued expenses and note payable
|
508
|
4,370
|
(2,192)
|
|||||
Insurance
and claims accruals
|
(6,180)
|
(1,639)
|
6,576
|
|||||
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
32,851
|
65,869
|
58,585
|
|||||
Investing
activities
|
||||||||
Purchases
of property and equipment
|
(37,325)
|
(57,186)
|
(32,338)
|
|||||
Proceeds
from sale of property and equipment
|
13,335
|
30,829
|
16,116
|
|||||
Change
in other assets
|
(105)
|
(2)
|
(172)
|
|||||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(24,095)
|
(26,359)
|
(16,394)
|
|||||
Financing
activities
|
||||||||
Borrowings
under long-term debt
|
66,502
|
120,689
|
155,278
|
|||||
Principal
payments on long-term debt
|
(52,984)
|
(130,582)
|
(150,178)
|
|||||
Principal
payments on capitalized lease obligations
|
(22,965)
|
(27,051)
|
(27,836)
|
|||||
Principal
payments on note payable
|
(1,622)
|
(1,963)
|
(2,299)
|
|||||
Net
increase (decrease) in bank drafts payable
|
1,178
|
(7,285)
|
246
|
|||||
Payments
to repurchase Common Stock
|
--
|
--
|
(17,403)
|
|||||
Excess
tax benefit (charge) from exercise of stock options
|
--
|
23
|
(12)
|
|||||
Proceeds
from exercise of stock options
|
391
|
186
|
895
|
|||||
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
(9,500)
|
(45,983)
|
(41,309)
|
|||||
Decrease (increase) in cash and cash equivalents
|
(744)
|
(6,473)
|
882
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents:
|
||||||||
Beginning
of period
|
1,541
|
8,014
|
7,132
|
|||||
End
of period
|
$
|
797
|
$
|
1,541
|
$
|
8,014
|
||
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
||||||||
Cash
paid during the period for:
|
||||||||
Interest
|
$
|
3,013
|
$
|
4,789
|
$
|
5,154
|
||
Income
taxes
|
2,082
|
499
|
560
|
|||||
Supplemental
schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:
|
||||||||
Liability
incurred for leases on revenue equipment
|
15,704
|
38,640
|
23,745
|
|||||
Liability
incurred for note payable
|
1,352
|
1,710
|
2,046
|
See
accompanying notes.
40NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December
31, 2009
1.
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Description
of Business
USA Truck
(the “Company”) is a truckload carrier providing transportation of general
commodities throughout the continental United States, into and out of Mexico and
into and out of portions of Canada. Generally, the Company transports
full dry van trailer loads of freight from origin to destination without
intermediate stops or handling. To complement the Company’s General Freight
operations, it provides dedicated, brokerage and rail intermodal
services. For shipments into Mexico, the Company transfers its
trailers to tractors operated by Mexican trucking companies at a facility in
Laredo, Texas, which is operated by the Company’s wholly-owned
subsidiary. Through the Company’s asset based and non-asset based
capabilities, it transports many types of freight for a diverse customer base in
a variety of industries.
Principles
of Consolidation
The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its
wholly-owned subsidiary. All intercompany accounts and significant
intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The
Company has no investments in or contractual obligations with variable interest
entities.
Cash
Equivalents
The
Company considers all highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months
or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. The carrying amount
reported in the balance sheet for cash and cash equivalents approximates its
fair value. On occasion, the Company will accumulate balances in a
money market account in an amount that exceeds the depository bank’s federally
insured limit. Because these balances are accumulated on a short-term
basis, the Company does not believe its exposure to loss to be a significant
risk.
Accounts
Receivable and Concentration of Credit Risk
The
Company extends credit to its customers in the normal course of
business. The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations and
generally does not require collateral. Trade accounts receivable are
recorded at their invoiced amounts, net of allowance for doubtful
accounts. The Company evaluates the adequacy of its allowance for
doubtful accounts quarterly. Accounts outstanding longer than
contractual payment terms are considered past due and are reviewed individually
for collectibility. The Company maintains reserves for potential
credit losses based upon its loss history and specific receivables aging
analysis. Receivable balances are written off when collection is
deemed unlikely. Such losses have been within management’s
expectations.
Accounts
receivable are comprised of a diversified customer base that results in a lack
of concentration of credit risk. During 2009, 2008 and 2007, the
Company’s top ten customers generated 32%, 32% and 34% of total revenue,
respectively. During the three year period ended December 31, 2009,
no single customer represented more than 10% of total revenue. Other
accounts receivable consists primarily of proceeds from the sale of revenue
equipment. The carrying amount reported in the balance sheet for
accounts receivable approximates fair value based on the fact that the
receivables collection averaged approximately 31 days from the billing
date.
The
following table provides a summary of the activity in the allowance for doubtful
accounts for 2009, 2008 and 2007:
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Balance
at beginning of year
|
$
|
204
|
$
|
81
|
$
|
96
|
||
Amounts
(credited) charged to expense
|
313
|
135
|
(15)
|
|||||
Uncollectible
accounts written off, net of recovery
|
(74)
|
(12)
|
--
|
|||||
Balance
at end of year
|
$
|
443
|
$
|
204
|
$
|
81
|
41
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and
accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Inventories
Inventories
consist of tires, fuel, supplies and Company store merchandise and are stated at
the lower of cost (first-in, first-out basis) or market.
Income
Taxes
Deferred
income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the
carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and
the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant components of
the Company’s deferred tax liabilities and assets include temporary differences
relating to depreciation, capitalized leases and certain revenues and
expenses. The Company has analyzed filing positions in its federal
and applicable state tax returns as well as in all open tax years. The only
periods subject to examination for its federal returns are the 2006, 2007 and
2008 tax years. The Company’s policy is to recognize interest related to
unrecognized tax benefits as interest expense and penalties as operating
expenses. The Company believes that its income tax filing positions and
deductions will be sustained on audit and do not anticipate any adjustments that
will result in a material change to its consolidated financial position, results
of operations and cash flows. Therefore, no reserves for uncertain income tax
positions have been recorded. At January 1, 2008, the Company had no
unrecognized tax benefits and it has not recorded any through December 31,
2009.
Prepaid
Tires
Effective
April 1, 2009, the Company changed its method of accounting for
tires. Commencing when the tires, including recaps, are placed into
service, the Company accounts for them as prepaid expenses and amortizes their
cost over varying time periods, ranging from 18 to 30 months, depending on the
type of tire. Prior to April 1, 2009, the cost of tires was fully
expensed when they were placed into service. The new accounting
method more appropriately matches the tire costs to the period during which the
tire is being used to generate revenue. For the year ended December
31, 2009, this change in estimate effected by a change in principle resulted in
a reduction of operations and maintenance expense on a pre-tax basis of
approximately $3.7 million and on a net of tax basis of approximately $2.3
million ($0.22 per share).
Property
and Equipment
Property
and equipment is recorded at cost. For financial reporting purposes,
the cost of such property is depreciated principally by the straight-line method
using the following estimated useful lives: structures – 5 to 39.5 years;
revenue equipment – 3 to 10 years; and service, office and other equipment – 3
to 20 years. Gains and losses on asset sales are reflected in the
year of disposal. Revenue equipment acquired under capital lease is
depreciated over the lease term. Trade-in allowances in excess of
book value of revenue equipment are accounted for by adjusting the cost of
assets acquired. Tires purchased with revenue equipment are
capitalized as a part of the cost of such equipment, with replacement tires
being inventoried and amortized under its prepaid tire policy.
The
Company previously owned two facilities in the Dayton, Ohio market, one of which
was not being used. During the third quarter of 2008, the Company
recorded an asset impairment charge in the amount of approximately $0.3 million
to write down the unused asset’s value to its estimated market value, net of
costs of disposal. This write down is included in Other expenses in
the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. On October
23, 2008, the Company entered into a contract to sell this facility, which
closed during the fourth quarter of 2009.
