e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2007
|
OR
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission File Number 1-3473
TESORO CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
95-0862768 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|
300 Concord Plaza Drive
San Antonio, Texas
(Address of principal
executive offices)
|
|
78216-6999
(Zip Code)
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
210-828-8484
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
|
|
Title of each class
|
|
Name of each exchange on which registered
|
|
Common Stock,
$0.162/3
par value
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark 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 registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer þ
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
|
Smaller
reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller
reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined by
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). Yes o No þ
At June 30, 2007, the aggregate market value of the voting
common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was
approximately $7.8 billion based upon the closing price of
its common stock on the New York Stock Exchange Composite tape.
At February 25, 2008, there were 137,602,531 shares of
the registrants common stock outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrants Proxy Statement to be filed
pursuant to Regulation 14A pertaining to the 2008 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into
Part III hereof. The Company intends to file such Proxy
Statement no later than 120 days after the end of the
fiscal year covered by this
Form 10-K.
TESORO
CORPORATION
ANNUAL REPORT ON
FORM 10-K
TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(including documents incorporated by reference herein) contains
statements with respect to our expectations or beliefs as to
future events. These types of statements are
forward-looking and subject to uncertainties. See
Forward-Looking Statements on page 54.
When used in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
the terms Tesoro, we, our
and us, except as otherwise indicated or as the
context otherwise indicates, refer to Tesoro Corporation and its
subsidiaries.
1
PART I
|
|
ITEMS 1. AND
2.
|
BUSINESS
AND PROPERTIES
|
Tesoro Corporation (Tesoro) is based in
San Antonio, Texas. We were incorporated in Delaware in
1968 under the name Tesoro Petroleum Corporation, which was
subsequently changed in 2004 to Tesoro Corporation. We are one
of the largest independent petroleum refiners and marketers in
the United States with two operating segments
(1) refining crude oil and other feedstocks at our seven
refineries in the western and mid-continental United States and
selling refined products in bulk and wholesale markets
(refining) and (2) selling motor fuels and
convenience products in the retail market (retail)
through our 911 branded retail stations in 17 states.
Through our refining segment, we produce refined products,
primarily gasoline and gasoline blendstocks, jet fuel, diesel
fuel and heavy fuel oils for sale to a wide variety of
commercial customers in the western and mid-continental United
States. Our retail segment distributes motor fuels through a
network of retail stations, primarily under the
Tesoro®
Mirastar®,
Shell®
and USA
Gasolinetm
brands. See Notes M and P in our consolidated financial
statements in Item 8 for additional information on our
operating segments and properties.
Our principal executive offices are located at 300 Concord Plaza
Drive, San Antonio, Texas
78216-6999
and our telephone number is
(210) 828-8484.
We file reports with the SEC, including annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q
and other reports from time to time. The public may read and
copy any materials that we file with the SEC at the SECs
Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E.,
Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the
operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
Our SEC filings are also available to the public on the
SECs Internet site at
http://www.sec.gov
and our website at
http://www.tsocorp.com
as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file
such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. You may
receive a copy of our Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
including the financial statements, free of charge by writing to
Tesoro Corporation, Attention: Investor Relations, 300 Concord
Plaza Drive, San Antonio, Texas
78216-6999.
We also post our corporate governance guidelines, code of
business conduct, code of ethics for senior financial officers
and our Board of Director committee charters on our website. Our
governance documents are available in print by writing to the
address above. We submitted to the New York Stock Exchange on
May 21, 2007 our annual certification concerning corporate
governance pursuant to Section 303A.12 (a) of the New
York Stock Exchange Listed Company Manual.
ACQUISITIONS
In May 2007, we acquired a 100,000 barrels per day
(bpd) refinery and a 42,000 bpd refined
products terminal located south of Los Angeles, California along
with a network of 276
Shell®
branded retail stations (128 are company-operated) located
throughout Southern California (collectively, the Los
Angeles Assets) from Shell Oil Products
U.S. (Shell). We will continue to operate the
retail stations using the
Shell®
brand under a long-term agreement. The purchase price for the
Los Angeles Assets was $1.82 billion (which includes
$257 million for petroleum inventories and direct costs of
$16 million).
In May 2007, we also acquired 138 retail stations located
primarily in California from USA Petroleum (the USA
Petroleum Assets). The purchase price of the assets and
the USA
Gasolinetm
brand name was paid in cash totaling $286 million
(including inventories of $15 million and direct costs of
$3 million).
We expect to realize annual recurring synergies of approximately
$100 million in connection with our acquisitions through
our crude purchasing and shipping logistics as well as by
maximizing the production of clean fuels for the California
market. During 2007, we achieved approximately $45 million
of our $100 million synergy goal mainly through shared
crude cargo benefits. Based on our most recent estimates, we
expect to spend approximately $1.2 billion to
$1.4 billion from 2008 through 2012 at our Los Angeles
refinery for projects to improve reliability, energy efficiency
and conversion capability and to upgrade refining infrastructure
to comply with regulatory requirements. See Note C in our
consolidated financial statements in Item 8 for further
information on these acquisitions.
2
REFINING
Refinery
Locations
|
|
|
We currently own and operate seven petroleum refineries located
in the western and mid-continental United States and sell
refined products to a wide variety of customers. Our refineries
produce a high proportion of our refined product sales volumes,
and we purchase the remainder from other refiners and suppliers.
Our seven refineries have a combined crude oil capacity of 658
thousand barrels per day (Mbpd). We operate the
largest refineries in Hawaii and Utah, the second largest
refineries in northern Cali-
|
|
|
fornia and Alaska, and the only refinery in North Dakota. Crude
oil capacity and throughput rates of crude oil and other
feedstocks by refinery are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude Oil
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity
|
|
|
Throughput (bpd)
|
|
Refinery
|
|
(bpd)(a)
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
California
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Golden Eagle
|
|
|
161,000
|
|
|
|
152,700
|
|
|
|
164,900
|
|
|
|
164,600
|
|
Los Angeles(b)
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
68,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pacific Northwest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Washington
|
|
|
113,000
|
|
|
|
121,000
|
|
|
|
111,300
|
|
|
|
110,500
|
|
Alaska
|
|
|
72,000
|
|
|
|
61,800
|
|
|
|
55,800
|
|
|
|
60,200
|
|
Mid-Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hawaii
|
|
|
94,000
|
|
|
|
81,400
|
|
|
|
84,600
|
|
|
|
82,700
|
|
Mid-Continent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North Dakota
|
|
|
58,000
|
|
|
|
57,900
|
|
|
|
56,300
|
|
|
|
58,100
|
|
Utah
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
51,700
|
|
|
|
56,100
|
|
|
|
53,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
658,000
|
|
|
|
594,700
|
|
|
|
529,000
|
|
|
|
529,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Crude oil capacity by refinery is obtained from the Oil and
Gas Journal (2007). Throughput can exceed crude oil capacity
due to the processing of other feedstocks in addition to crude
oil. |
|
(b) |
|
We acquired the Los Angeles refinery on May 10, 2007 in
connection with the acquisition of the Los Angeles Assets.
Throughput for 2007 includes amounts for the Los Angeles
refinery since acquisition averaged over 365 days.
Throughput averaged over the 235 days of operation was
106,000 bpd. |
3
Feedstock Supply. We purchase crude oil and
other feedstocks for our refineries from many domestic and
foreign sources through term agreements with renewal provisions
and in the spot market. Prices under the term agreements
generally fluctuate with market prices. We purchase over 40% of
our crude oil under term agreements, which are primarily
short-term agreements with market-related prices, and we
purchase the remainder in the spot market. Historically, our
largest domestic and foreign sources of crude oil have been
Alaska North Slope and Canadian, respectively. Sources of our
crude oil purchases are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Domestic
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
58
|
%
|
Foreign
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We process both heavy and light crude oils. Actual throughput
volumes by feedstock type are summarized below (in Mbpd):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Volume
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Volume
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Volume
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
California(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heavy crude(b)
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
46
|
%
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
44
|
%
|
Light crude
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
Other feedstocks
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
222
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pacific Northwest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heavy crude(b)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
Light crude
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
Other feedstocks
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heavy crude(b)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
Light crude
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Continent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Light crude
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
96
|
%
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
96
|
%
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
96
|
%
|
Other feedstocks
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Refining Throughput
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heavy crude(b)
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
Light crude
|
|
|
429
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
418
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
Other feedstocks
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
595
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
529
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
530
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Since acquisition, throughput at the Los Angeles refinery
averaged 68 Mbpd over 2007. Throughput averaged over the
235 days of operation was 106 Mbpd. |
|
(b) |
|
In 2007, we redefined heavy crude oil as crude oil with an
American Petroleum Institute gravity of 24 degrees or less.
Previously, heavy crude oil was defined as crude oil with a
gravity of 32 degrees or less. Heavy and light throughput
volumes for 2006 and 2005 have been adjusted to conform to the
2007 presentation. |
4
Refined Products. Refining yield represents
produced volumes of refined products consisting primarily of
gasoline and gasoline blendstocks, jet fuel, diesel fuel and
heavy fuel oils. We also manufacture other refined products,
including liquefied petroleum gas, petroleum coke and asphalt.
Our refining yield, in volumes, is summarized below (in Mbpd):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Volume
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Volume
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Volume
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
California(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
55
|
%
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products, internally produced fuel and other
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
234
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pacific Northwest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
40
|
%
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
39
|
%
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
42
|
%
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products, internally produced fuel and other
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
189
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
172
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products, internally produced fuel and other
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Continent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
56
|
%
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products, internally produced fuel and other
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Refining Yield
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
45
|
%
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
45
|
%
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
45
|
%
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products, internally produced fuel and other
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
619
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
549
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
549
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Since acquisition, yield at the Los Angeles refinery averaged 73
Mbpd over 2007. Yield averaged over the 235 days of
operation was 114 Mbpd. |
5
Transportation. To optimize the transportation
of crude oil and refined products within our refinery system and
secure shipping capacity, we term-charter four U.S. flag
tankers and six foreign-flag tankers, nine of which are
double-hulled and one of which is double-bottomed. Our term
charters expire between 2008 and 2010. We have also entered into
term-charters for four new-build U.S. flag tankers that
will replace our expiring charters in 2009 and 2010, with
three-year terms and options to renew. In January 2008, we took
delivery of our seventh foreign flagged term-charter, which runs
through 2011, and we have an agreement for one additional
foreign-flagged tanker to be delivered in 2008 with a term
through 2013. For our Hawaii and Washington operations, we
charter tugs and product barges over varying terms ending in
2008 through 2015, with options to renew. We also have
arrangements to charter vessels to transport crude oil in
double-hulled tankers from certain regions of the globe. Other
tankers and ocean-going barges are also chartered on a
short-term basis to transport crude oil and refined products.
We receive crude oils and ship refined products through owned
and third-party pipelines. We own and operate over
900 miles of crude and product pipelines, located in
California, Alaska, Hawaii, North Dakota, Utah and Montana
transporting more than 380 Mbpd across our refining system. We
also operate a proprietary trucking business at three of our
refineries transporting crude oil and refined products to
customers.
Terminals. We operate refined products
terminals at our refineries and at 14 other locations in
California, Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, North Dakota, Utah and
Idaho. We also distribute products through third-party
terminals, truck racks and rail cars, which are supplied by our
refineries and through purchases and exchange agreements with
other refining and marketing companies.
California
Refineries
Golden
Eagle
Refining. Our Golden Eagle refinery, located
in Martinez, California on 2,206 acres about 30 miles
east of San Francisco, has a crude oil capacity of 161
Mbpd. We source Golden Eagle refinerys crude oil from
California, Alaska and foreign locations. Major refined product
upgrading units at the refinery include fluid catalytic cracking
(FCC), fluid coking, hydrocracking, naphtha
reforming, vacuum distillation, hydrotreating and alkylation
units. These units enable the refinery to produce a high
proportion of motor fuels, including cleaner-burning California
Air Resources Board (CARB) gasoline and CARB diesel,
as well as conventional gasoline and diesel. The refinery also
produces heavy fuel oils, liquefied petroleum gas and petroleum
coke. During the first quarter of 2008, we expect to
substantially complete a project at the refinery to modify the
existing fluid coking unit into a delayed coking unit which will
enable us to comply with the terms of an abatement order to
lower emissions while also enhancing the refinerys
capabilities in terms of reliability, lengthening turnaround
cycles and reducing operating costs.
Transportation. Our Golden Eagle refinery has
waterborne access through the San Francisco Bay that
enables us to receive crude oil and ship refined products
through our marine terminals. In addition, the refinery can
receive crude oil through a third-party marine terminal at
Martinez. We also receive California crude oils and ship refined
products from the refinery through third-party pipeline systems.
In June 2007, we completed a project at our Amorco wharf which
improves our crude oil flexibility by enabling us to supply all
of the refinerys crude oil requirements by water.
Terminals. We operate a refined products
terminal at Stockton, California and a refined products terminal
at the refinery. We also distribute refined products through
third-party terminals, which are supplied by our refinery and
through purchases and exchange arrangements with other refining
and marketing companies. We also lease third-party clean product
storage capacity with waterborne access in the
San Francisco Bay area.
Los
Angeles
Refining. Our Los Angeles refinery, located in
Wilmington, California on 311 acres approximately
10 miles south of Los Angeles, has a total crude oil
capacity of 100 Mbpd. We source our Los Angeles refinerys
crude oil from California as well as foreign locations. Major
refined product upgrading units at the Los Angeles refinery
include FCC, delayed coking, hydrocracking, vacuum distillation,
hydrotreating, reforming, butane isomerization and alkylation
units. These units enable the Los Angeles refinery to produce a
high proportion of motor fuels, including CARB gasoline and CARB
diesel, as well as conventional gasoline, diesel and jet fuel.
The Los Angeles refinery also produces heavy oils, liquefied
petroleum gas and petroleum coke.
6
Transportation. Our Los Angeles refinery has
waterborne access at the Port of Long Beach that enables us to
receive crude oil and ship refined products through our marine
terminal. In addition, the Los Angeles refinery can receive
crude oil from the San Joaquin Valley and the Los Angeles
Basin through third-party pipelines.
Terminals. We operate a 42 Mbpd refined
products terminal at the Los Angeles refinery. We also
distribute refined products through third-party terminals, which
are supplied by our refinery, waterborne deliveries and
purchases and exchange agreements with other refining and
marketing companies. We also lease storage capacity at
third-party terminals in southern California, the majority of
which has waterborne access.
Pacific
Northwest Refineries
Washington
Refining. Our Washington refinery, located in
Anacortes on the Puget Sound on 917 acres about
60 miles north of Seattle, has a total crude oil capacity
of 113 Mbpd. We source our Washington refinerys crude oil
from Alaska, Canada and other foreign locations. The Washington
refinery also processes intermediate feedstocks, primarily heavy
vacuum gas oil, provided by some of our other refineries and by
spot-market purchases from third-parties. Major refined product
upgrading units at the refinery include the FCC, alkylation,
hydrotreating, vacuum distillation, deasphalting and naphtha
reforming units, which enable our Washington refinery to produce
a high proportion of light products, such as gasoline (including
CARB gasoline and components for CARB gasoline), diesel and jet
fuel. The refinery also produces heavy fuel oils, liquefied
petroleum gas and asphalt.
Transportation. Our Washington refinery
receives Canadian crude oil through a third-party pipeline
originating in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. We receive other crude
oil through our Washington refinerys marine terminal. Our
Washington refinery ships products (gasoline, jet fuel and
diesel) through a third-party pipeline system, which serves
western Washington and Portland, Oregon. We also deliver
gasoline and diesel fuel through a neighboring refinerys
truck rack and distribute diesel fuel through a truck rack at
our refinery. We deliver refined products, including CARB
gasoline and components for CARB gasoline, through our marine
terminal to ships and barges and sell liquefied petroleum gas
and asphalt at our refinery.
Terminals. We operate refined products
terminals at Anacortes, Port Angeles and Vancouver, Washington,
supplied primarily by our refining system. We also distribute
refined products through third-party terminals in our market
areas, supplied by our refinery and through purchases and
exchange arrangements with other refining and marketing
companies.
Alaska
Refining. Our Alaska refinery is located near
Kenai on the Cook Inlet on 488 acres approximately
70 miles southwest of Anchorage. Our Alaska refinery
processes crude oil from Alaska and, to a lesser extent, foreign
locations. The refinery has a total crude oil capacity of 72
Mbpd, and its refined product upgrading units include vacuum
distillation, distillate hydrocracking, hydrotreating, naphtha
reforming and light naphtha isomerization units. Our Alaska
refinery produces gasoline and gasoline blendstocks, jet fuel,
diesel fuel, heating oil, heavy fuel oils, liquefied petroleum
gas and asphalt. In May 2007, we completed the installation of a
10 Mbpd diesel desulfurizer unit at the refinery, which enables
us to manufacture ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) and
become the sole producer of ULSD in Alaska.
Transportation. We receive crude oil by tanker
and through our owned and operated crude oil pipeline at our
marine terminal. Our crude oil pipeline is a
24-mile
common carrier pipeline, which is connected to the Eastside Cook
Inlet oil field. We also own and operate a common-carrier
refined products pipeline that runs from the Alaska refinery to
our terminal facilities in Anchorage and to the Anchorage
airport. This
71-mile
pipeline has the capacity to transport approximately 40 Mbpd of
refined products and allows us to transport gasoline, diesel and
jet fuel to the terminal facilities. Both of our owned pipelines
are subject to regulation by various federal, state and local
agencies, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC). Refined products are also distributed by
tankers and barges from our marine terminal.
7
Terminals. We operate refined products
terminals at Kenai and Anchorage, which are supplied by our
Alaska refinery. We also distribute refined products through a
third-party terminal near Fairbanks, which is supplied through
an exchange arrangement with another refining company.
Mid-Pacific
Refinery
Hawaii
Refining. Our 94 Mbpd Hawaii refinery is
located at Kapolei on 131 acres about 22 miles west of
Honolulu. We supply the Hawaii refinery with crude oil from
Southeast Asia, the Middle East and other foreign sources. Major
refined product upgrading units include the vacuum distillation,
hydrocracking, hydrotreating, visbreaking and naphtha reforming
units. The Hawaii refinery produces gasoline and gasoline
blendstocks, jet fuel, diesel fuel, heavy fuel oils, liquefied
petroleum gas and asphalt.
Transportation. We transport crude oil to
Hawaii by tankers, which discharge through our single-point
mooring terminal, 1.5 miles offshore from our refinery.
Three underwater pipelines from the single-point mooring
terminal allow crude oil and refined products to be transferred
to and from the refinerys storage tanks. We distribute
refined products to customers on the island of Oahu through
owned and third-party pipeline systems. Our refined products
pipelines also connect the Hawaii refinery to Barbers Point
Harbor, 2.5 miles away, where refined products are
transferred to ships and barges.
Terminals. We also distribute refined products
from our refinery to customers through third-party terminals at
Honolulu International Airport and Honolulu Harbor and by barge
to our owned and third-party terminal facilities on the islands
of Oahu, Maui, Kauai and Hawaii.
Mid-Continent
Refineries
North
Dakota
Refining. Our 58 Mbpd North Dakota refinery is
located near Mandan on 960 acres. We supply our North
Dakota refinery primarily with Williston Basin sweet crude oil
through our crude oil pipeline. The refinery also can access
other supplies, including Canadian crude oil. Major refined
product upgrading units at the refinery include FCC, naphtha
reforming, hydrotreating and alkylation units. The North Dakota
refinery produces gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, heavy fuel
oils and liquefied petroleum gas.
Transportation. We own a crude oil pipeline
system, consisting of over 700 miles of pipeline that
delivers all of the crude oil to our North Dakota refinery. Our
crude oil pipeline system gathers crude oil from the Williston
Basin and adjacent production areas in North Dakota and Montana
and transports it to our refinery and has the capability to
transport crude oil to other regional points where there is
additional demand. Our crude oil pipeline system is a common
carrier subject to regulation by various federal, state and
local agencies, including the FERC. We distribute approximately
85% of our refinerys production through a third-party
refined products pipeline system which serves various areas from
Bismarck, North Dakota to Minneapolis, Minnesota. All gasoline
and distillate products from our refinery, with the exception of
railroad-spec diesel fuel, can be shipped through that pipeline
to third-party terminals.
Terminals. We operate a refined products
terminal at the North Dakota refinery. We also distribute
refined products through a third-party refined products pipeline
system which connects to third-party terminals located in North
Dakota and Minnesota. We distribute refined products from our
refinery to customers primarily through these third-party
terminals.
Utah
Refining. Our 60 Mbpd Utah refinery is located
in Salt Lake City on 145 acres. Our Utah refinery processes
crude oils primarily from Utah, Colorado, Wyoming and Canada.
Major refined product upgrading units include FCC, naphtha
reforming, alkylation and hydrotreating units. The Utah refinery
produces gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, heavy fuel oils and
liquefied petroleum gas.
8
Transportation. Our Utah refinery receives
crude oil primarily by third-party pipelines from fields in
Utah, Colorado, Wyoming and Canada. We distribute the
refinerys production through a system of both owned and
third-party terminals and third-party pipeline connections,
primarily in Utah, Idaho and eastern Washington, with some
refined product delivered in Nevada and Wyoming.
Terminals. In addition to sales at the
refinery, we distribute refined products to customers through a
third-party pipeline to our owned terminals in Boise and Burley,
Idaho and to third-party terminals in Pocatello, Idaho and
Pasco, Washington.
Wholesale
Marketing and Refined Product Distribution
We sell refined products including gasoline and gasoline
blendstocks, jet fuel, diesel fuel, heavy fuel oils and residual
products in both the bulk and wholesale markets. The majority of
our wholesale volumes are sold in 10 states to independent
unbranded distributors that sell refined products purchased
through our owned and third-party terminals. Our bulk volumes
are primarily sold to independent unbranded distributors,
independent and other oil companies, utilities, railroads,
airlines and marine and industrial end-users, which are
distributed by pipelines, ships, barges, railcars and trucks. In
addition, we sell refined products that we manufacture, purchase
or receive on exchange from third parties. Exchange agreements
provide for the delivery of our refined products primarily to
third-party terminals in exchange for the delivery of refined
products from the third parties at specific locations. Our
refined product sales, including intersegment sales to our
retail operations, consisted of (in Mbpd):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Refined Product Sales(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
319
|
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products and other
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Refined Product Sales
|
|
|
643
|
|
|
|
586
|
|
|
|
609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Total refined product sales were reduced by 66 Mbpd and 23 Mbpd
in 2007 and 2006, respectively, as a result of recording certain
purchases and sales transactions with the same counterparty on a
net basis beginning in the 2006 first quarter upon adoption of
EITF Issue
No. 04-13
(see Note A of the consolidated financial statements in
Item 8 for further information). |
Gasoline and Gasoline Blendstocks. We sell
gasoline and gasoline blendstocks in both the bulk and wholesale
markets in the western and mid-continental United States. The
demand for gasoline is seasonal in many of our markets, with
lowest demand during the winter months. We also sell gasoline to
wholesale customers and several major independent and other oil
companies under various supply agreements. We sell, at
wholesale, to unbranded distributors and high-volume retailers,
and we distribute refined product through owned and third party
terminals. Gasoline also is delivered to refiners and marketers
in exchange for refined product received at other locations in
our markets.
Jet Fuel. We supply jet fuel to passenger and
cargo airlines at airports in Alaska, Hawaii, California,
Washington, Utah and other western states. We also supply jet
fuel to the U.S. military from our refineries in Alaska,
Hawaii, Washington, Utah, and North Dakota.
Diesel Fuel. We sell our diesel fuel
production primarily on a wholesale basis for marine,
transportation, industrial and agricultural use. We sell lesser
amounts to end-users through marine terminals and for power
generation in Hawaii and Washington. Since completing the
installation of a diesel desulfurizer unit in May 2007 at our
Alaska refinery, we are able to manufacture ULSD at all of our
refineries and have become the sole producer of ULSD in both
Alaska and Hawaii.
9
Heavy Fuel Oils and Residual Products. We sell
heavy fuel oils to other refineries, third-party resellers,
electric power producers and marine and industrial end-users.
Our refineries supply substantially all of the marine fuels that
we sell through facilities at Port Angeles, Seattle, and Tacoma,
Washington, and Portland, Oregon, and through our refinery
terminals at Washington, Alaska and Hawaii. Our Golden Eagle and
Los Angeles refineries produce petroleum coke that we sell to
industrial end-users. Tesoro is also a key supplier of liquid
asphalt for asphalt and construction companies in Washington and
Alaska and the sole supplier in Hawaii.
Sales of Purchased Products. In the normal
course of business to meet local market demands, we purchase
refined products manufactured by others for resale to our
customers. We purchase these refined products, primarily
gasoline, jet fuel, diesel fuel and industrial and marine fuel
blendstocks, mainly in the spot market. We conduct our gasoline
and diesel fuel purchase and resale activity primarily on the
U.S. West Coast. Our jet fuel activity primarily consists
of supplying markets in Alaska, California and Hawaii. We also
purchase a lesser amount of gasoline and other refined products
that are sold outside of our refineries local markets.