During
the fourth quarter of 2008, the Company removed from service approximately 250
tractors. The reduction in the Company-owned fleet targeted those
tractors with the highest miles and resulted in an impairment charge in the
amount of approximately $0.5 million relating to certain of those
tractors. This write down, which adjusted the book value of the
tractors down to their market value, is included in Other operating expenses in
the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The Company
disposed of all but one of those high mileage tractors during 2009.
Claims
Liabilities
The
Company is self-insured up to certain limits for bodily injury, property damage,
workers’ compensation, cargo loss and damage claims and medical
benefits. Provisions are made for both the estimated liabilities for
known claims as incurred and estimates for those incurred but not
reported.
42
The
Company’s self-insurance retention levels are $0.5 million for workers’
compensation claims per occurrence, $0.05 million for cargo loss and damage
claims per occurrence and $1.0 million for bodily injury and property damage
claims per occurrence. For medical benefits, the Company self-insures
up to $0.25 million per plan participant per year with an aggregate claim
exposure limit determined by the Company’s year-to-date claims experience and
its number of covered lives. The Company is completely self-insured
for physical damage to its own tractors and trailers, except that the Company
carries catastrophic physical damage coverage to protect against natural
disasters. The Company maintains insurance above the amounts for
which it self-insures, to certain limits, with licensed insurance
carriers. The Company has excess general, auto and employer’s
liability coverage in amounts substantially exceeding minimum legal
requirements, and the Company believes this coverage is sufficient to protect
against material loss.
The
Company records claims accruals at the estimated ultimate payment amounts based
on information such as individual case estimates or historical claims
experience. The current portion reflects the amounts of claims
expected to be paid in the next twelve months. In making the
estimates of ultimate payment amounts and the determinations of the current
portion of each claim the Company relies on past experience with similar claims,
negative or positive developments in the case and similar
factors. The Company re-evaluates these estimates and determinations
each reporting period based on developments that occur and new information that
becomes available during the reporting period.
Interest
|
|
The
Company capitalizes interest on major projects during
construction. Interest is capitalized based on the average interest
rate on related debt. Capitalized interest was $0.05 million, $0.06
million and $0.02 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. Interest expense was $3.0 million, $4.6 million and
$5.1 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
(Loss)
earnings Per Share
Basic
(loss) earnings per share is computed based on the weighted average number of
shares of Common Stock outstanding during the year. Diluted (loss)
earnings per share is computed by adjusting the weighted average shares
outstanding by Common Stock equivalents attributable to dilutive stock options
and restricted stock.
Segment
Reporting
The
service offerings provided by the Company relate to the transportation of
truckload quantities of freight for customers in a variety of
industries. The services generate revenue, and to a great extent
incur expenses, primarily on a per mile basis. The Company classifies its
business into the Trucking operating segment and the Strategic Capacity
Solutions operating segment, which it previously designated as operating
divisions. These two operating segments are aggregated into one
segment for financial reporting purposes. Both Trucking and Strategic
Capacity Solutions have similar economic characteristics and are impacted by
virtually the same economic factors as discussed elsewhere in this
report. Trucking consists primarily of the Company’s General Freight
and Dedicated Freight service offerings, as well as its Trailer-on-Flat-Car rail
intermodal service offering. The Company previously referred to its
Freight Brokerage operations as its “Strategic Capacity Solutions”
division. The Company now uses “Strategic Capacity Solutions” to
refer to the operating segment, which now consists primarily of its Freight
Brokerage service offering and its Container-on-Flat-Car rail intermodal service
offering. This service offering within the Strategic Capacity Solutions
operating segment is intended to provide services that complement the Company’s
Trucking services, primarily to existing customers of its Trucking operating
segment. Those complementary services consist of services such as
freight brokerage, transportation scheduling, routing and mode
selection. A majority of the customers of Strategic Capacity
Solutions have also engaged the Company to provide services through one or more
of its Trucking service offerings. The Company’s Strategic Capacity
Solutions operating segment represents a relatively minor part of its business,
generating approximately 4.3%, 4.2% and 2.3% of total base revenue for the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The Company
began offering rail intermodal services during December 2007, and the operating
segment into which those service offerings are classified depends on whether or
not Company equipment is used in providing the services. If Company
equipment is used, those results are included the Company’s Trucking operating
segment (Trailer-on-Flat-Car). If Company equipment is not used,
those results are included in the Company’s Strategic Capacity Solutions
operating segment (Container-on-Flat-Car). For the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008, rail intermodal service offerings generated
approximately 2.4% and 1.2% of total base revenue, respectively.
43
The
Company’s decision to aggregate its two operating segments into one reporting
segment was based on factors such as the similar economic and operating
characteristics of its service offerings and its centralized internal management
structure. Except with respect to the relatively minor components of
the Company’s operations that do not involve the use of its tractors, key
operating statistics include, for example, revenue per mile and miles per
tractor per week. While the operations of the Company’s Strategic
Capacity Solutions service offerings do not involve the use of its equipment and
drivers, it nevertheless provides truckload freight services to its customers
through arrangements with third party carriers who are subject to the same
general regulatory environment and cost sensitivities imposed upon the Trucking
operations.
Revenue
Recognition
Revenue
generated by the Company’s Trucking operating segment is recognized in full upon
completion of delivery of freight to the receiver’s location. For
freight in transit at the end of a reporting period, the Company recognizes
revenue pro rata based on relative transit time completed as a portion of the
estimated total transit time. Expenses are recognized as
incurred.
Revenue
generated by the Company’s Strategic Capacity Solutions operating segment is
recognized upon completion of the services provided. Revenue is
recorded on a gross basis, without deducting third party purchased
transportation costs, as the Company acts as a principal with substantial risks
as primary obligor.
Management
believes these policies most accurately reflect revenue as earned and direct
expenses, including third party purchased transportation costs, as
incurred.
Reclassifications
In 2008,
the Company included capitalized software development costs in the approximate
amount of $1.5 million in land and structures on its consolidated balance
sheets. Capitalized software development costs have been
appropriately reclassified as service, office and other equipment in the
consolidated balance sheets, with no impact on the consolidated statements of
operations, at December 31, 2009 and 2008.
New
Accounting Pronouncements
In June
2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued The FASB Accounting
Standards CodificationTM
(“Codification”). The Codification is the source of authoritative
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) recognized by the FASB to
be applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive
releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under authority of
federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC
registrants. On the effective date, the Codification superseded all
then-existing non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. All other
non-grandfathered non-SEC accounting literature not included in the Codification
will become non-authoritative. The Codification is effective for
financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after
September 15, 2009, and it has not had a material impact on the Company’s
financial reporting.
As set
forth in the Subsequent Events Topic of the Codification, general standards have
been established for the accounting for and disclosure of events that occur
after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or are
available to be issued. In particular, the Subsequent Events Topic sets forth
the period after the balance sheet date during which management should evaluate
events or transactions that may occur for potential recognition or disclosure in
the financial statements, the circumstances under which an entity should
recognize events or transactions occurring after the balance sheet date in its
financial statements and the disclosures that an entity should make about events
or transactions that occurred after the balance sheet date. The
Subsequent Events Topic is effective for financial statements issued for interim
and annual periods ending after June 15, 2009, and it has not had a material
impact on the Company’s financial reporting.
As
required by the Derivatives and Hedging Topic of the Codification (ASC 815),
enhanced disclosures about (a) how and why an entity uses derivative
instruments, (b) how derivative instruments and related hedged items are
accounted for and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect
an entity’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows are now
required. The enhanced disclosures requirement of the Derivatives and
Hedging Topic became effective for the Company on January 1, 2009, and it has
not had a material impact on its financial reporting.
2. Prepaid
Expenses and Other Current Assets
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets consist of the following:
(in
thousands)
|
|||||
December
31,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||
Prepaid
tires (1)
|
$
|
3,726
|
$
|
--
|
|
Prepaid
licenses, permits and tolls
|
1,912
|
2,169
|
|||
Prepaid
insurance
|
1,355
|
1,307
|
|||
Other
|
938
|
905
|
|||
Total
prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
$
|
7,931
|
$
|
4,381
|
|
(1)
Effective April 1, 2009, the Company changed its method of accounting for
tires. Commencing when the tires are placed into service, the
Company accounts for them as prepaid expenses and amortizes their cost
over varying time periods, ranging from 18 to 30 months depending on the
type of tire. Prior to April 1, 2009, the cost of tires was
fully expensed when they were placed into
service.
|
3.
|
Derivative
Financial Instruments
|
The
Company records derivative financial instruments in the balance sheet as either
an asset or liability at fair value based on the active market in which the
derivative financial instrument is traded, with classification as current or
long-term depending on the duration of the instrument.
Changes
in the derivative instrument’s fair value must be recognized currently in
earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. For cash
flow hedges that meet the criteria, the derivative instrument’s gains and
losses, to the extent effective, are recognized in accumulated other
comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period during
which the hedged transaction affects earnings. The Company records
the gains and losses in other operating expenses and costs in its consolidated
statements of operations. (See also Note 4. Comprehensive (Loss)
Income.)
On
October 21, 2008, the Company entered into an interest rate swap agreement with
a notional amount of $9.0 million with an effective date of October 21,
2008. The Company designated the $9.0 million interest rate swap as a
cash flow hedge of its exposure to variability in future cash flow resulting
from the interest payments indexed to the three-month London Interbank Offered
Rate (“LIBOR”). The rate on the swap was fixed at 4.25% until January
20, 2009.
On
February 6, 2009, the Company entered into a $10 million dollar interest rate
swap agreement with an effective date of February 19, 2009. The rate on
the swap is fixed at 1.57% until February 19, 2011. The interest rate swap
agreement is being accounted for as a cash flow hedge.
4. Comprehensive
(Loss) Income
Comprehensive
(loss) income consisted of the following components:
(in
thousands)
|
|||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||
Net
(loss) income
|
$
|
(7,177)
|
$
|
3,140
|
|
Change
in fair value of interest rate swap, net of income tax benefit of $(79)
for the year ended December 31, 2009, and net of income tax benefit of
$(40) for the year ended December 31, 2008
|
(126)
|
(65)
|
|||
Reclassification
of derivative net losses to statement of operations, net of income tax of
$73 for the year ended December 31, 2009, and net of income tax benefit of
$(7) for the year ended December 31, 2008
|
118
|
12
|
|||
Total
comprehensive (loss)
income
|
$
|
(7,185)
|
$
|
3,087
|
Fair
Value Measurements
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||||||
Total
Fair Value Assets (Liabilities) at 12/31/09
|
Quoted
Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
(Level
1)
|
Significant
Other Observable Inputs
(Level
2)
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
(Level
3)
|
||||||||
Derivative
Liabilities
|
$
|
(61)
|
$
|
--
|
$
|
(61)
|
$
|
--
|
The fair
value of derivatives, consisting primarily of interest rate swaps as discussed
above, is calculated using proprietary models utilizing observable inputs as
well as future assumptions related to interest rates and other applicable
variables. These calculations are performed by the financial
institutions that are counterparties to the applicable swap agreements and
reported to the Company on a monthly basis. The Company uses these
reported fair values to adjust the asset or liability as
appropriate. The Company evaluates the reasonableness of the
calculations by comparing the yield curve from other sources for the applicable
period.
5. Accrued
Expenses
Accrued
expenses consist of the following:
(in
thousands)
|
||||||
December
31,
|
||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||
Salaries,
wages, bonuses and employee
benefits
|
$
|
3,966
|
$
|
4,118
|
||
Other
(1)
|
5,042
|
8,040
|
||||
Total
accrued
expenses
|
$
|
9,008
|
$
|
12,158
|
(1)
|
As
of December 31, 2009 and 2008, no single item included within other
accrued expenses exceeded 5.0% of the Company’s total current
liabilities.
|
6.
|
Note
Payable
|
On
October 21, 2009, the Company’s Board of Directors approved an unsecured note
payable of $1.4 million bearing interest at 3.4%. The balance of the
note payable at December 31, 2009, was $1.0 million. The note, which
is payable in monthly installments of principal and interest of approximately
$114,400, is scheduled to mature on September 1, 2010.
At
December 31, 2008, the Company had an unsecured note payable of $1.3
million. The note, which was payable in monthly installments of
principal and interest of approximately $145,600, was scheduled to mature on
September 1, 2009, bearing interest at 4.8%. The note payable was
paid in full in the approximate amount of $0.6 million on May 8,
2009.
Both of
these notes payable were used to finance a portion of the Company’s annual
insurance premiums.
7.
|
Long-term
Debt
|
Long-term
debt consists of the following:
(in
thousands)
|
||||||
December
31,
|
||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||
Revolving
credit agreement (1)
|
$
|
46,718
|
$
|
33,200
|
||
Capitalized
lease obligations (2)
|
55,859
|
63,120
|
||||
102,577
|
96,320
|
|||||
Less
current maturities
|
(63,461)
|
(16,956)
|
||||
Long-term
debt, less current maturities
|
$
|
39,116
|
$
|
79,364
|
|
(1)
|
Our
Amended and Restated Senior Credit Facility provides for available
borrowings of $100.0 million, including letters of credit not exceeding
$25.0 million. Availability may be reduced by a borrowing base
limit as defined in the Facility. At December 31, 2009, the
Company had approximately $46.7 million in borrowings, $1.8 million in
letters of credit outstanding, and $51.5 million available under the
Facility. The Facility provides an accordion feature allowing
the Company to increase the maximum borrowing amount by up to an
additional $75.0 million in the aggregate in one or more increases no less
than six months prior to the maturity date, subject to certain
conditions. Accordingly, the Facility can be increased to
$175.0 million at the Company’s option, with the additional availability
provided by the current lenders, at their election, or by other
lenders. At this time, the Company does not anticipate the need
to exercise the accordion feature or, if needed, it does not expect to
encounter any difficulties in doing so. The Facility bears
variable interest based on the type of borrowing and on the agent bank’s
prime rate, or the federal funds rate plus a certain percentage or the
LIBOR plus a certain percentage, which is determined based on the
Company’s attainment of certain financial ratios. The interest
rate on our overnight borrowings under the Facility at December 31, 2009
was 3.25%. The interest rate including all borrowings made
under this Facility at December 31, 2009 was 1.46%. The
interest rate on the Company’s borrowings under the Facility for the year
ended December 31, 2009 was 1.6%. A quarterly commitment fee is
payable on the unused portion of the credit line and bears a rate which is
determined based on the Company’s attainment of certain financial
ratios. At December 31, 2009, the rate was 0.2% per
annum. The Facility is collateralized by revenue equipment
having a net book value of $178.5 million at December 31, 2009, and all
trade and other accounts receivable. The Facility requires the
Company to meet certain financial covenants and to maintain a minimum
tangible net worth of approximately $133.9 million at December 31,
2009. The Company was in compliance with these covenants at
December 31, 2009. The covenants would prohibit the payment of
dividends by the Company if such payment would cause it to be in violation
of any of the covenants. The carrying amount reported in the
balance sheet for borrowings under the Facility approximates its fair
value as the applicable interest rates fluctuate with changes in current
market conditions.
|
The
Facility matures on September 1, 2010. Accordingly, during the
quarter ended September 30, 2009, we reclassified that debt from long-term to
short-term. We anticipate that the pricing spreads on any new
facility will be materially higher than our current spreads due to widely
reported dislocations in the credit markets. We recently signed a
term sheet, containing higher pricing spreads, with a bank to replace the
facility and we are now working on definitive documents.