10
|
|
|
RETAIL
Through our network of retail stations, we sell gasoline
and diesel fuel in the western and mid-continental United
States. The demand for gasoline is seasonal in a majority of our
markets, with highest demand for gasoline during the summer
driving season. We sell gasoline and diesel to retail customers
through company-operated retail stations and agreements with
third-party branded distributors (or
jobber/dealers). Many of our company-operated retail
stations include convenience stores that sell a wide variety of
merchandise items. Our retail network provides a committed
outlet for a portion of the motor
|
|
Branded Retail Network
|
fuels produced by our refineries. During 2007, greater economies
of scale were created as we nearly doubled our retail network by
adding 414 high-volume
Shell®
and USA
Gasolinetm
retail stations. Also, with the departure of a number of
third-party retail brands in the Northern Great Plains we
expanded our branded presence by adding 48 retail stations,
nearly 50% growth of our branded stations in that region. Our
expanded retail presence in California, Minnesota, North Dakota
and South Dakota positions us to realize more value for finished
products that we produce at our two California and North Dakota
refineries. As of December 31, 2007, our retail segment
included a network of 911 branded retail stations (under the
Tesoro®,
Mirastar®,
Shell®
and USA
Gasolinetm
brands). Our
Mirastar®
brand is used exclusively at Wal-Mart stores in 13 western
states under a long-term agreement. We also operate under the
Shell®
brand at certain stations in California through a long-term
agreement. Our retail stations (summarized by type and brand)
were located in the following states as of December 31,
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
|
Brand
|
|
|
|
Company-
|
|
|
Jobber/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA
|
|
|
|
|
State
|
|
Operated
|
|
|
Dealer
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Tesoro®
|
|
|
Mirastar®
|
|
|
Shell®
|
|
|
Gasolinetm
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
California
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
431
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
431
|
|
Alaska
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
North Dakota
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
Utah
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
Washington
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
Minnesota
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
Hawaii
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
Idaho
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
Other(a)
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
449
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
911
|
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
911
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
Other states include Kansas, New
Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Oregon, Nebraska, Nevada, Arizona and
South Dakota.
|
11
The following table summarizes our retail operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Fuel Revenues (in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company-operated
|
|
$
|
2,386
|
|
|
$
|
674
|
|
|
$
|
609
|
|
Jobber/dealer
|
|
|
560
|
|
|
|
386
|
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fuel Revenues
|
|
$
|
2,946
|
|
|
$
|
1,060
|
|
|
$
|
944
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merchandise and Other Revenues (in millions)
|
|
$
|
221
|
|
|
$
|
144
|
|
|
$
|
141
|
|
Merchandise Margin (percent of revenues)
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
|
|
27
|
%
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
Average Number of Branded Retail Stations (during year)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company-operated
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
|
|
213
|
|
Jobber/dealer
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
|
261
|
|
|
|
281
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Average Retail Stations
|
|
|
746
|
|
|
|
465
|
|
|
|
494
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fuel Volume (millions of gallons)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company-operated
|
|
|
856
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
258
|
|
Jobber/dealer
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
191
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fuel Volumes
|
|
|
1,098
|
|
|
|
434
|
|
|
|
449
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Fuel Volume Per Month Per Retail Station
(thousands of gallons)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company-operated
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
Jobber/dealer
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
All retail stations
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
COMPETITION
AND OTHER
We compete on a global basis with a number of major integrated
oil companies who produce crude oil, some of which is used in
their refining operations and other companies that may have
greater financial and other resources. The availability and cost
of crude oil is affected by global supply and demand dynamics.
Similarly, the supply and prices of refined products are
impacted by global dynamics. Competition and concentrations
specific to each of our refineries are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Our Golden Eagle, Los Angeles and Washington refineries compete
with several refineries on the U.S. West Coast. In
addition, products flow into the West Coast from the Gulf Coast
and other parts of the world, including the Far East and Europe.
|
|
|
|
In Washington, jet fuel sales are concentrated at the
Seattle/Tacoma International Airport. We also supply jet fuel to
customers in Portland, Oregon; Los Angeles, San Francisco
and San Diego, California; Las Vegas and Reno, Nevada; and
Phoenix, Arizona. Other suppliers compete for sales at all of
these airports.
|
|
|
|
Our Alaska refinery competes with other refineries in Alaska and
on the U.S. West Coast. Our refining competition in Alaska
includes two refineries near Fairbanks and a refinery near
Valdez. We estimate that the other Alaska refineries have a
combined capacity to process approximately 270 Mbpd of crude
oil. Our jet fuel sales in Alaska are concentrated in Anchorage,
where we are one of the principal suppliers to the Anchorage
International Airport, a major hub for air cargo traffic between
manufacturing regions in the Far East and markets in the United
States and Europe.
|
|
|
|
Our Hawaii refinery competes primarily with one other refinery
in Hawaii, owned by a major integrated oil company that also is
located at Kapolei and has a crude oil capacity of approximately
54 Mbpd. In Hawaii, jet fuel sales are concentrated in Honolulu,
where we are the principal supplier to the Honolulu
International Airport. We also serve four airports on other
islands in Hawaii.
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
Our North Dakota refinery is the only refinery in North Dakota.
Refineries in Wyoming, Montana, the Midwest and the United
States Gulf Coast region are the primary competitors with our
North Dakota refinery. The North Dakota refinery supplies jet
fuel to customers in Minneapolis/St. Paul and Moorhead,
Minnesota and in Bismarck and Jamestown, North Dakota.
|
|
|
|
Our Utah refinery is the largest of five refineries located in
Utah. We estimate that these other refineries have a combined
capacity to process approximately 108 Mbpd of crude oil. These
five refineries collectively supply a high proportion of the
gasoline and distillate products consumed in the states of Utah
and Idaho, with additional supplies provided from refineries in
surrounding states. In Utah, our jet fuel sales are concentrated
in Salt Lake City, and we also supply jet fuel to customers in
Boise, Burley and Pocatello, Idaho.
|
|
|
|
In Alaska, Hawaii, and North Dakota we compete with other
suppliers for U.S. military contracts. Both the Alaska and
Hawaii markets periodically require additional jet fuel supplies
from outside the state to meet demand.
|
We sell gasoline in Alaska, California, Hawaii, North Dakota,
Utah, Washington and other western and mid-continental states
through a network of company-operated retail stations and
branded and unbranded jobber/dealers. From time-to-time we also
sell refined product to other refiners. Competitive factors that
affect retail marketing include price, station appearance,
location and brand awareness. Our retail marketing operations
compete with other independent marketing companies, integrated
oil companies and high-volume retailers.
We sell our diesel fuel production primarily on a wholesale
basis, competing with other suppliers in all of our market
areas. Refined products from foreign sources, including Canada,
also compete for distillate customers in our market areas.
GOVERNMENT
REGULATION AND LEGISLATION
Environmental
Controls and Expenditures
All of our operations, like those of other companies engaged in
similar businesses, are subject to extensive and frequently
changing federal, state, regional and local laws, regulations
and ordinances relating to the protection of the environment,
including those governing emissions or discharges to the air and
water, the handling and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes
and the remediation of contamination. While we believe our
facilities are in substantial compliance with current
requirements, our facilities will continue to be engaged in
meeting new requirements promulgated by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
the states and local jurisdictions in which we operate. These
laws and regulations have required and are expected to continue
to require us to make significant expenditures. For additional
information regarding our environmental matters see
Environmental and Other in Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Condition and Results in Operations
in Item 7.
Oil
Spill Prevention and Response
We operate in environmentally sensitive coastal waters, where
tanker, pipeline and refined product transportation operations
are closely regulated by federal, state and local agencies and
monitored by environmental interest groups. The transportation
of crude oil and refined product over water involves risk and
subjects us to the provisions of the Federal Oil Pollution Act
of 1990 and related state requirements, which require that most
oil refining, transport and storage companies maintain and
update various oil spill prevention and oil spill contingency
plans. We have submitted these plans and received federal and
state approvals necessary to comply with the Federal Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 and related regulations. Our oil spill
prevention plans and procedures are frequently reviewed and
modified to prevent oil and refined product releases and to
minimize potential impacts should a release occur.
We currently charter tankers to ship crude oil from foreign and
domestic sources to our California, Mid-Pacific and Pacific
Northwest refineries. The Federal Oil Pollution Act of 1990
requires, as a condition of operation, that we demonstrate the
capability to respond to the worst case discharge to
the maximum extent practicable. As an example, the State of
Alaska requires us to provide spill-response capability to
contain or control and cleanup
13
amounts equal to 50,000 barrels of crude oil for a tanker
carrying fewer than 500,000 barrels and
300,000 barrels for a tanker carrying more than
500,000 barrels. To meet these requirements, we have
entered into contracts with various parties to provide spill
response services. We have entered into spill-response
agreements with (1) Cook Inlet Spill Prevention and
Response, Incorporated (for which we fund approximately 84% of
expenditures) and Alyeska Pipeline Service Company for
spill-response services in Alaska and (2) Clean Islands
Council for response services throughout the State of Hawaii.
For larger spill contingency capabilities, we have entered into
contracts with Marine Spill Response Corporation for Hawaii, the
San Francisco Bay, Puget Sound and the Ports of Los Angeles
and Long Beach. In addition, we contract with other spill
response organizations outside the U.S. for shipments of
crude oil on chartered vessels in foreign waters. We believe
these contracts, and those with other regional spill-response
organizations that are in place on a location by location basis,
provide the additional services necessary to meet spill-response
requirements established by state and federal law.
We require time chartered vessels used for the transportation of
crude oil and heavier products over water to be double hulled.
All other time chartered vessels and all other chartered vessels
are required to be double hulled vessels if available. All
vessels used by us to transport crude oil and refined products
over water are examined or evaluated and subject to approval
prior to their use.
Regulation
of Pipelines
Our crude oil pipeline system in North Dakota and our pipeline
systems in Alaska are common carriers subject to regulation by
various federal, state and local agencies, including the FERC
under the Interstate Commerce Act. The Interstate Commerce Act
provides that, to be lawful, the rates of common carrier
petroleum pipelines must be just and reasonable and
not unduly discriminatory.
The intrastate operations of our crude oil pipeline system are
subject to regulation by the North Dakota Public Services
Commission. The intrastate operations of our Alaska pipelines
are subject to regulation by the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska. Like the FERC, the state regulatory authorities require
that we notify shippers of proposed intrastate tariff increases
and they have an opportunity to protest the increases. The North
Dakota Public Services Commission also files with the state
authorities copies of interstate tariff charges filed with the
FERC. In addition to challenges to new or proposed rates,
challenges to intrastate rates that have already become
effective are permitted by complaint of an interested person or
by independent action of the appropriate regulatory authority.
EMPLOYEES
At December 31, 2007, we had approximately
5,500 full-time employees 1,376 of whom are
covered by collective bargaining agreements. The agreements for
1,133 of those employees expire February 1, 2009. We
consider our relations with our employees to be satisfactory.
PROPERTIES
Our principal properties are described above under the captions
Refining and Retail. In addition, we own
feedstock and refined product storage facilities at our refinery
and terminal locations. We believe that our properties and
facilities are generally adequate for our operations and that
our facilities are maintained in a good state of repair. We are
the lessee under a number of cancelable and non-cancelable
leases for certain properties, including office facilities,
retail facilities, ship charters, barges and equipment used in
the storage, transportation and production of feedstocks and
refined products. We conduct our retail business under the
Tesoro®,
Tesoro
Alaska®,
Mirastar®,
2-Go
Tesoro®,
Shell®
and USA
Gasolinetm
brands through a network of 911 retail stations, of which 449
are company-operated. See Notes I and M in our consolidated
financial statements in Item 8.
14
GLOSSARY
OF TERMS
Alkylation Units Units that chemically
combine isobutane with hydrocarbons through the control of
temperature and pressure in the presence of an acid catalyst.
This process produces alkylates, which have a high octane value
and are blended into gasoline to improve octane values.
CARB California Air Resources
Board. Gasoline and diesel sold in the state of
California requires stricter quality and emissions reduction
performance than other states.
Cogeneration Plant A plant designed to
produce both steam and electricity used to operate the refinery.
Cracking The breaking down of larger
molecules into smaller molecules, utilizing catalysts
and/or
elevated temperatures and pressures.
Deasphalting The process of recovering
higher-value oils from refinery residues.
Delayed Coker A process by which the heaviest
crude oil fractions can be thermally cracked under conditions of
elevated temperatures to produce both refined products and
petroleum coke.
Desulfurization - The removal of sulfur from petroleum
products to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions that result from the
use of these fuels.
Distillate Hydrocracking - A catalytic hydrocracking
process designed to produce primarily diesel fuel and jet fuel.
Exchange Agreement An agreement providing for
the delivery of refined products, primarily to third-party
terminals, in exchange for the delivery of refined products from
third parties at specified locations.
FCC Fluid Catalytic
Cracking. Catalytic cracking is the refining process
of breaking down the larger, heavier, and more complex
hydrocarbon molecules into simpler and lighter molecules through
the use of a catalytic agent to increase the yield of gasoline
from crude oil. Fluid catalytic cracking uses a catalyst in the
form of very fine particles, which behave as a fluid when
aerated with a vapor.
Fluid Coker A process similar to fluid
catalytic cracking to remove carbon (coke) from heavy low
quality crude oils into lighter products.
Gross Refining Margin The margin on products
manufactured and purchased, including those sold to our retail
segment. Gross refining margin is calculated as revenues less
costs of feedstocks, purchased refined products, transportation
and distribution.
Heavy Crude Oil Crude oil with an American
Petroleum Institute gravity of 24 degrees or less. Heavy crude
oil is generally sold at a discount to lighter crude oils.
Heavy Oils, Residual Products, Internally Produced Fuel and
Other Product yields other than gasoline, jet
fuel and diesel produced in the refining process. These products
include residual fuels, gas oils, propane, and internally
produced fuel.
Hydrocracking The process of using a catalyst
to crack heavy hydrocarbon molecules in the presence of
hydrogen. Major products from hydrocracking are jet fuel,
naphtha, propane and gasoline components such as butane.
Hydrotreating The process of removing sulfur
from refined products in the presence of catalysts and
substantial quantities of hydrogen to reduce sulfur dioxide
emissions.
Isomerization A refining process that alters
the fundamental arrangement of atoms in the molecule without
adding or removing anything from the original material. The
process is used to convert normal butane into isobutane and
normal pentane into isopentane and hexane into isohexane. Both
isopentane and isohexane are high-octane gasoline components.
Jobber/Dealer Stations Retail stations owned
by third parties that sell products purchased from or through
Tesoro and carry one of our brands.
15
Light Crude Oil Crude oil with an American
Petroleum Institute gravity of greater than 24 degrees. Light
crude oils are generally sold at a premium to heavy crude oils.
Manufacturing Costs Costs associated directly
with the manufacturing process including cash operating
expenses, but excluding depreciation and amortization.