46
|
(2)
|
The
Company’s capitalized lease obligations have various termination dates
extending through March 2013 and contain renewal or fixed price purchase
options. The effective interest rates on the leases range from
3.2% to 4.8% at December 31, 2009. The lease agreements require
the Company to pay property taxes, maintenance and operating
expenses.
|
8.
|
Leases
and Commitments
|
The
Company leases certain revenue equipment under capital leases with terms of 42
months. At December
31, 2009, property and equipment included capitalized leases, which had
capitalized costs of $72.8 million, accumulated amortization of $17.0 million
and a net book value of $55.8 million. At December 31, 2008, property
and equipment included capitalized leases, which had capitalized costs of $81.6
million, accumulated amortization of $18.8 million and a net book value of $62.8
million. Amortization of leased assets is included in depreciation and
amortization expense and totaled $10.7 million, $13.0 million and $14.2 million
for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
At
December 31, 2009, the future minimum payments under capitalized leases with
initial terms of one year or more were $18.6 million for 2010, $20.8 million for
2011, $19.3 million for 2012 and $0.7 million for 2013. As of
December 31, 2009, the remaining minimum capital lease payments were $55.9
million, which excludes amounts representing interest of $3.6
million. The current portion of net minimum lease payments, including
interest, is $18.6 million.
From time
to time the Company enters into operating leases for certain facilities and
office equipment. Rent expense under those operating leases was $1.2
million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. At
December 31, 2009, the Company was obligated to pay future rentals under those
operating leases of $0.6 million, $0.3 million, $0.2 million, $0.03 million,
$0.01 million and $0.3 million for 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and thereafter,
respectively.
Certain
leases contain cross-default provisions with other financing agreements of the
Company.
Commitments
to purchase revenue equipment (including capital leases) and other fixed assets
aggregated approximately $31.7 million at December 31, 2009.
9. Federal
and State Income Taxes
Significant
components of the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities are as
follows:
(in
thousands)
|
||||||
December
31,
|
||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||
Current
deferred tax assets:
|
||||||
Accrued
expenses not deductible until paid
|
$
|
3,247
|
$
|
5,755
|
||
Equity
Incentive Plan
|
303
|
360
|
||||
Revenue
recognition
|
283
|
204
|
||||
Allowance
for doubtful accounts
|
170
|
78
|
||||
Total
current deferred tax assets
|
4,003
|
6,397
|
||||
Current
deferred tax liability:
|
||||||
Prepaid
expenses deductible when paid
|
(3,041)
|
(1,680)
|
||||
Total
current deferred tax liability
|
(3,041)
|
(1,680)
|
||||
Net
current deferred tax assets
|
$
|
962
|
$
|
4,717
|
||
Noncurrent
deferred tax assets:
|
||||||
Capitalized
leases
|
$
|
153
|
$
|
137
|
||
Interest
rate swap
|
38
|
33
|
||||
Non-compete
agreement
|
107
|
129
|
||||
Net
operating loss
|
3,100
|
--
|
||||
Total
noncurrent deferred tax assets
|
3,398
|
299
|
||||
Noncurrent
deferred tax liabilities:
|
||||||
Tax
over book depreciation
|
(56,440)
|
(48,834)
|
||||
Other
|
(31)
|
(28)
|
||||
Total
noncurrent deferred tax liabilities
|
(56,471)
|
(48,862)
|
||||
Net
deferred tax liabilities
|
$
|
(53,073)
|
$
|
(48,563)
|
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, the Company’s effective tax rate decreased to
23.9% from 57.4%. This decrease of 33.5% was primarily due to a
decrease in pre-tax income, which made the nondeductible items less of an impact
to the overall tax rate. The change in the effective tax rate
resulted in an increase of the deferred tax liability of approximately $4.5
million and a decrease in the deferred tax asset of approximately $3.8
million.
Significant
components of the (benefits) provision for income taxes are as
follows:
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Current:
|
||||||||
Federal
|
$
|
(8,717)
|
$
|
2,443
|
$
|
156
|
||
State
|
(1,806)
|
507
|
32
|
|||||
Total
current
|
(10,523)
|
2,950
|
188
|
|||||
Deferred:
|
||||||||
Federal
|
6,851
|
1,056
|
2,344
|
|||||
State
|
1,419
|
219
|
486
|
|||||
Total
deferred
|
8,270
|
1,275
|
2,830
|
|||||
Total
income tax (benefit) expense
|
$
|
(2,253)
|
$
|
4,225
|
$
|
3,018
|
A
reconciliation between the effective income tax rate and the statutory federal
income tax rate is as follows:
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Income
tax at statutory federal rate
|
$
|
(3,206)
|
$
|
2,504
|
$
|
1,074
|
||
Federal
income tax effects of:
|
||||||||
State
income taxes
|
136
|
(258)
|
(189)
|
|||||
Per
diem and other nondeductible meals and entertainment
|
1,022
|
1,274
|
1,685
|
|||||
Other
|
194
|
(55)
|
(109)
|
|||||
Federal
income taxes
|
(1,854)
|
3,465
|
2,461
|
|||||
State
income taxes
|
(399)
|
760
|
557
|
|||||
Total
income tax (benefit) expense
|
$
|
(2,253)
|
$
|
4,225
|
$
|
3,018
|
||
Effective
tax rate
|
23.9%
|
57.4%
|
95.6%
|
The
effective rates varied from the statutory federal tax rate primarily due to
state income taxes and certain non-deductible expenses including a per diem pay
structure for drivers. Due to the partially nondeductible effect of
per diem pay, the Company’s tax rate will fluctuate in future periods based on
fluctuations in earnings and in the number of drivers who elect to receive this
pay structure.
10.
|
Employee
Benefit Plans
|
The
Company sponsors the USA Truck, Inc. Employees’ Investment Plan, a tax deferred
savings plan under section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code that covers
substantially all employees. Employees can contribute up to 50% of
their compensation, subject to statutory limits, with the Company matching 50%
of the first 4% of compensation contributed by each
employee. Effective April 1, 2009, the Company suspended its
contribution match. Employees’ rights to employer contributions vest
after three years from their date of employment. Company matching contributions
to the plan were approximately $0.2 million, $0.7 million and $0.8 million for
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
11. Stock
Plans
The
current equity compensation plans that have been approved by the Company’s
stockholders are its 2004 Equity Incentive Plan and its 2003 Restricted Stock
Award Plan. The Company does not have any equity compensation plans
under which equity awards are outstanding or may be granted that have not been
approved by its stockholders.
The USA
Truck, Inc. 2004 Equity Incentive Plan provides for the granting of incentive or
nonqualified options or other equity-based awards covering up to 1,025,000
shares of Common Stock to directors, officers and other key
employees. On the day of each annual meeting of stockholders of the
Company for a period of nine years, which commenced with the annual meeting of
stockholders in 2005 and will end with the annual meeting of stockholders in
2013, the maximum number of shares of Common Stock that is available for
issuance under the Plan is automatically increased by that number of shares
equal to the lesser of 25,000 shares or such lesser number of shares (which may
be zero or any number less than 25,000) as determined by the
Board. No options were granted under this plan for less than the fair
market value of the Common Stock as defined in the plan at the date of the
grant. Although the exercise period is determined when options are
granted, no option may be exercised later than 10 years after it is
granted. Options granted under this plan generally vest ratably over
three to five years. The option price under this plan is the fair
market value of the Company’s Common Stock at the date the options were granted,
except that the exercise prices of options granted to the Chairman of the Board
are equal to 110% of the fair market value of the Company’s common stock at the
date those options were granted. The exercise prices of outstanding
options granted under the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan range from $11.19 to $30.22
as of December 31, 2009. At December 31, 2009, approximately 450,419
shares were available for granting future options or other equity awards under
this plan. The Company issues new shares upon the exercise of stock
options.
Compensation
cost recognized in 2009 and 2008 includes: (a) compensation cost for
all share-based payments granted prior to, but not yet vested as of January 1,
2006 and (b) compensation cost for all share-based payments granted subsequent
to January 1, 2006. The compensation cost is based on the grant-date
fair value calculated using a Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing formula and is
amortized over the vesting period. For the year ended December 31,
2009, the Company recognized approximately $0.2 million in compensation expense
related to incentive and nonqualified stock options granted under its
plans. For each of the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the
Company recognized approximately $0.3 million in compensation expense related to
incentive and nonqualified stock options granted under its plans. This
compensation expense is included in salaries, wages and employee benefits in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
49
On
January 28, 2009, the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors
of the Company approved the USA Truck, Inc. Executive Team Incentive
Plan. The Executive Team Incentive Plan consists of cash and equity
incentive awards. The cash incentives will be awarded upon the
achievement of predetermined results in designated performance measurements,
which will be identified by the Committee on an annual
basis. Executive Team Incentive Plan participants will be paid a cash
percentage of their base salaries corresponding with the level of results
achieved. As determined by the Committee on an annual basis,
Executive Team Incentive Plan participants are also eligible for an annual
Equity Incentive Award consisting of Company Common Stock, issued under the 2004
Equity Incentive Plan. The Equity Incentive Awards will consist of a
combination of Restricted Stock Awards (“RSAs”) and Incentive Stock Options
(“ISOs”). The value of the equity award to each participant will be
granted fifty percent in the form of RSAs and fifty percent in the form of ISOs,
as defined. To the extent options fail to qualify as “incentive stock
options” under IRS regulations, they will be non-qualified stock
options. Annual awards approved by the Committee will be granted
quarterly and will vest one-third each year on August 1, beginning the year
following the year in which the shares are awarded. The following
grants were made in accordance with the terms of the Executive Team Incentive
Plan:
Grant
Date
|
Restricted
Shares (1)
|
Number
of shares under options (1)
|
Fair
Market Value (2)
|
||||
February
2, 2009
|
5,113
|
12,283
|
$
|
14.18
|
|||
May
1, 2009
|
5,222
|
16,473
|
13.88
|
||||
August
3, 2009
|
4,997
|
15,291
|
14.50
|
||||
November
2, 2009
|
6,478
|
20,949
|
11.19
|
(1)
|
Net
of forfeited shares.
|
(2)
|
Represents
the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock on the dates of
grant.
|
On
February 1, 2010, the Executive Compensation Committee granted an award of 3,250
restricted shares and incentive stock options to acquire 11,222 shares of the
Company’s Common Stock. These awards were valued at $12.21 per share,
which was the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock on that
date.
Information
related to option activity for the year ended December 31, 2009 is as
follows:
Number
of Options
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
Weighted-Average
Remaining Contractual Life (in years)
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic Value (1)
|
||||||
Outstanding
- beginning of year
|
221,300
|
$
|
16.24
|
||||||
Granted
|
65,462
|
13.22
|
|||||||
Exercised
|
(42,200)
|
11.72
|
97,656
|
||||||
Cancelled/forfeited/expired
|
(43,116)
|
16.04
|
|||||||
Outstanding
at December 31, 2009
|
201,446
|
16.25
|
2.7
|
$
|
70,282
|
||||
Exercisable
at December 31, 2009 (2)
|
84,350
|
$
|
15.99
|
0.8
|
$
|
42,420
|
(1)
|
The
intrinsic value of a stock option is the amount by which the market value
of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise price of the
option. The per share market value of the Company’s Common
Stock, as determined by the closing price on December 31, 2009 (the last
trading day of the fiscal year), was $12.52. The intrinsic
value for options exercised in 2009 was $97,656 and in 2008 was
$46,955.
|
(2)
|
The
fair value of the options exercisable at December 31, 2009 was $0.5
million.
|
Information
related to the weighted-average fair value of stock option activity for the year
ended December 31, 2009 is as follows:
Number
of Shares Under Options
|
Weighted-Average
Fair Value
|
||||
Nonvested
options - December 31, 2008
|
113,100
|
$
|
7.97
|
||
Granted
(1)
|
65,462
|
4.51
|
|||
Forfeited
|
(10,066)
|
7.94
|
|||
Vested
|
(51,400)
|
6.07
|
|||
Nonvested
options - December 31, 2009
|
117,096
|
6.87
|
|
(1)
|
No
options were granted in 2008 and the weighted-average fair value for
options granted in 2007 was $7.74.
|
The exercise price, number,
weighted-average remaining contractual life of options outstanding and the
number of options exercisable as of December 31, 2009 is as
follows:
Exercise
Price
|
Number
of Options Outstanding
|
Weighted-Average
Remaining Contractual Life (in years)
|
Number
of Options Exercisable
|
||||
$
|
11.19
|
20,949
|
4.6
|
--
|
|||
11.47
|
40,400
|
0.8
|
40,400
|
||||
12.66
|
4,000
|
1.1
|
4,000
|
||||
13.88
|
16,473
|
4.6
|
--
|
||||
14.18
|
12,283
|
4.6
|
--
|
||||
14.50
|
17,691
|
4.6
|
500
|
||||
15.83
|
5,000
|
4.6
|
1,000
|
||||
16.08
|
2,250
|
0.1
|
2,250
|
||||
17.06
|
24,000
|
2.5
|
9,600
|
||||
22.54
|
52,400
|
2.1
|
23,600
|
||||
22.93
|
3,000
|
0.8
|
1,500
|
||||
30.22
|
3,000
|
1.6
|
1,500
|
||||
201,446
|
2.7
|
84,350
|
|||||
The
following assumptions were used to value the stock options granted during the
years indicated:
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||
Dividend
yield
|
0%
|
--
|
0%
|
||
Expected
volatility
|
36.5%
- 53.1%
|
--
|
38.7%
- 49.9%
|
||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
1.4%
|
--
|
4.2%
- 5.0%
|
||
Expected
life (in years)
|
4.13
- 4.25
|
--
|
3 -
9
|
Expected
volatility is a measure of the expected fluctuation in share
price. The Company uses the historical method to calculate volatility
with the historical period being equal to the expected life of each
option. This calculation is then used to determine the potential for
the share price to increase over the expected life of the
option. Expected life represents the length of time the options are
anticipated to be outstanding before being exercised. Based on
historical experience, that time period is best represented by the option’s
contractual life. The risk-free interest rate is based on an implied
yield on United States zero-coupon treasury bonds with a remaining term equal to
the expected life of the outstanding options. In addition to the
above, the Company also includes a factor for anticipated forfeiture, which
represents the number of shares under options expected to be forfeited over the
expected life of the option.