Mbpd Thousand barrels per day.
Naphtha Naphtha is used as a gasoline
blending component, a feedstock for reforming, and as a
petrochemical feedstock.
Refining Yield Volumes of product produced
from crude oils and feedstocks.
Reforming A refining process using controlled
heat and pressure with catalysts to rearrange certain
hydrocarbon molecules, thereby converting paraffinic and
naphthenic type hydrocarbons (e.g., low-octane gasoline boiling
range fractions) into petrochemical feedstocks and higher octane
stocks suitable for blending into finished gasoline.
Retail Fuel Margin The margin on fuel
products sold through our retail segment is calculated as
revenues less costs of sales. Costs of sales in fuel margin are
based on purchases from our refining segment and third parties
using average bulk market prices adjusted for transportation and
other differentials.
Throughput The quantity of crude oil and
other feedstocks processed at a refinery measured in barrels per
day.
Turnaround The scheduled shutdown of a
refinery processing unit for significant overhaul and
refurbishment. Turnaround expenditures are capitalized and
amortized over the period of time until the next planned
turnaround of each unit.
ULSD Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel. Diesel fuel
with lower sulfur content for the purpose of lowering emissions,
which was required for use in the U.S. beginning in 2006
for on-road consumption.
Vacuum Distillation Distillation under
reduced pressure which lowers the boiling temperature of crude
oils in order to distill crude oil components that have high
boiling points.
Visbreaking A thermal cracking process in
which heavy atmospheric or vacuum still bottoms are cracked at
moderate temperatures to increase production of distillate
products and reduce viscosity of the distillate residues.
16
EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
The following is a list of our executive officers, their ages
and their positions at Tesoro, effective as of March 1,
2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Position Held Since
|
|
Bruce A. Smith
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief
Executive Officer
|
|
June 1996
|
William J. Finnerty
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
|
February 2006
|
Everett D. Lewis
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Strategy and Asset Management
|
|
January 2007
|
Gregory A. Wright
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer
|
|
June 2007
|
W. Eugene Burden
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Government Affairs
|
|
February 2006
|
Claude A. Flagg
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Strategy
|
|
January 2007
|
J. William Haywood
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Strategy Development
|
|
March 2008
|
Joseph G. McCoy
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Supply and Optimization
|
|
February 2008
|
Joseph M. Monroe
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Business Development and Logistics
|
|
January 2007
|
Claude P. Moreau
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Marketing
|
|
February 2008
|
Charles S. Parrish
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
|
May 2006
|
Daniel J. Porter
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Refining
|
|
March 2008
|
Lynn D. Westfall
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, External Affairs and Chief Economist
|
|
January 2007
|
Phillip M. Anderson
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
Vice President and Treasurer
|
|
June 2007
|
Arlen O. Glenewinkel, Jr.
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Vice President and Controller
|
|
December 2006
|
Susan A. Lerette
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Vice President, Human Resources
|
|
May 2005
|
Otto C. Schwethelm
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
|
|
June 2007
|
Sarah S. Simpson
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
Vice President, Corporate Communications
|
|
June 2005
|
G. Scott Spendlove
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
Vice President, Asset Enhancement and Planning
|
|
August 2007
|
There are no family relationships among the officers listed, and
there are no arrangements or understandings pursuant to which
any of them were elected as officers. Officers are elected
annually by our Board of Directors during the annual meeting of
stockholders. The term of each office runs until the
corresponding meeting of the Board of Directors in the next year
or until a successor has been elected or qualified. Positions
held for at least the past five years for each of our executive
officers is described below (positions, unless otherwise
specified, are with Tesoro).
Bruce A. Smith was named Chairman of the Board of
Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer in June 1996.
17
William J. Finnerty was named Executive Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer in February 2006. Prior to that, he
served as Executive Vice President, Operations beginning in
January 2005 and Senior Vice President, Supply and Distribution
of Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company beginning in February
2004. He joined Tesoro in December 2003 as Vice President, Crude
Oil and Logistics of Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company.
Prior to joining Tesoro, Mr. Finnerty served as Vice
President, Trading North America Crude, for ChevronTexaco from
October 2001 to November 2003.
Everett D. Lewis was named Executive Vice President,
Strategy and Asset Management in January 2007. Prior to that, he
served as Executive Vice President, Strategy beginning in
January 2005 and Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategic
Planning from November 2004 to January 2005. Mr. Lewis
served as Senior Vice President, Planning and Optimization from
February 2003 to November 2004 and Senior Vice President,
Planning and Risk Management from April 2001 to February 2003.
Gregory A. Wright was named Executive Vice President and
Chief Administrative Officer in June 2007. Prior to that, he
served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
beginning in December 2003 and as Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer beginning in April 2001.
W. Eugene Burden was named Senior Vice President,
Government Affairs in February 2006. Prior to that, he served as
Senior Vice President, External Affairs from November 2004 to
February 2006 and as Senior Vice President, Human Resources and
Government Relations from June 2002 to November 2004.
Claude A. Flagg was named Senior Vice President, Strategy
in January 2007. Prior to that, he served as Senior Vice
President, Supply and Optimization beginning in February 2005.
He joined Tesoro in January 2005 as Senior Vice President,
Planning and Optimization. Prior to joining Tesoro, he served as
General Manager of Supply Optimization at Shell Oil Products
U.S. from January 2003 to December 2004.
J. William Haywood was named Senior Vice President,
Strategy Development effective March 2008. Prior to that, he
served as Senior Vice President, Refining beginning in March
2005 and as President of the California Region of Tesoro
Refining and Marketing Company from September 2002 to February
2005.
Joseph G. McCoy was named Senior Vice President, Supply
and Optimization in February 2008. Prior to joining Tesoro,
Mr. McCoy held numerous positions with Chevron, including
Vice President, Trading Capability from July 2005 to October
2007 and Vice President, Global Products Supply and Trading from
November 2001 to June 2005.
Joseph M. Monroe was named Senior Vice President,
Business Development and Logistics in January 2007. Prior to
that, he served as Senior Vice President, Corporate Development
beginning in February 2006, Senior Vice President, Business
Integration and Analysis from February 2005 to February 2006 and
Senior Vice President, Organizational Effectiveness from
November 2004 to February 2005. Mr. Monroe served as Senior
Vice President, Strategic Planning and Business Development of
Tesoro Petroleum Companies, Inc. from February 2004 to November
2004 and as Senior Vice President, Supply and Distribution of
Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company from May 2002 to February
2004.
Claude P. Moreau was named Senior Vice President,
Marketing in February 2008. Prior to that, he served as Vice
President, Marketing beginning in August 2007. Before joining
Tesoro, he served as Chief Commercial Officer of Trafigura AG
and other various marketing and business development positions
since 2003. From 2001 to 2003, Mr. Moreau served as Vice
President, Manufacturing and Marketing for ChevronTexaco Latin
America Products Company.
Charles S. Parrish was named Senior Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary in May 2006. Prior to that, he
served as Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
beginning in March 2005 and as Vice President, Assistant General
Counsel and Secretary beginning in November 2004.
Mr. Parrish served as Vice President, Assistant General
Counsel of Tesoro Petroleum Companies, Inc. from March 2003 to
November 2004. From 1995 through March 2003, he served numerous
roles in the Companys legal department, primarily focused
on matters related to the Companys capital structure and
Securities Act reporting.
Daniel J. Porter was named Senior Vice President,
Refining effective March 2008. Prior to that, he served as
Senior Vice President, Supply and Optimization beginning in June
2007 and as Senior Vice President, Marketing
18
beginning in April 2005. Mr. Porter concurrently served as
President of the Northwest Region of Tesoro Refining and
Marketing Company and Anacortes Refinery Manager from June 2002
to April 2005.
Lynn D. Westfall was named Senior Vice President,
External Affairs and Chief Economist in January 2007. Prior to
that, he served as Senior Vice President, Chief Economist
beginning in May 2006, Vice President, Chief Economist from
August 2005 to May 2006 and as Vice President, Development and
Business Analysis from January 2002 to August 2005.
Phillip M. Anderson was named Vice President and
Treasurer in June 2007. Prior to that, he served as Director,
Finance and Treasury beginning in November 2005 and as Director,
Business Analysis from April 2003 to October 2005.
Mr. Anderson also held the position of Director, Mergers
and Acquisitions from January 2002 to March 2003.
Arlen O. Glenewinkel, Jr. was named Vice President
and Controller in December 2006. Prior to that, he served as
Vice President, Enterprise Risk beginning in April 2005 and Vice
President, Internal Audit, from August 2002 to April 2005.
Susan A. Lerette was named Vice President, Human
Resources in May 2005. Prior to that, she served as Vice
President, Human Resources and Communications from May 2004 to
May 2005. From April 2001 to May 2004, she served as Vice
President, Communications.
Otto C. Schwethelm was named Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer in June 2007. Prior to that, he served as Vice
President, Finance and Treasurer beginning in March 2006. Prior
to that, he served as Vice President and Controller from
February 2003 to March 2006 and as Vice President and Operations
Controller from September 2002 to February 2003.
Sarah S. Simpson was named Vice President, Corporate
Communications in June 2005. Prior to joining Tesoro, she served
as Director of Corporate Communications and Community Relations
at Cemex, Inc. from November 2004 to June 2005. From July 2000
to November 2004, she served as Director of Corporate
Communications at Waste Management, Inc.
G. Scott Spendlove was named Vice President, Asset
Enhancement and Planning in August 2007. Prior to that, he
served as Vice President, Strategy and Long-Term Planning
beginning in December 2006 and as Vice President and Controller
beginning in March 2006. Mr. Spendlove also served as Vice
President, Finance and Treasurer from May 2003 to March 2006 and
as Vice President, Finance from January 2002 to May 2003.
BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE REGISTRANT
The following is a list of our Board of Directors:
|
|
|
Bruce A. Smith
|
|
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Tesoro
Corporation |
|
Steven H. Grapstein |
|
Lead Director of Tesoro Corporation; Chief Executive
Officer of Kuo Investment Company |
|
John F. Bookout, III |
|
Retired Director of McKinsey & Company; Senior Advisor
to First Reserve Corporation |
|
Rodney F. Chase |
|
Chairman of Petrofac, Ltd. and Senior Advisor to Lehman
Brothers, Inc.; Deputy Chairman of Tesco, plc |
|
Robert W. Goldman |
|
Vice President, Finance for World Petroleum Council; Retired
Chief Financial Officer of Conoco, Inc. |
|
William J. Johnson |
|
Director of Devon Energy; President of JonLoc, Inc. |
|
J.W. (Jim) Nokes |
|
Retired Director and Executive Vice President for
ConocoPhillips; Director of Post Oak Bank (Houston, Texas) |
19
|
|
|
Donald H. Schmude |
|
Retired Vice President of Texaco and President and Chief
Executive Officer of Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc. |
|
Michael E. Wiley |
|
Retired Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Baker
Hughes, Inc.; Advisory Board of Fidelity Funds |
The volatility of crude oil prices, refined product prices
and natural gas and electrical power prices may have a material
adverse effect on our cash flow and results of operations.
Our earnings and cash flows from our refining and wholesale
marketing operations depend on a number of factors, including
fixed and variable expenses (including the cost of crude oil and
other refinery feedstocks) and the margin above those expenses
at which we are able to sell refined products. In recent years,
the prices of crude oil and refined products have fluctuated
substantially. These prices depend on numerous factors beyond
our control, including the global supply and demand for crude
oil, gasoline and other refined products, which are subject to,
among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the global economy and the level of foreign and
domestic production of crude oil and refined products;
|
|
|
|
threatened or actual terrorist incidents, acts of war, and other
global political conditions;
|
|
|
|
availability of crude oil and refined products and the
infrastructure to transport crude oil and refined products;
|
|
|
|
weather conditions, hurricanes or other natural disasters;
|
|
|
|
government regulations; and
|
|
|
|
local factors, including market conditions, the level of
operations of other refineries in our markets, and the volume of
refined products imported.
|
Prices for refined products are influenced by the price of crude
oil. We do not produce crude oil and must purchase all of our
crude oil, the price of which fluctuates on worldwide market
conditions. Generally, an increase or decrease in the price of
crude oil affects the price of gasoline and other refined
products. However, the prices for crude oil and prices for our
refined products can fluctuate in different directions based on
global market conditions. In addition, the timing of the
relative movement of the prices (both among different classes of
refined products and among various global markets for similar
refined products) as well as the overall change in refined
product prices, can reduce profit margins and could have a
significant impact on our refining and wholesale marketing
operations, earnings and cash flow. Also, crude oil supply
contracts are generally term contracts with market-responsive
pricing provisions. We purchase our refinery feedstocks weeks
before manufacturing and selling the refined products. Price
level changes during the period between purchasing feedstocks
and selling the manufactured refined products from these
feedstocks could have a significant effect on our financial
results. We also purchase refined products manufactured by
others for sale to our customers. Price level changes during the
periods between purchasing and selling these refined products
also could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Volatile prices for natural gas and electrical power used by our
refineries and other operations affect manufacturing and
operating costs. Natural gas and electricity prices have been
and will continue to be affected by supply and demand for fuel
and utility services in both local and regional markets.
The dangers inherent in our operations and the potential
limits on insurance coverage could expose us to potentially
significant liability costs.
Our operations are subject to hazards and risks inherent in
refining operations and in transporting and storing crude oil
and refined products, such as fires, natural disasters,
explosions, pipeline ruptures and spills and mechanical failure
of equipment at our or third-party facilities, any of which can
result in damage to our properties and the properties of others.