51
The 2003
Restricted Stock Award Plan, which terminated on August 31, 2009, allowed the
Company to issue up to 150,000 shares of Common Stock as awards of restricted
stock to its officers, 100,000 shares of which had been awarded. The
Chairman of the Board contributed 100,000 shares of his Common Stock to the
Company for purposes of issuance under the 2003 Restricted Stock Award
Plan. Shares issued as restricted stock awards under the 2003
Restricted Stock Award Plan consisted solely of shares of Common Stock
contributed to the Company by its Chairman of the Board. Awards under
the 2003 Restricted Stock Award Plan vested over a period of no less than five
years and vesting of awards is also subject to the achievement of such
performance goals as set by the Board of Directors based on criteria set forth
in the 2003 Restricted Stock Award Plan. Currently, the performance
goals require the attainment of an annual retained earnings growth rate of 10.0%
in order for the shares to qualify for full vesting (with 50.0% vesting if a
9.0% growth rate is achieved). The fair value of the 100,000 shares
of Common Stock subject to the awards previously granted is being amortized over
the vesting period as compensation expense based on management’s assessment as
to whether achievement of the performance goals is probable. To the
extent the performance goals are not achieved and there is not full vesting in
the shares awarded, the compensation expense recognized to the extent of the
non-vested and forfeited shares will be reversed. The performance
goal for 2008 was not met. As a result, no compensation expense was
recognized for the 14,000 shares that were to have vested on March 1, 2009,
based on 2008 performance. The shares remained outstanding until
their scheduled vesting date of March 1, 2009, at which time their forfeiture
became effective. For financial statement purposes, the previously
recorded expense in the amount of $0.2 million relating to the forfeited shares
was recovered on December 31, 2008, the date on which it was determined that the
achievement of the performance goal was not met. As a result, such
shares have been recorded as treasury stock and are not reflected as nonvested
shares in the table below as of December 31, 2008. As of September
30, 2009, management determined that the performance goal for 2009 will not be
met. As a result, the 4,000 shares that were scheduled to vest on
March 1, 2010 have been deemed to be forfeited. For financial
statement purposes, the previously recorded expense in the amount of $0.1
million relating to the forfeited shares was recovered on September 30, 2009,
the date on which it was determined that the achievement of the performance goal
would not be met. As a result, such shares have been recorded as
treasury stock and are not included in the nonvested shares in the table below
as of December 31, 2009. The shares will remain outstanding until
their scheduled vesting date of March 1, 2010, at which time their forfeiture
will become effective. Pursuant to the provisions of the Plan, any
shares that remained in the Plan that were not subject to outstanding awards
when the Plan terminated and any previously awarded shares that are forfeited
after the Plan terminates are to be returned to Mr. Robert M. Powell, Chairman
of the Board of Directors. Accordingly, the 38,000 previously
forfeited shares were returned to Mr. Powell on September 1,
2009. The 4,000 shares which were deemed forfeited on September 30,
2009, will be returned to Mr. Powell on March 1, 2010, the effective date of
their forfeiture.
The
compensation expense recognized is based on the market value of the Company’s
Common Stock on the date the restricted stock award is granted and is not
adjusted in subsequent periods. The amount recognized is amortized
over the vesting period. The stock-based compensation expense
(credit) that was recognized related to the Company’s restricted stock awards
was $0.4 million, $0.01 million and $(0.2) million in 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively, and is included in salaries, wages and employee benefits in the
consolidated statement of operations.
Information related to the 2003
Restricted Stock Award Plan for the year ended December 31, 2009 is as
follows:
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Fair Value
|
|||
Nonvested
shares - December 31, 2008
|
8,000
|
$
|
27.66
|
|
Granted
|
--
|
--
|
||
Forfeited
|
(4,000)
|
27.66
|
||
Vested
|
--
|
--
|
||
Nonvested
shares - December 31, 2009
|
4,000
|
27.66
|
On July
16, 2008, the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the
Company, pursuant to the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan, granted thereunder awards
totaling 200,000 restricted shares of the Company’s Common Stock to certain
officers of the Company. The grants were made effective as of July
18, 2008 and were valued at $12.13 per share, which was the closing price of the
Company’s Common Stock on that date. Each participating officer’s
restricted shares of Common Stock will vest in varying amounts over the ten year
period beginning April 1, 2011, subject to the Company’s attainment of retained
earnings growth. Management must attain an average five-year trailing
retained earnings annual growth rate of 10.0% (before dividends) in order for
the shares to qualify for full vesting (pro rata vesting will apply down to
50.0% at a 5.0% annual growth rate). Any shares that fail to vest as
a result of the Company’s failure to attain a performance goal will revert to
the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan where they will remain available for grants under
the terms of that plan until that plan expires in 2014.
Information
related to the restricted stock awarded under the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan for
the year ended December 31, 2009, is as follows:
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Fair Value
|
|||
Nonvested
shares – December 31, 2008
|
200,000
|
$
|
12.13
|
|
Granted
|
21,978
|
13.30
|
||
Forfeited
|
(168)
|
14.03
|
||
Vested
|
--
|
--
|
||
Nonvested
shares – December 31, 2009
|
221,810
|
$
|
12.24
|
As of
December 31, 2009, unrecognized compensation expense that related to stock
options and restricted stock was $0.3 million and $2.1 million, respectively,
which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of
approximately 2.7 years for stock options and 6.2 years for restricted
stock.
12.
|
(Loss)
Earnings per Share
|
The
following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted (loss) earnings
per share:
(in
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||
Numerator:
|
|||||||||
Net
(loss) income
|
$
|
(7,177)
|
$
|
3,140
|
$
|
140
|
|||
Denominator:
|
|||||||||
Denominator
for basic earnings per share – weighted average shares
|
10,240
|
10,220
|
10,596
|
||||||
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
|||||||||
Employee
stock options
|
--
|
18
|
55
|
||||||
--
|
18
|
55
|
|||||||
Denominator
for diluted earnings per share – adjusted weighted
|
|||||||||
weighted-average
shares and assumed conversions
|
10,240
|
10,238
|
10,651
|
||||||
Basic
(loss) earnings per share
|
$
|
(0.70)
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.01
|
|||
Diluted
(loss) earnings per share
|
$
|
(0.70)
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.01
|
|||
Weighted-average
number of stock option shares not included in earnings per share
calculation for the periods presented because their effect is
anti-dilutive
|
131
|
117
|
132
|
13.
|
Common
Stock Transactions
|
On
January 24, 2007, the Company publicly announced that its Board of Directors
authorized the repurchase of up to 2,000,000 shares of its outstanding Common
Stock over a three-year period ending January 24, 2010. The Company
may make Common Stock purchases under this program on the open market or in
privately negotiated transactions at prices determined by its Chairman of the
Board or President. The Board had
previously approved an authorization, publicly announced on October 19, 2004, to
repurchase up to 500,000 shares and the remaining balance of 264,000 shares was
repurchased during the first quarter of 2007 at a total cost of approximately
$4.3 million. During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the
Company did not repurchase any shares of its Common Stock. During the year ended
December 31, 2007, the Company repurchased a total of 834,099 shares of its
Common Stock under the current authorization, at a total cost of approximately
$13.1 million. The Company’s current repurchase authorization has
1,165,901 shares remaining.
On
October 21, 2009, the Board of Directors of the Company approved an
authorization for the repurchase of up to 2,000,000 shares of the Company’s
Common Stock expiring on October 21, 2012. Subject to applicable
timing and other legal requirements, repurchase under authorization may be made
on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions on terms approved by
the Company’s Chairman of the Board or President. Repurchased shares
may be retired or held in treasury for future use for appropriate corporate
purposes including issuance in connection with awards under the Company’s
employee benefit plans. The new authorization is in addition to the
existing repurchase.
53
14.
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
|
At
December 31, 2009 and 2008, the amounts reported in the Company’s consolidated
balance sheets for its Senior Credit Facility and capital leases approximate
their fair value.
15.
|
Litigation
|
The
Company is a party to routine litigation incidental to its business, primarily
involving claims for personal injury and property damage incurred in the
transportation of freight. Though the Company believes these claims
to be routine and immaterial to its long-term financial position, adverse
results of one or more of these claims could have a material adverse effect on
its financial position, results of operations or cash flow.