A serious accident could also result in serious injury or death
to our employees or
20
contractors and could expose us to significant liability for
personal injury claims and reputational risk. In addition, we
operate seven petroleum refineries, any of which could
experience a major accident, be damaged by severe weather or
other natural disaster, or otherwise be forced to shut down. Any
such unplanned shutdown could have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial condition and results of operations.
While we carry property, casualty and business interruption
insurance, we do not maintain insurance coverage against all
potential losses, and we could suffer losses for uninsurable or
uninsured risks or in amounts in excess of existing insurance
coverage. The occurrence of an event that is not fully covered
by insurance could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our business is impacted by risks inherent in refining
operations.
The operation of refineries, pipelines and refined products
terminals is inherently subject to spills, discharges or other
releases of petroleum or hazardous substances. If any of these
events had previously occurred or occurs in the future in
connection with any of our refineries, pipelines or refined
products terminals, or in connection with any facilities to
which we sent wastes or by-products for treatment or disposal,
other than events for which we are indemnified, we could be
liable for all costs and penalties associated with their
remediation under federal, state and local environmental laws or
common law, and could be liable for property damage to third
parties caused by contamination from releases and spills. The
penalties and
clean-up
costs that we may have to pay for releases or the amounts that
we may have to pay to third parties for damage to their
property, could be significant and the payment of these amounts
could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
We operate in environmentally sensitive coastal waters, where
tanker, pipeline and refined product transportation operations
are closely regulated by federal, state and local agencies and
monitored by environmental interest groups. Our California,
Mid-Pacific and Pacific Northwest refineries import crude oil
and other feedstocks by tanker. Transportation of crude oil and
refined products over water involves inherent risk and subjects
us to the provisions of the Federal Oil Pollution Act of 1990
and state laws in California, Hawaii, Washington and Alaska.
Among other things, these laws require us to demonstrate in some
situations our capacity to respond to a worst case
discharge to the maximum extent possible. We have
contracted with various spill response service companies in the
areas in which we transport crude oil and refined products to
meet the requirements of the Federal Oil Pollution Act of 1990
and state and foreign laws. However, there may be accidents
involving tankers transporting crude oil or refined products,
and response services may not respond to a worst case
discharge in a manner that will adequately contain that
discharge, or we may be subject to liability in connection with
a discharge.
Our operations are subject to general environmental risks,
expenses and liabilities which could affect our results of
operations.
From time to time we have been, and presently are, subject to
litigation and investigations with respect to environmental and
related matters, including product liability claims related to
the oxygenate MTBE. We may become involved in further litigation
or other proceedings, or we may be held responsible in any
existing or future litigation or proceedings, the costs of which
could be material.
We have in the past operated retail stations with underground
storage tanks in various jurisdictions, and currently operate
retail stations that have underground storage tanks in
17 states in the mid-continental and western United States.
Federal and state regulations and legislation govern the storage
tanks, and compliance with these requirements can be costly. The
operation of underground storage tanks also poses certain other
risks, including damages associated with soil and groundwater
contamination. Leaks from underground storage tanks which may
occur at one or more of our retail stations, or which may have
occurred at our previously operated retail stations, may impact
soil or groundwater and could result in fines or civil liability
for us.
Consistent with the experience of other U.S. refineries,
environmental laws and regulations have raised operating costs
and require significant capital investments at our refineries.
We believe that existing physical facilities at our refineries
are substantially adequate to maintain compliance with existing
applicable laws and regulatory requirements. However,
potentially material expenditures could be required in the
future. For example, we may be required to comply with evolving
environmental, health and safety laws, regulations or
requirements that may be adopted or imposed in the future. We
also may be required to address information or conditions that
may be discovered in the future and require a response.
21
Assembly Bill 32, a California bill that creates a statewide cap
on greenhouse gas emissions and requires that the state return
to 1990 emission levels by 2020, was passed by the California
legislature and was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger on
September 27, 2006. The bill focuses on using market
mechanisms, such as offsets and
cap-and-trade
programs, to achieve the targets. Regulations under the bill
have not yet been promulgated. The bill specifies that any
established greenhouse gas allowances will be assigned to the
entity regulated under the cap. Implementation is slated to
begin January 1, 2010 with full implementation to occur by
2020. The implementation and implications of this legislation
will take many years to realize, and we cannot predict at this
time what impact, if any, this legislation will have on our
business.
Currently, various legislative and regulatory measures to
address greenhouse gas emissions (including carbon dioxide,
methane and nitrous oxides) are in various phases of discussion
or implementation. These include proposed federal legislation
and state actions to develop statewide or regional programs,
each of which have imposed or would impose reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions. These actions could result in
increased costs to (i) operate and maintain our facilities,
(ii) install new emission controls on our facilities and
(iii) administer and manage any greenhouse gas emissions
program. These actions could also impact the consumption of
refined products, thereby affecting our operations.
In December 2007, the U.S. Congress passed the Energy
Independence and Security Act, which, among other things sets a
target of 35 miles per gallon for the combined fleet of
cars and light trucks by model year 2020 and modified the
industry requirements for Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). The RFS
now stands at 9 billion gallons in 2008 rising to
36 billion gallons by 2022. Both requirements could reduce
demand growth for petroleum products in the future. In the near
term, the RFS presents ethanol production and logistics
challenges for both the ethanol and refining industries and may
require additional capital expenditures or expenses by us to
accommodate increased ethanol use.
In June 2007, the California Air Resources Board proposed
amendments to the predictive model for compliant gasoline in the
state of California that decreases the allowable sulfur levels
to a cap of 20 parts per million and allows for additional
ethanol to be blended into gasoline. The requirements begin
December 31, 2009 but may be postponed by individual
companies until December 31, 2011 through the use of the
Alternative Emission Reduction Plan which allows for the
acquisition of emissions offsets from sources not directly
related to petroleum fuel use. We expect both of our California
refineries to be in compliance with the regulation by the 2009
deadline.
We are subject to interruptions of supply and increased costs
as a result of our reliance on third-party transportation of
crude oil and refined products.
Our Washington refinery receives all of its Canadian crude oil
and delivers a high proportion of its gasoline, diesel and jet
fuel through third-party pipelines and the balance through
marine vessels. Our Hawaii and Alaska refineries receive most of
their crude oil and transport a substantial portion of refined
products through ships and barges. Our Utah refinery receives
substantially all of its crude oil and delivers substantially
all of its refined products through third-party pipelines. Our
North Dakota refinery delivers substantially all of its refined
products through a third-party pipeline system. Our Golden Eagle
refinery receives approximately one-third of its crude oil
through pipelines and the balance through marine vessels.
Substantially all of our Golden Eagle refinerys production
is delivered through third-party pipelines, ships and barges.
Our Los Angeles refinery receives California crudes through
third-party pipelines and the balance of its crude supply
through marine vessels. Approximately two-thirds of our Los
Angeles refinery production is delivered through third-party
pipelines, terminals, ships and barges. In addition to
environmental risks discussed above, we could experience an
interruption of supply or an increased cost to deliver refined
products to market if the ability of the pipelines or vessels to
transport crude oil or refined products is disrupted because of
accidents, governmental regulation or third-party action. A
prolonged disruption of the ability of a pipeline or vessels to
transport crude oil or refined product could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
Terrorist attacks and threats or actual war may negatively
impact our business.
Our business is affected by global economic conditions and
fluctuations in consumer confidence and spending, which can
decline as a result of numerous factors outside of our control,
such as actual or threatened terrorist attacks and acts of war.
Terrorist attacks, as well as events occurring in response to or
in connection with them, including
22
future terrorist attacks against U.S. targets, rumors or
threats of war, actual conflicts involving the United States or
its allies, or military or trade disruptions impacting our
suppliers or our customers or energy markets in general, may
adversely impact our operations. As a result, there could be
delays or losses in the delivery of supplies and raw materials
to us, delays in our delivery of refined products, decreased
sales of our refined products and extension of time for payment
of accounts receivable from our customers. Strategic targets
such as energy-related assets (which could include refineries
such as ours) may be at greater risk of future terrorist attacks
than other targets in the United States. These occurrences could
significantly impact energy prices, including prices for our
crude oil and refined products, and have a material adverse
impact on the margins from our refining and wholesale marketing
operations. In addition, disruption or significant increases in
energy prices could result in government-imposed price controls.
Any one of, or a combination of, these occurrences could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
Our operating results are seasonal and generally are lower in
the first and fourth quarters of the year.
Demand for gasoline is higher during the spring and summer
months than during the winter months in most of our markets due
to seasonal increases in highway traffic. As a result, our
operating results for the first and fourth quarters are
generally lower than for those in the second and third quarters.
23
|
|
ITEM 1B.
|
UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS
|
None.
|
|
ITEM 3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
In the ordinary course of business, we become party to or
otherwise involved in lawsuits, administrative proceedings and
governmental investigations, including environmental, regulatory
and other matters. Large and sometimes unspecified damages or
penalties may be sought from us in some matters and some matters
may require years for us to resolve. We cannot provide assurance
that an adverse resolution of one or more of the matters
described below during a future reporting period will not have a
material adverse effect on our financial position or results of
operations in future periods. However, on the basis of existing
information, we believe that the resolution of these matters,
individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material
adverse effect on our financial position or results of
operations.
On March 2, 2007, we settled our dispute with Tosco
Corporation (Tosco) concerning soil and groundwater
conditions at the Golden Eagle refinery. We received
$58.5 million from ConocoPhillips as successor in interest
to Tosco and Phillips Petroleum, both former owners and
operators of the refinery. In exchange for the settlement
proceeds we assumed responsibility for certain environmental
liabilities arising from operations at the refinery prior to
August of 2000. For further information related to this matter,
see Note M in our consolidated financial statements in
Item 8.
In March 2007, we received an offer from the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (the District) to settle
77 Notices of Violation (NOVs) for $4 million.
The NOVs allege violations of air quality at our Golden Eagle
refinery. In January 2008, we agreed to settle this matter for
$1.5 million pending the negotiation of a final agreement
with the District. For further information related to this
matter, see Note M in our consolidated financial statements
in Item 8.
On January 25, 2008 we received an offer of settlement from
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(ADEC) related to the grounding of a vessel in the
Alaska Cook Inlet on February 2, 2006. The ADEC has alleged
two vessels chartered by us violated provisions of our Cook
Inlet Vessel Oil Prevention and Contingency Plan during the
period from December 2004 to February 2006. The resolution of
this matter will not have a material adverse effect on our
financial position or results of operations.
On December 12, 2007 we received an NOV from ADEC alleging
that our Alaska refinery violated provisions of its Clean Air
Act Title V operating permit. We are negotiating a
resolution of the NOV with ADEC and do not believe the
resolution will have a material adverse effect on our financial
position or results of operations.
As previously reported we are a defendant, along with other
manufacturing, supply and marketing defendants, in ten pending
cases alleging MTBE contamination in groundwater. In December
2007, we agreed to participate in a proposed settlement of seven
and part of an eighth of the pending cases subject to
negotiation of settlement documents. The defendants are being
sued for having manufactured MTBE and having manufactured,
supplied and distributed gasoline containing MTBE. The
plaintiffs, all in California, are generally water providers,
governmental authorities and private well owners alleging, in
part, the defendants are liable for manufacturing or
distributing a defective product. The suits generally seek
individual, unquantified compensatory and punitive damages and
attorneys fees. We believe the final resolution of the
cases included in the proposed settlement will not have a
material adverse effect on our financial position or results of
operations, but at this time we cannot estimate the amount or
the likelihood of the ultimate resolution of the cases not
subject to the settlement. We believe we have defenses to the
claims in the remaining cases and intend to vigorously defend
ourselves in those lawsuits.
|
|
ITEM 4.
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
None.
24
PART II
|
|
ITEM 5.
|
MARKET
FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
The following performance graph and related information shall
not be deemed soliciting material or to be
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any
future filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended, except to the extent that
Tesoro specifically incorporates it by reference into such
filing.
The performance graph below compares the cumulative total return
of our common stock to the cumulative total return of the
S&P Composite Index and to a composite peer group of
companies. The composite peer group (the Peer Group)
includes Sunoco, Inc. and Valero Energy Corporation. The graph
below is for the period of five years commencing
December 31, 2002 and ending December 31, 2007.
Comparison
of Five Year Cumulative Total Return*
Among the Company, the S&P 500 Index and Composite Peer
Group
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/31/2002
|
|
12/31/2003
|
|
12/31/2004
|
|
12/31/2005
|
|
12/31/2006
|
|
12/31/2007
|
Tesoro
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
$
|
322
|
|
|
$
|
705
|
|
|
$
|
1,362
|
|
|
$
|
1,464
|
|
|
$
|
2,139
|
|
S&P 500
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
$
|
129
|
|
|
$
|
143
|
|
|
$
|
150
|
|
|
$
|
173
|
|
|
$
|
183
|
|
Peer Group
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
$
|
139
|
|
|
$
|
253
|
|
|
$
|
544
|
|
|
$
|
516
|
|
|
$
|
691
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Assumes that the value of the investment in common stock and
each index was $100 on December 31, 2002, and that all
dividends were reinvested. Investment is weighted on the basis
of market capitalization. |
Note: The stock price performance shown on the graph
is not necessarily indicative of future performance.