On May
22, 2006, a former independent sales agent filed a lawsuit against the Company
entitled All-Ways Logistics,
Inc. v. USA Truck, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Arkansas, Jonesboro Division, alleging, among other things, breach
of contract, breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, and tortious
interference with business relations. The plaintiff alleged that the
Company breached and wrongfully terminated its commission sales agent agreement
with it and improperly interfered with its business relationship with certain of
its customers. In early August 2007, the jury returned an unfavorable
verdict in this contract dispute. The jury held that the Company
breached the contract and awarded the plaintiff damages of approximately $3.0
million, which was accrued during the quarter ended September 30,
2007. In its December 4, 2007 order, the court denied substantially
all of USA Truck’s motions for post-trial relief and granted the plaintiff’s
motions for pre-judgment interest, attorney’s fees and costs in an amount
totaling approximately $1.7 million, which was accrued during the fourth quarter
of 2007. The court’s order also awarded the plaintiff post-judgment
interest, of which the Company accrued approximately $0.2 million and $0.2
million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. On January 2, 2008, the Company filed an appeal of the
verdict and the court’s order, and on September 25, 2008, it presented an oral
argument before the 8th
Circuit United States Court of Appeals seeking to overturn the
verdict. On October 1, 2009, the Court of Appeals entered an order
affirming the decision of the District Court. The total award in the
amount of $5.1 million was paid on October 19, 2009. On October 20,
2009, the Court issued its final mandate, effectively concluding the
litigation.
16.
|
Quarterly
Results of Operations (Unaudited)
|
The
tables below present quarterly financial information for 2009 and
2008:
(in
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|||||||||||
2009
|
|||||||||||
Three
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
||||||||
Operating
revenues
|
$
|
93,496
|
$
|
92,384
|
$
|
96,171
|
$
|
100,316
|
|||
Operating
expenses and
costs
|
95,130
|
92,980
|
97,670
|
103,194
|
|||||||
Operating
(loss)
|
(1,634)
|
(596)
|
(1,499)
|
(2,878)
|
|||||||
Other
expenses,
net
|
862
|
710
|
616
|
635
|
|||||||
(Loss)
before income
taxes
|
(2,496)
|
(1,306)
|
(2,115)
|
(3,513)
|
|||||||
Income
tax
(benefit)
|
(616)
|
(158)
|
(477)
|
(1,001)
|
|||||||
Net
(loss)
|
$
|
(1,880)
|
$
|
(1,148)
|
$
|
(1,638)
|
$
|
(2,512)
|
|||
Average
shares outstanding (Basic)
|
10,213
|
10,230
|
10,249
|
10,275
|
|||||||
Basic
(loss) per
share
|
$
|
(0.18)
|
$
|
(0.11)
|
$
|
(0.16)
|
$
|
(0.24)
|
|||
Average
shares outstanding (Diluted)
|
10,213
|
10,230
|
10,249
|
10,275
|
|||||||
Diluted
(loss) per
share
|
$
|
(0.18)
|
$
|
(0.11)
|
$
|
(0.16)
|
$
|
(0.24)
|
|||
Note -
The above amounts have been previously reported in the Company’s quarterly
reports on Form 10-Q. Certain line items in those quarterly reports
may not total the corresponding amount reported in this Annual Report on Form
10-K due to rounding.
(in
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
||||||||||||
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||||||
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|||||||||
Operating
revenues
|
$
|
127,238
|
$
|
146,127
|
$
|
146,089
|
$
|
116,167
|
||||
Operating
expenses and
costs
|
128,647
|
141,017
|
140,238
|
113,571
|
||||||||
Operating
(loss)
income
|
(1,409)
|
5,110
|
5,851
|
2,596
|
||||||||
Other
expenses,
net
|
1,169
|
1,058
|
1,458
|
1,098
|
||||||||
(Loss)
income before income taxes
|
(2,578)
|
4,052
|
4,393
|
1,498
|
||||||||
Income
tax (benefit)
expense
|
(632)
|
1,917
|
2,041
|
899
|
||||||||
Net
(loss)
income
|
$
|
(1,946)
|
$
|
2,135
|
$
|
2,352
|
$
|
599
|
||||
Average
shares outstanding (Basic)
|
10,211
|
10,220
|
10,223
|
10,225
|
||||||||
Basic
(loss) earnings per
share
|
$
|
(0.19)
|
$
|
0.21
|
$
|
0.23
|
$
|
0.06
|
||||
Average
shares outstanding (Diluted)
|
10,211
|
10,227
|
10,251
|
10,244
|
||||||||
Diluted
(loss) earnings per
share
|
$
|
(0.19)
|
$
|
0.21
|
$
|
0.23
|
$
|
0.06
|
||||
Note -
The above amounts have been previously reported in the Company’s quarterly
reports on Form 10-Q. Certain line items in those quarterly reports
may not total the corresponding amount reported in this Annual Report on Form
10-K due to rounding.
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE
|
None.
Item
9A.
CONTROLS AND
PROCEDURES
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We have
established disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to our Company, including our consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to the officers who certify our financial reports and to other
members of senior management and the Board of Directors. Our
management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”)
and our Chief Financial Officer (the “CFO”), conducted an evaluation of the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act). Based on this
evaluation, as of December 31, 2009, our CEO and CFO have concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that the information
required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the
Exchange Act is (i) recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the
time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and (ii) accumulated and
communicated to management, including our principal executive officer and
principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding
required disclosure.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
No
changes occurred in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal quarter
ended December 31, 2009, that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Management’s
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our
management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal
control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is
defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act as a
process designed by, or under the supervision of, the principal executive
officer and principal financial officer and effected by the Board of Directors,
management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles and includes those policies and procedures that:
1.
|
Pertain
to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and
fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our
assets;
|
2.
|
Provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being
made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and
directors; and
|
3.
|
Provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have
a material effect on our financial
statements.
|
Under the
supervision and with the participation of our management, including our CEO and
CFO, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control
over financial reporting based on the criteria set forth in Internal Control -
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission. Based on our management’s evaluation under the
criteria set forth in Internal Control - Integrated Framework, management
concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2009. The effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2009 has been audited by Grant Thornton
LLP, an independent registered accounting firm, as stated in their attestation
report, which is included herein.
Design
and Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Disclosure
controls and procedures are controls and other procedures that are designed to
ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed or
submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and
reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and
forms. In accordance with these controls and procedures, information
is accumulated and communicated to management, including our CEO, as
appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding disclosures. There were no
changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the quarter ended December 31, 2009, that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
56
Attestation
Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Report of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm
Board of
Directors and Stockholders
USA
Truck, Inc.
We have
audited USA Truck, Inc. (a Delaware Corporation) and subsidiary, collectively,
the “Company’s”, internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible
for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,
included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective
internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over
financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing
and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based
on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
A
company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over
financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to
the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2)
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are
being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of
the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s
assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not
prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of
effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance
with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our
opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria
established in Internal
Control—Integrated Framework issued by COSO.
We also
have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of USA Truck,
Inc. and subsidiary, as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009 and our report
dated March 16, 2010, expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated
financial statements.
/s/ GRANT
THORNTON LLP
Tulsa,
Oklahoma
March 16,
2010
57
There is
no information that we are required to report, but did not report, on Form 8-K
during the fourth quarter of 2009.
PART
III
Item
10.
|
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
|
The
sections entitled “Additional Information Regarding the Board of Directors –
Biographical Information,” “Executive Officers” “Section 16(a) Beneficial
Ownership Reporting Compliance,” “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial
Owners, Directors and Executive Officers,” “Audit Committee,” and “Corporate
Governance and Related Matters” in our proxy statement for the annual meeting of
stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010, set forth certain information with
respect to the directors, nominees for election as directors and executive
officers and are incorporated herein by reference.