25
Our common stock is listed under the symbol TSO on
the New York Stock Exchange. Summarized below are high and low
sales prices of and dividends declared on our common stock on
the New York Stock Exchange during 2007 and 2006. All per share
data presented below reflects the effect of a two-for-one stock
split effected in the form of a stock dividend which was
distributed on May 29, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales Prices per
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
|
Common Share
|
|
|
Per
|
|
Quarter Ended
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Common Share
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
65.98
|
|
|
$
|
44.53
|
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
$
|
62.00
|
|
|
$
|
42.64
|
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
June 30, 2007
|
|
$
|
64.65
|
|
|
$
|
50.06
|
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
51.40
|
|
|
$
|
31.47
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
36.55
|
|
|
$
|
27.33
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
September 30, 2006
|
|
$
|
38.40
|
|
|
$
|
26.48
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
June 30, 2006
|
|
$
|
37.87
|
|
|
$
|
30.16
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
March 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
36.99
|
|
|
$
|
28.84
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
On January 30, 2008, our Board of Directors declared a
quarterly cash dividend on common stock of $0.10 per share,
payable on March 17, 2008 to shareholders of record on
March 3, 2008. At February 25, 2008, there were
approximately 2,934 holders of record of our 137,602,531
outstanding shares of common stock. For information regarding
restrictions on future dividend payments and stock repurchases,
see Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7 and
Notes I and N in our consolidated financial statements in
Item 8.
The 2008 annual meeting of stockholders will be held at
5:00 P.M. Central Time on Tuesday, May 6, 2008,
at the Grand Hyatt San Antonio, 1148 East Commerce Street,
San Antonio, Texas. Holders of common stock of record at
the close of business on March 14, 2008 are entitled to
notice of and to vote at the annual meeting.
The following table summarizes, as of December 31, 2007,
certain information regarding equity compensation to our
employees, officers, directors and other persons under our
equity compensation plans.
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining Available for
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Issuance under
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities to be
|
|
|
Weighted-Average Exercise
|
|
|
Equity Compensation
|
|
|
|
Issued upon Exercise of
|
|
|
Price of Outstanding
|
|
|
Plans (Excluding
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Options,
|
|
|
Options, Warrants
|
|
|
Securities Reflected in
|
|
Plan Category
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
|
And Rights
|
|
|
the Second Column)
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
7,837,072
|
|
|
$
|
19.48
|
|
|
|
1,835,252
|
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders(a)
|
|
|
252,738
|
|
|
$
|
4.83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
8,089,810
|
|
|
$
|
19.02
|
|
|
|
1,835,252
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The Key Employee Stock Option Plan was approved by our Board of
Directors in November 1999 and provided for stock option grants
to eligible employees who are not our executive officers. The
options expire ten years after the date of grant. Our Board of
Directors has suspended any future grants under this plan. |
During the three month period ended December 31, 2007, we
did not repurchase any of our common stock.
26
|
|
ITEM 6.
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
The following table sets forth certain selected consolidated
financial and operating data of Tesoro as of and for each of the
five years in the period ended December 31, 2007. The
selected consolidated financial information presented below has
been derived from our historical financial statements. Our
financial and operating results include the results of the
acquisitions of our Los Angeles Assets and USA Petroleum Assets
since May 2007. All share and per share amounts presented
reflect the effect of our two-for-one stock split effected in
the form of a stock dividend which was distributed on
May 29, 2007. The following table should be read in
conjunction with Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7 and
our consolidated financial statements in Item 8.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues
|
|
$
|
21,915
|
|
|
$
|
18,104
|
|
|
$
|
16,581
|
|
|
$
|
12,262
|
|
|
$
|
8,846
|
|
Net Earnings(a)
|
|
$
|
566
|
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
|
$
|
507
|
|
|
$
|
328
|
|
|
$
|
76
|
|
Net Earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
4.17
|
|
|
$
|
5.89
|
|
|
$
|
3.72
|
|
|
$
|
2.50
|
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
4.06
|
|
|
$
|
5.73
|
|
|
$
|
3.60
|
|
|
$
|
2.38
|
|
|
$
|
0.58
|
|
Weighted Shares Outstanding (millions):(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
135.7
|
|
|
|
136.0
|
|
|
|
136.3
|
|
|
|
131.0
|
|
|
|
129.3
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
139.5
|
|
|
|
139.8
|
|
|
|
140.9
|
|
|
|
137.7
|
|
|
|
130.2
|
|
Dividends per share(c)
|
|
$
|
0.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Assets
|
|
$
|
2,600
|
|
|
$
|
2,811
|
|
|
$
|
2,215
|
|
|
$
|
1,393
|
|
|
$
|
1,024
|
|
Property, Plant and Equipment, Net
|
|
$
|
4,780
|
|
|
$
|
2,687
|
|
|
$
|
2,467
|
|
|
$
|
2,304
|
|
|
$
|
2,252
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
8,128
|
|
|
$
|
5,904
|
|
|
$
|
5,097
|
|
|
$
|
4,075
|
|
|
$
|
3,661
|
|
Current Liabilities
|
|
$
|
2,494
|
|
|
$
|
1,672
|
|
|
$
|
1,502
|
|
|
$
|
993
|
|
|
$
|
687
|
|
Total Debt(d)
|
|
$
|
1,659
|
|
|
$
|
1,046
|
|
|
$
|
1,047
|
|
|
$
|
1,218
|
|
|
$
|
1,609
|
|
Stockholders Equity(b)
|
|
$
|
3,052
|
|
|
$
|
2,502
|
|
|
$
|
1,887
|
|
|
$
|
1,327
|
|
|
$
|
965
|
|
Current Ratio
|
|
|
1.0:1
|
|
|
|
1.7:1
|
|
|
|
1.5:1
|
|
|
|
1.4:1
|
|
|
|
1.5:1
|
|
Working Capital
|
|
$
|
106
|
|
|
$
|
1,139
|
|
|
$
|
713
|
|
|
$
|
400
|
|
|
$
|
337
|
|
Total Debt to Capitalization(b)(d)
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
29
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
48
|
%
|
|
|
62
|
%
|
Common Stock Outstanding (millions of shares)(b)
|
|
|
137.0
|
|
|
|
135.8
|
|
|
|
138.6
|
|
|
|
133.6
|
|
|
|
129.5
|
|
Book Value Per Common Share
|
|
$
|
22.28
|
|
|
$
|
18.42
|
|
|
$
|
13.61
|
|
|
$
|
9.93
|
|
|
$
|
7.45
|
|
Cash Flows From (Used In)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities
|
|
$
|
1,322
|
|
|
$
|
1,139
|
|
|
$
|
758
|
|
|
$
|
681
|
|
|
$
|
447
|
|
Investing Activities
|
|
|
(2,838
|
)
|
|
|
(430
|
)
|
|
|
(254
|
)
|
|
|
(174
|
)
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
Financing Activities(b)(c)(d)
|
|
|
553
|
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
|
|
(249
|
)
|
|
|
(399
|
)
|
|
|
(410
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
$
|
(963
|
)
|
|
$
|
546
|
|
|
$
|
255
|
|
|
$
|
108
|
|
|
$
|
(33
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Expenditures(e)
|
|
$
|
789
|
|
|
$
|
453
|
|
|
$
|
262
|
|
|
$
|
179
|
|
|
$
|
101
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Operating Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining Throughput (thousand barrels per day)(f)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Golden Eagle
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
|
156
|
|
Los Angeles
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pacific Northwest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Washington
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
Alaska
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
Mid-Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hawaii
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
Mid-Continent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North Dakota
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
Utah
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Refining Throughput
|
|
|
595
|
|
|
|
529
|
|
|
|
530
|
|
|
|
520
|
|
|
|
488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining Yield (thousand barrels per day)(f)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
251
|
|
|
|
239
|
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products, internally produced fuel and other
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Refining Yield
|
|
|
619
|
|
|
|
549
|
|
|
|
549
|
|
|
|
540
|
|
|
|
507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined Product Sales (thousand barrels per day)(g)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
319
|
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
280
|
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products and other
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Refined Product Sales
|
|
|
643
|
|
|
|
586
|
|
|
|
609
|
|
|
|
604
|
|
|
|
557
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail Fuel Sales (millions of gallons)
|
|
|
1,098
|
|
|
|
434
|
|
|
|
449
|
|
|
|
510
|
|
|
|
568
|
|
Number of Branded Retail Stations (end of period)
|
|
|
911
|
|
|
|
460
|
|
|
|
478
|
|
|
|
507
|
|
|
|
557
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
We have incurred charges that affect the comparability of the
periods presented. During 2006 and 2005, we incurred charges for
the Washington refinery delayed coker project termination, debt
prepayment and refinancing, and retirement benefits (see
Results of Operations in Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations in Item 7 for further information). In 2004, we
incurred after-tax charges of $14 million for debt
prepayment and financing costs and executive retirement costs of
$1 million. In 2003, we incurred after-tax charges of
$23 million for the write-off of unamortized debt issuance
costs, $6 million for losses on the sale of marine services
assets and certain retail asset impairments, $6 million for
voluntary early retirement benefits and $6 million for the
termination of our funded executive security plan. |
|
(b) |
|
During 2006, we repurchased 2.4 million shares of our
common stock for $148 million in connection with our share
repurchase program. |
|
(c) |
|
We began paying a quarterly dividend in June 2005. Prior to
2005, we had not paid dividends since 1986. |
|
(d) |
|
During 2007, we issued $500 million in senior notes
primarily to fund the acquisition of the Los Angeles refinery
and voluntarily prepaid the remaining $14 million on our
senior subordinated notes. During 2005, we voluntarily prepaid
the remaining $96 million of senior secured term loans and
refinanced nearly $1 billion of |
28
|
|
|
|
|
outstanding senior notes through a $900 million notes
offering and a $92 million prepayment of debt. During 2004,
we voluntarily prepaid the $297.5 million of outstanding
senior subordinated notes and $100 million of senior
secured term loans. |
|
(e) |
|
Capital expenditures include accruals for capital, but exclude
amounts for refinery turnaround spending and other maintenance
costs and acquisitions. |
|
(f) |
|
Volumes for 2007 include amounts from the Los Angeles refinery
since we acquired it on May 10, 2007, averaged over
365 days. Throughput and yield for the Los Angeles refinery
averaged over the 235 days of operation that we owned the
refinery were 106 Mbpd and 114 Mbpd, respectively. |
|
(g) |
|
Sources of total refined product sales include refined products
manufactured at the refineries and refined products purchased
from third parties. Total refined product sales were reduced by
66 Mbpd and 23 Mbpd during 2007 and 2006, respectively, as a
result of recording certain purchases and sales transactions
with the same counterparty on a net basis upon adoption of EITF
Issue
No. 04-13,
Accounting for Purchases and Sales of Inventory with the
Same Counterparty effective January 1, 2006 (see our
consolidated financial statements in Item 8 for further
information). |
|
|
ITEM 7.
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
Those statements in this section that are not historical in
nature should be deemed forward-looking statements that are
inherently uncertain. See Forward-Looking Statements
on page 54 and Risk Factors on page 20 for
a discussion of the factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those projected in these statements.
BUSINESS
STRATEGY AND OVERVIEW
Our strategy is to create a value-added refining and marketing
business that has (i) economies of scale, (ii) a
competitive cost structure, (iii) effective management
information systems that enable success and
(iv) outstanding employees focused on achieving operational
excellence in a global market in order to provide stockholders
with competitive returns in any economic environment.
Our goals are focused on: (i) operating our facilities in a
safe, reliable, and environmentally responsible way;
(ii) improving cash flow by achieving greater operational
and administrative efficiencies; and (iii) using excess
cash flows from operations in a balanced way to create further
shareholder value.
During 2007, we achieved the following relative to our goals,
which are further described below under Results of
Operations and Capital Resources &
Liquidity:
|
|
|
|
|
We acquired and fully integrated the Los Angeles refinery and
retail networks of 276
Shell®
branded and 138 USA
Gasolinetm
branded retail stations.
|
|
|
|
Prior to completing the acquisitions, we set a year-end goal to
reduce our debt to capitalization ratio to or below 40%. As of
December 31, 2007 our debt to capitalization ratio was 35%.
|
|
|
|
Achieved $45 million in synergies during 2007 through our
acquisitions, mainly through shared crude cargo benefits.
|
|
|
|
Our cash flows from operating activities were $1.3 billion,
an increase of $183 million from 2006.
|
|
|
|
In June 2007, we doubled the cash dividend on our common stock
from $0.05 per share (reflects May 2007 two-for-one stock split)
to $0.10 per share. We paid cash dividends on common stock
totaling $48 million or $0.35 per share during 2007.
|
|
|
|
Excluding the Los Angeles refinery, we achieved average
throughput of 526,500 barrels per day, which was just below
the 529,600 barrels per day record set in 2005.
|
|
|
|
We managed the largest capital program in our history totaling
$789 million and completed several strategic capital
projects during 2007 as described below.
|
29
Industry
Overview and Outlook
The global fundamentals of the refining industry remained strong
during 2007. Continued demand growth in developing areas such as
India and China and global political concerns supported high
prices for crude oil and refined products. In the U.S., refining
margins remained above historical levels during the first half
of 2007 in part due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
continued gasoline and diesel demand growth coupled with limited
production capacity;
|
|
|
|
lower refinery utilization due to heavy industry turnaround
activity and unplanned outages;
|
|
|
|
low product inventories;
|
|
|
|
a continuing reliance on gasoline imports; and
|
|
|
|
new lower sulfur standards for non-road diesel, which went into
effect on June 1, 2007.
|
During the second half of 2007, industry refined product margins
on the U.S. West Coast declined substantially as moderately
rising product prices lagged rapidly rising crude oil prices.