Our Code
of Business Conduct and Ethics (“Code of Ethics”), which applies to all
directors, officers and employees, and sets forth the conduct and ethics
expected of all affiliates and employees of the Company, is available at our
Internet address http://www.usa-truck.com, under the “Corporate Governance” tab
of the “Investors” menu. Any amendment to, or waivers of, any
provision of the Code of Ethics that apply to our principal executive, financial
and accounting officers, or persons performing similar functions, will be posted
at that same location on our website.
Item
11.
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
The
sections entitled “Executive Compensation,” “Director Compensation,”
“Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” and “Compensation
Committee Report” in our proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders
to be held on May 5, 2010, set forth certain information with respect to the
compensation of management and Directors and related matters and is incorporated
herein by reference.
Item
12.
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF
CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS
|
The
section entitled “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners, Directors and
Executive Officers” in our proxy statement for the annual meeting of
stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010, sets forth certain information with
respect to the ownership of our voting securities and is incorporated herein by
reference. See “Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and
Related Stockholder Matters,” of this annual report on Form 10-K, which sets
forth certain information with respect to our equity compensation
plans.
Item
13.
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS
AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
The
sections entitled “Certain Transactions” and “Additional Information Regarding
the Board of Directors – Board Meetings, Director Independence and Committees –
Director Independence” in our proxy statement for the annual meeting of
stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010, set forth certain information with
respect to relations of and transactions by management and the independence of
our directors and nominees for election as directors and is incorporated herein
by reference.
Item
14.
|
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING
FEES AND SERVICES
|
The
section entitled “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in our proxy
statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 5, 2010, sets
forth certain information with respect to the fees billed by our independent
registered public accounting firm and the nature of services rendered for such
fees for each of the two most recent fiscal years and with respect to our Audit
Committee’s policies and procedures pertaining to pre-approval of audit and
non-audit services rendered by our independent registered public accounting firm
and is incorporated herein by reference.
PART
IV
Item
15.
|
EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL
STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
|
(a) The
following documents are filed as a part of this report:
|
Page
|
|
1.
|
Financial
statements.
|
||
The
following financial statements of the Company are included in Part II,
Item 8 of this report:
|
|||
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008
|
37 | ||
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
38 | ||
Consolidated
Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007
|
39 | ||
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
40 | ||
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
41 | ||
2.
|
Schedules
have been omitted since the required information is not applicable or not
present in amounts sufficient to require submission of the schedule, or
because the information required is included in the financial statements
or the notes thereto.
|
||
3.
|
Listing
of exhibits.
|
||
The
exhibits filed with this report are listed in the Exhibit Index, which is
a separate section of this report, and incorporated in this Item 15(a) by
reference.
|
|||
Management
Compensatory Plans:
|
|||
-Employee
Stock Option Plan (Exhibit 10.1)
|
|||
-Executive
Profit-Sharing Incentive Plan (Exhibit 10.2)
|
|||
-1997
Nonqualified Stock Option Plan for Nonemployee Directors (Exhibit
10.3)
|
|||
-2003
Restricted Stock Award Plan (Exhibit 10.4)
|
|||
-Form
of Restricted Stock Award Agreement (Exhibit 10.5)
|
|||
-USA
Truck, Inc. 2004 Equity Incentive Plan (Exhibit 10.6)
|
|||
-USA Truck, Inc. Executive Team Incentive Plan (Exhibit 10.8) |
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by
the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
USA
TRUCK, INC.
(Registrant)
By:
|
/s/
Clifton R. Beckham
|
By:
|
/s/
Darron R. Ming
|
|
Clifton
R. Beckham
|
Darron
R. Ming
|
|||
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
Vice
President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
|
|||
Date:
|
March
16, 2010
|
Date:
|
March
16, 2010
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature
|
Title
|
Date
|
||
/s/
Robert M. Powell
|
||||
Robert
M. Powell
|
Chairman
of the Board and Director
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
/s/
Clifton R. Beckham
|
||||
Clifton
R. Beckham
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
/s/
Darron R. Ming
|
||||
Darron
R. Ming
|
Vice
President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial and
accounting officer)
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
/s/
James B. Speed
|
||||
James
B. Speed
|
Director
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
/s/
Terry A. Elliott
|
||||
Terry
A. Elliott
|
Director
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
/s/
William H. Hanna
|
||||
William
H. Hanna
|
Director
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
/s/
Joe D. Powers
|
||||
Joe
D. Powers
|
Director
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
/s/
Richard B. Beauchamp
|
||||
Richard
B. Beauchamp
|
Director
|
March
16, 2010
|
||
EXHIBIT
INDEX
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit
|
|
3.01
|
Restated
and Amended Certificate of Incorporation of the Company (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form
S-1, Registration No. 33-45682, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 13, 1992 [the “Form S-1”]).
|
|
3.02
|
Amended
Bylaws of the Company as currently in effect (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2001).
|
|
3.03
|
Certificate
of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of the Company filed March
17, 1992 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to Amendment No. 1 to the Form S-1 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 19, 1992).
|
|
3.04
|
Certificate
of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of the Company filed April
29, 1993 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 5 to the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form 8-A/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June
2, 1997[the “Form 8-A/A”]).
|
|
3.05
|
Certificate
of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of the Company filed May 13,
1994 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 6 to the Form
8-A/A).
|
|
4.01
|
Specimen
certificate evidencing shares of the Common Stock, $.01 par value, of the
Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Form
S-1).
|
|
4.03
|
Restated
and Amended Certificate of Incorporation of the Company (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form
S-1, Registration No. 33-45682, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 13, 1992 [the “Form S-1”]).
|
|
4.04
|
Amended
Bylaws of the Company as currently in effect (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2001).
|
|
4.05
|
Certificate
of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of the Company filed March
17, 1992 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to Amendment No. 1 to
the Form S-1 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March
19, 1992).
|
|
4.06
|
Certificate
of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of the Company filed April
29, 1993 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 5 to the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form 8-A/A filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on June 2, 1997[the “Form 8-A/A”]).
|
|
4.07
|
Certificate
of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of the Company filed May 13,
1994 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 6 to the Form
8-A/A).
|
|
10.1*
|
Employee
Stock Option Plan of the Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.6 to the Form S-1) terminated in 2002, except with respect to
outstanding options.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit
|
||
10.2*
|
Executive Profit-Sharing Incentive Plan, as
amended effective January 1, 2007, for executive officers of the
Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Report
on Form 8-K filed on October 20,
2006).
|
||
10.3*
|
1997 Nonqualified Stock Option Plan for
Nonemployee Directors of the Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
99.1 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-8, Registration No.
333-20721, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January
30, 1997).
|
||
10.4*
|
2003 Restricted Stock Award Plan (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2003).
|
||
10.5*
|
Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s quarterly
report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2003).
|
||
10.6*
|
USA Truck, Inc. 2004 Equity Incentive Plan
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit B to the Company’s proxy statement
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 19,
2004).
|
||
10.7
|
Amended
and Restated Senior Credit Facility dated September 1, 2005, between the
Company and Bank of America, N.A., U.S. Bank, N.A., SunTrust Bank and
Regions Bank collectively as the Lenders (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K dated September 8,
2005).
|
||
10.8
|
USA
Truck, Inc. Executive Team Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended March 30, 2009).
|
||
21
|
The
Company’s wholly owned subsidiary is omitted as it does
not constitute a significant subsidiary as of the end of the reporting
fiscal year ending December 31, 2009.
|
||
23.1**
|
Consent of Grant Thornton LLP, Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
||
31.1**
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
||
31.2**
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
||
32.1**
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
||
32.2**
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
||
*Management
contract, compensatory plan or arrangement.
|
|||
**Filed
herewith.
|