The average cost of Alaska North Slope (ANS) crude
oil (presented in the graph below), for example, increased by
approximately $11 per barrel during the third quarter and $23
per barrel during the fourth quarter, as compared to the 2007
second quarter. The rapid increase in crude oil prices reflects
continued worldwide demand growth, concerns over declining crude
oil supplies, the weakening U.S. dollar and investment fund
speculation. While crude prices rose sharply, product prices on
the U.S. West Coast increased only moderately during the
last half of 2007 reflecting lower product demand and rising
product inventories. Product demand on the U.S. West Coast
was negatively impacted due to the weakening U.S. economy,
seasonality and inclement weather in California during December.
In addition to weakening product demand, the increase in product
inventories was also a result of strong refinery utilization
during the fourth quarter.
The following three factors should have a positive impact on
industry refining margins beginning late in the first quarter of
2008: (i) lower planned industry production runs combined
with the impact of planned turnarounds, (ii) the seasonal
reductions of gasoline inventories due to the transition into
summer-grade gasoline and (iii) increased seasonal demand.
While we continue to be concerned about demand growth and the
potential for a U.S. recession, we believe U.S. West
Coast industry refining margins should return to their five-year
historical averages for the remainder of 2008.
Acquisitions
Los
Angeles Assets
On May 10, 2007 we acquired a 100 thousand barrels per day
(Mbpd) refinery and a 42 Mbpd refined products
terminal located south of Los Angeles, California along with a
network of 276
Shell®
branded retail stations (128 are company-operated) located
throughout Southern California (collectively, the Los
Angeles Assets) from Shell Oil Products
U.S. (Shell). We will continue to operate the
retail stations using the
Shell®
brand under a long-term agreement. The purchase price for the
Los Angeles Assets was $1.82 billion (which includes
$257 million for petroleum inventories and direct costs of
$16 million). The purchase price of the Los Angeles Assets
was paid for with $1.0 billion of debt and the remainder
with cash on hand. Borrowings totaling
30
$500 million under our revolver were repaid in 2007 with
cash flows from operating activities. For further information on
our financing of the acquisition, see Capital Resources
and Liquidity Capitalization herein.
We expect to realize annual recurring synergies of approximately
$100 million in connection with our acquisitions through
our crude oil purchasing and shipping logistics as well as by
maximizing the production of clean fuels for the California
market. During 2007, we achieved approximately $45 million
of our $100 million synergy goal mainly through shared
crude cargo benefits.
Based on our most recent estimates, we expect to spend
approximately $1.2 billion to $1.4 billion from 2008
through 2012 for projects to improve reliability, energy
efficiency and conversion capability and to upgrade refinery
infrastructure to comply with regulatory requirements at the Los
Angeles refinery. The projects include an upgrade project
designed to increase heavy crude processing capacity, which is
under further review and evaluation. The project, if approved,
would cost between $200 million to $350 million with
estimated completion by the end of 2012. We are also planning to
install a new cogeneration facility and boilers to reduce air
emissions and improve reliability and efficiency. This project,
if approved, would cost approximately $250 million to
$325 million with estimated completion in late 2010. These
projects continue to be under evaluation. The cost estimates are
subject to further review and analysis.
Our regulatory projects include replacing underground pipelines
with above-ground pipelines as required by an Order from the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board. This project is
estimated to be completed in 2014 and will cost approximately
$80 million. Our regulatory projects also include a fuel
gas treating unit designed to reduce fuel gas sulfur and new
flare gas recovery compressors designed to meet flaring
requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
We project to spend approximately $75 million through 2011
to complete the fuel gas treating unit project and approximately
$50 million through 2009 to install the flare gas recovery
compressors. These cost estimates are subject to further review
and analysis.
Spending on refinery turnaround and other maintenance at the Los
Angeles refinery is expected to be approximately
$200 million to $225 million from 2008 through 2012.
These cost estimates are subject to further review and analysis.
USA
Petroleum Retail Stations
On May 1, 2007, we acquired 138 retail stations located
primarily in California from USA Petroleum (the USA
Petroleum Assets). The purchase price of the assets and
the USA
Gasolinetm
brand name was paid in cash totaling $286 million
(including inventories of $15 million and direct costs of
$3 million).
This acquisition, along with the acquired 276 Shell branded
retail stations, provides us with retail stations near our
Golden Eagle and Los Angeles refineries that will allow us to
optimize production, invest in refinery improvements and deliver
more clean products into the California market. In addition,
greater economies of scale were created as we nearly doubled our
retail network by adding 414 retail stations.
Strategic
Capital Projects
To achieve our strategy of a competitive cost structure and
earning competitive returns in any margin environment, we focus
on capital projects that improve safety and reliability, enhance
our crude oil flexibility, improve clean product yields and
increase energy efficiency. Our 2008 capital budget is
$966 million. All capital expenditures, whether actual or
expected, include estimates of capitalized interest and labor.
See Capital Resources and Liquidity for additional
information related to our budgeted and actual capital spending.
Completed
Strategic Capital Projects
During 2007, we completed the following strategic capital
projects:
|
|
|
|
|
a diesel desulfurizer unit (10,000 bpd) at our Alaska
refinery which enables us to manufacture ultra-low sulfur diesel
(ULSD) and become the sole producer of ULSD in
Alaska;
|
|
|
|
the Amorco wharf project at our Golden Eagle refinery which
lowers our crude costs as we can now supply all of the
refinerys crude oil requirements by water;
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
two sulfur handling projects at our Washington refinery, which
allow us to process a greater percentage of sour crude oils at
the refinery; and
|
|
|
|
the control modernization project at our Golden Eagle refinery,
which converted our older refinery control technologies to a
modern digital system, allowing us to improve refining yields
and reduce energy costs.
|
Golden
Eagle Coker Modification Project
The $575 million coker modification project at our Golden
Eagle refinery is currently scheduled to be substantially
completed during the first quarter of 2008. The modification of
our existing fluid coker unit to a delayed coker unit will
enable us to comply with the terms of an abatement order to
lower air emissions while also enhancing the refinerys
capabilities in terms of reliability, lengthening turnaround
cycles and lowering maintenance costs. By extending the typical
coker turnaround cycle from 2.5 years to 5 years, we
will effectively increase clean fuels production and
significantly reduce the duration and costs of coker turnarounds.
Future
Strategic Capital Projects
During the third quarter of 2008, we expect to complete the
selective hydrogenation unit (SHU) at our Washington
refinery, which will reduce the sulfur content in gasoline. The
SHU will allow a higher percentage of sour crude oils to be
processed at the refinery.
Beyond 2008, we are currently evaluating several projects that
focus on our strategic goals. At our Golden Eagle and Hawaii
refineries we are evaluating crude oil flexibility projects that
would allow us to process a more diverse slate of less expensive
sour crude oils. These projects, if approved, would be completed
by the end of 2012. At our Los Angeles refinery, we are also
evaluating an upgrade project designed to increase heavy crude
processing capacity as described above and projects to increase
our capability of receiving waterborne crude oil through access
at our Port of Long Beach terminal. We are also studying energy
efficiency projects at all of our refineries. These projects are
preliminary and are subject to further review and analysis.
Hawaii
Refinery Initiatives
During 2007, gross refining margins at our Hawaii refinery
declined by $164 million from 2006. The significant decline
in gross refining margins year-over-year reflects the decrease
in industry margins and the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Hawaiis reliance on light sweet crude from Asia, which has
been pricing at a premium;
|
|
|
|
finished product sales agreements that did not keep pace with
rapidly rising crude prices; and
|
|
|
|
unplanned downtime on the refinerys reformer unit and
related repairs and maintenance expenses.
|
We have several initiatives to address these issues at Hawaii in
2008. These initiatives include:
|
|
|
|
|
changes to our crude slate to reduce the amount of Asian light
sweet crudes;
|
|
|
|
achieving better value for finished products marketed in
Hawaii; and
|
|
|
|
improving reliability primarily through (i) a control
modernization project which also improves refining yields and
reduces energy costs and (ii) a project to install a new
electrical substation to improve electrical reliability, both of
which are expected to be completed in 2008.
|
Cash
Dividends
On January 30, 2008, our Board of Directors declared a
quarterly cash dividend on common stock of $0.10 per share,
payable on March 17, 2008 to shareholders of record on
March 3, 2008. During 2007, we paid cash dividends on
common stock totaling $0.35 per share.
32
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
A discussion and analysis of the factors contributing to our
results of operations is presented hereafter. The accompanying
consolidated financial statements in Item 8, together with
the following information, are intended to provide investors
with a reasonable basis for assessing our historical operations,
but should not serve as the only criteria for predicting our
future performance. Our results include the operations of the
Los Angeles Assets and USA Petroleum Assets since their
acquisition dates in May 2007.
Summary
Our net earnings for 2007 declined to $566 million ($4.06
per diluted share) from $801 million ($5.73 per diluted
share) in 2006 due primarily to the following (these factors and
other factors are more fully described in the following
discussion and analysis):
|
|
|
|
|
substantially lower refined product margins on the
U.S. West Coast during the second half of the year as crude
oil prices rose rapidly and product prices increased only
moderately;
|
|
|
|
significantly lower gross refining margins at our Hawaii
refinery due, in part, to the factors previously described;
|
|
|
|
higher operating expenses reflecting increased repairs and
maintenance expenses and employee costs;
|
|
|
|
the impact of rising crude oil costs on our non-trading
derivative positions; and
|
|
|
|
increased selling, general and administrative expenses
reflecting higher stock-based compensation and employee costs.
|
Net earnings for 2006 increased to $801 million ($5.73 per
diluted share) from $507 million ($3.60 per diluted share)
in 2005 primarily due to the following (these factors and other
factors are more fully described in the following discussion and
analysis):
|
|
|
|
|
higher refined product margins primarily due to strong product
demand combined with extensive industry maintenance and
unplanned downtime; and
|
|
|
|
lower interest expense as a result of debt reduction and
refinancing in 2005 totaling $191 million.
|
Net earnings for 2006 included an after-tax charge of
$17 million related to the termination of a delayed coker
project at our Washington refinery. For 2005, net earnings
included after-tax charges for debt refinancing and prepayment
costs of $58 million and executive termination and
retirement costs of $6 million.
Refining
Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions except
|
|
|
|
per barrel amounts)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined products(a)
|
|
$
|
20,906
|
|
|
$
|
17,323
|
|
|
$
|
15,587
|
|
Crude oil resales and other
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues
|
|
$
|
21,533
|
|
|
$
|
17,887
|
|
|
$
|
16,369
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throughput(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heavy crude(c)
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
Light crude(c)
|
|
|
429
|
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
|
418
|
|
Other feedstocks
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Throughput
|
|
|
595
|
|
|
|
529
|
|
|
|
530
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Heavy Crude Oil of Total Refining Throughput(c)
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions except
|
|
|
|
per barrel amounts)
|
|
|
Yield (thousand barrels per day)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
Jet Fuel
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
Diesel Fuel
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products, internally produced fuel and other
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Yield
|
|
|
619
|
|
|
|
549
|
|
|
|
549
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross refining margin ($/throughput barrel)(d)
|
|
$
|
12.73
|
|
|
$
|
13.62
|
|
|
$
|
11.62
|
|
Manufacturing cost before depreciation and
amortization(d) ($/throughput bbl)
|
|
$
|
4.47
|
|
|
$
|
3.57
|
|
|
$
|
3.48
|
|
Segment Operating Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross refining margin(e)
|
|
$
|
2,762
|
|
|
$
|
2,631
|
|
|
$
|
2,246
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing costs
|
|
|
971
|
|
|
|
689
|
|
|
|
673
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
Depreciation and amortization(f)
|
|
|
314
|
|
|
|
221
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
Loss on asset disposals and impairments
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Operating Income
|
|
$
|
1,188
|
|
|
$
|
1,476
|
|
|
$
|
1,194
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined Product Sales (thousand barrels per day)(a)(g)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline and gasoline blendstocks
|
|
|
319
|
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
Jet fuel
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
Diesel fuel
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
Heavy oils, residual products and other
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Refined Product Sales
|
|
|
643
|
|
|
|
586
|
|
|
|
609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined Product Sales Margin ($/barrel)(g)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price
|
|
$
|
89.47
|
|
|
$
|
81.26
|
|
|
$
|
70.20
|
|
Average costs of sales
|
|
|
78.14
|
|
|
|
69.42
|
|
|
|
60.28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined Product Sales Margin
|
|
$
|
11.33
|
|
|
$
|
11.84
|
|
|
$
|
9.92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining Data by Region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California (Golden Eagle and Los Angeles)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining throughput (thousand barrels per day)(b)(h)
|
|
|
222
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
Gross refining margin(b)(d)
|
|
$
|
1,317
|
|
|
$
|
1,148
|
|
|
$
|
1,045
|
|
Gross refining margin ($/throughput barrel)(d)
|
|
$
|
16.33
|
|
|
$
|
19.08
|
|
|
$
|
17.39
|
|
Manufacturing cost before depreciation and amortization(d)
($/throughput bbl)
|
|
$
|
7.22
|
|
|
$
|
5.57
|
|
|
$
|
5.56
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions except
|
|
|
|
per barrel amounts)
|
|
|
Pacific Northwest (Alaska and Washington)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining throughput (thousand barrels per day)(h)
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
|
171
|
|
Gross refining margin(d)
|
|
$
|
730
|
|
|
$
|
706
|
|
|
$
|
594
|
|
Gross refining margin ($/throughput barrel)(d)
|
|
$
|
10.94
|
|
|
$
|
11.57
|
|
|
$
|
9.53
|
|
Manufacturing cost before depreciation and amortization(d)
($/throughput bbl)
|
|
$
|
3.00
|
|
|
$
|
2.88
|
|
|
$
|
2.74
|
|
Mid-Pacific (Hawaii)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining throughput (thousand barrels per day)(h)
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
Gross refining margin(d)
|
|
$
|
35
|
|
|
$
|
199
|
|
|
$
|
188
|
|
Gross refining margin ($/throughput barrel)(d)
|
|
$
|
1.18
|
|
|
$
|
6.44
|
|
|
$
|
6.23
|
|
Manufacturing cost before depreciation and amortization(d)
($/throughput bbl)
|
|
$
|
2.22
|
|
|
$
|
1.84
|
|
|
$
|
1.85
|
|
Mid-Continent (North Dakota and Utah)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining throughput (thousand barrels per day)(h)
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
Gross refining margin(d)
|
|
$
|
701
|
|
|
$
|
577
|
|
|
$
|
413
|
|
Gross refining margin ($/throughput barrel)(d)
|
|
$
|
17.51
|
|
|
$
|
14.06
|
|
|
$
|
10.15
|
|
Manufacturing cost before depreciation and amortization(d)
($/throughput bbl)
|
|
$
|
3.07
|
|
|
$
|
2.96
|
|
|
$
|
2.73
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes intersegment sales to our retail segment, at prices
which approximate market of $2.8 billion, $987 million
and $873 million in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Intersegment refined product sales volumes totaled
42,700 bpd, 16,200 bpd and 16,900 bpd in 2007,
2006 and 2005, respectively. |
|
(b) |
|
Volumes and margins for 2007 include amounts for the Los Angeles
refinery since acquisition on May 10, 2007, averaged over
the periods presented. Throughput and yield averaged over the
235 days of operation were 106,000 bpd and
114,000 bpd, respectively. |
|
(c) |
|
In 2007, we redefined heavy crude oil as crude oil with an
American Petroleum Institute gravity of 24 degrees or less.
Previously, heavy crude oils were defined as crude oils with a
gravity of 32 degrees or less. Heavy and light throughput
volumes for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 have
been adjusted to conform to the 2007 presentation. |
|
(d) |
|
In 2007, we revised the calculation of gross refining margin per
throughput barrel to include the effect of inventory changes.
Inventory changes are the result of selling a volume and mix of
product that is different than actual volumes manufactured. The
amounts for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 have
been recalculated to conform to the 2007 calculation.
Previously, gross refining margin per barrel was calculated
based upon manufactured product volumes. Management uses gross
refining margin per barrel to evaluate performance and compare
profitability to other companies in the industry. Gross refining
margin per barrel is calculated by dividing gross refining
margin by total refining throughput and may not be calculated
similarly by other companies. Gross refining margin is
calculated as revenues less costs of feedstocks, purchased
refined products, transportation and distribution. Management
uses manufacturing costs per barrel to evaluate the efficiency
of refinery operations. Manufacturing costs per barrel is
calculated by dividing manufacturing costs by total refining
throughput and may not be comparable to similarly titled
measures used by other companies. Investors and analysts use
these financial measures to help analyze and compare companies
in the industry on the basis of operating performance. These
financial measures should not be considered as alternatives to
segment operating income, revenues, costs of sales and operating
expenses or any other measure of financial performance presented
in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America. |
|
(e) |
|
Consolidated gross refining margin totals gross refining margin
for each of our regions adjusted for other costs not directly
attributable to a specific region. Other costs resulted in a
decrease of $21 million for the year ended |
35
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007 and an increase of $1 million and
$6 million for the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005, respectively. Gross refining margin includes the effect of
intersegment sales to the retail segment at prices which
approximate market. Gross refining margin approximates total
refining throughput times gross refining margin per barrel. |
|
(f) |
|
Includes manufacturing depreciation and amortization per
throughput barrel of approximately $1.37, $1.06 and $0.75 for
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. |
|
(g) |
|
Sources of total refined product sales included refined products
manufactured at the refineries and refined products purchased
from third parties. Total refined product sales margin includes
margins on sales of manufactured and purchased refined products.
Total refined product sales were reduced by 66 Mbpd and 23 Mbpd
during 2007 and 2006, respectively, as a result of recording
certain purchases and sales transactions with the same
counterparty on a net basis upon adoption of EITF Issue
No. 04-13,
Accounting for Purchases and Sales of Inventory with the
Same Counterparty effective January 1, 2006 (see our
consolidated financial statements in Item 8 for further
information). |
|
(h) |
|
We experienced reduced throughput during scheduled turnarounds
for the following refineries: the Los Angeles, Golden Eagle, and
Utah refineries during 2007; the Golden Eagle, Washington and
Alaska refineries during 2006; and the Golden Eagle, Washington
and Hawaii refineries during 2005. |
2007
Compared to 2006
Overview. The decrease in operating income of
$288 million during 2007 was primarily due to reduced gross
refining margins per barrel and increased operating expenses and
depreciation and amortization, partially offset by increased
throughput. During 2007, total gross refining margin per barrel
decreased by 7% from 2006, reflecting significantly lower
industry margins on the U.S. West Coast during the last six
months of 2007. U.S. refined product margins during the
first six months of 2007 remained well above historical levels
primarily due to strong product demand, lower industry refinery
utilization due to heavy turnaround activity and unplanned
outages, low product inventories and the introduction of new
lower sulfur requirements for non-road diesel beginning
June 1, 2007. However, during the second half of 2007
industry refined product margins on the U.S. West Coast
fell substantially as moderately rising product prices lagged
rapidly rising crude oil prices as described above in
Industry Overview. Industry margins on the
U.S. West Coast in the second half of 2006 were much
stronger compared to the second half of 2007 reflecting stronger
product demand, lower average product inventories and the
introduction of new sulfur requirements for gasoline and diesel.
In addition, during the 2006 fourth quarter we experienced
record industry margins due to extensive industry turnaround
activity and unplanned downtime on the U.S. West Coast.
Gross Refining Margins. On an aggregate basis,
our total gross refining margins increased to $2.8 billion
in 2007 from $2.6 billion in 2006, reflecting increased
refining throughput as a result of acquiring the Los Angeles
refinery partly offset by lower per barrel gross refining
margins particularly at our Hawaii refinery. Discussion of our
results by refining region is presented below.
|
|
|
|
|
During 2007, gross refining margins in our California and
Pacific Northwest regions declined 15% and 3%, respectively. The
sharp decline in U.S. West Coast industry margins during
the second half of 2007, compared to the same period in 2006
when industry refining margins in the region were robust,
resulted in a decline in our gross refining margins during 2007.
Other factors that negatively impacted our gross refining
margins in the California region during 2007 included:
(i) the scheduled refinery maintenance turnarounds at our
Golden Eagle refinery of the fluid catalytic cracker
(FCC) and hydrocracking units and subsequent
extension of the FCC turnaround during the first quarter due to
unanticipated repairs and equipment malfunctions;
(ii) unscheduled downtime at our Golden Eagle refinery
during the third quarter which increased feedstock costs and
reduced throughput; and (iii) contractual purchase
commitments and certain refinery logistical limitations at our
Los Angeles refinery which limited our ability to capture the
cost differentials between foreign sourced and local crudes. We
have identified opportunities to improve our optimization of
foreign sourced crude purchases at our Los Angeles refinery and
we expect to realize these opportunities beginning in 2008. The
Pacific Northwest region was negatively impacted by unscheduled
maintenance of the boiler unit for the FCC and scheduled
maintenance on two hydrotreating units at our
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
Washington refinery during the third quarter resulting in
reduced operating income of approximately $12 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In our Mid-Pacific region, gross refining margins declined 82%
during 2007, reflecting the decline in U.S. West Coast
industry margins during the second half of 2007. Crude oil costs
in the region were impacted as Asian sweet crude oils realized
higher premiums due to strong Asian demand. At the same time,
several of our term product contracts have lagging pricing
provisions, which prevented us from fully passing along the
rising crude oil costs. In addition, an unplanned outage of the
Hawaii refinerys reformer unit during the fourth quarter
negatively impacted results by an estimated $30 million,
including $10 million of higher repairs and maintenance
expenses.
|
|
|
|
In our Mid-Continent region, gross refining margins increased
21% per barrel during 2007 reflecting strong product demand from
the farming sector and unplanned refinery outages at several
refineries during the first half of 2007. We were also able to
take advantage of more discounted local light sweet crudes
during the 2007 fourth quarter.
|
Our gross refining margins were also impacted by our non-trading
derivative positions during 2007. Our derivative positions were
negatively impacted by rapidly rising crude oil costs, which
reduced our gross refining margins by $104 million
year-over-year. During 2007 and 2006, our derivative positions
resulted in a $61 million loss and a $43 million gain,
respectively. For additional information relating to our
non-trading derivative program see Item 7A,
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk included herein.
Refining Throughput. Total refining throughput
averaged 595 Mbpd in 2007 compared to 529 Mbpd during 2006,
primarily reflecting average refining throughput at our Los
Angeles refinery of 68 Mbpd (see footnote (b) of the table
above for information related to refining throughput at our Los
Angeles refinery). Excluding the Los Angeles refinery, we
continued to achieve near record throughput levels reflecting
on-going reliability and operating efficiencies. Scheduled
downtime during 2007 and 2006 that negatively impacted refining
throughput is described in footnote (h) of the table above.
We also experienced unscheduled downtime in 2007 at our Golden
Eagle, Washington and Hawaii refineries as described above.
During 2006, we experienced unscheduled downtime at our Alaska
refinery as a result of the grounding of our time-chartered
vessel which impacted the supply of feedstocks to the refinery.
Refined Product Sales. Revenues from sales of
refined products increased 21% during 2007 primarily due to
higher average refined product sales prices and increased
refined product sales volumes. Our average refined product sales
price increased 10% to $89.47 per barrel reflecting the increase
in crude oil prices. Total refined product sales volumes
increased 57 Mbpd in 2007, primarily reflecting additional sales
volumes from our Los Angeles refinery.
Expenses. Our average costs of sales increased
13% to $78.14 per barrel during 2007, reflecting the significant
increase in crude oil prices during the year. Manufacturing and
other operating expenses increased to $1.2 billion in 2007,
compared with $867 million in 2006, with $196 million
of the increase incurred by the Los Angeles refinery. The
remaining increase of $144 million reflects higher repairs
and maintenance expenses of $52 million, increased employee
costs of $42 million, higher marine charter expenses of
$22 million and increased utilities costs of
$18 million. Depreciation and amortization increased to
$314 million in 2007, compared to $221 million in
2006, reflecting depreciation and amortization of
$48 million associated with the Los Angeles refinery and
increased depreciation from our recent investments in capital
projects. Loss on asset disposals and impairments decreased by
$31 million primarily due to charges of $28 million
during 2006 relating to the termination of a delayed coker
project at our Washington refinery. We anticipate our operating
expenses during 2008 at our Los Angeles refinery will be
consistent with the 2007 fourth quarter primarily due to
continued elevated repair and maintenance costs to address aging
assets and front-end engineering costs for our capital projects
that are not capitalized. However, over the next five years we
expect to decrease our operating expenses at the refinery by an
estimated 25% as inflationary cost increases are more than
offset by lower energy and repair and maintenance costs. We
expect to reduce energy costs (assuming energy prices are
comparable to 2007) as a result of planned capital projects
including a new cogeneration facility and boilers as discussed
above in Business Strategy and Overview. We also
estimate that repair and maintenance costs beyond 2008 will be
lower as a result of implementing new maintenance efficiency and
reliability programs along with benefits from our planned
capital projects.
37
2006
Compared to 2005
Overview. The increase in operating income of
$282 million was primarily due to increased gross refining
margins, partially offset by higher depreciation expense and the
increased loss on asset disposals and impairments. Total gross
refining margins increased 17% from 2005 reflecting higher
industry margins in all of our regions. The higher industry
margins in 2006 reflected the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
continued strong demand for refined products;
|
|
|
|
limited production capacity in the U.S.;
|
|
|
|
a stronger reliance on gasoline imports;
|
|
|
|
strong global economic growth;
|
|
|
|
the introduction of new sulfur requirements for gasoline and
diesel;
|
|
|
|
the elimination of MTBE;
|
|
|
|
extended downtime at three refineries in the U.S. Gulf
Coast damaged by hurricanes in 2005; and
|
|
|
|
higher than normal industry turnaround activity during the first
half of 2006 and extensive turnaround activity on the
U.S. West Coast in the 2006 fourth quarter.
|
During the second half of 2005, industry margins were higher
than the same period in 2006 due to production and supply
disruptions on the U.S. Gulf Coast caused by hurricanes
Katrina and Rita.
Gross Refining Margins. On an aggregate basis,
our total gross refining margins increased to $2.6 billion
in 2006 from $2.2 billion in 2005, reflecting higher per
barrel gross refining margins in all of our regions,
particularly in our Mid-Continent and Pacific Northwest regions.
|
|
|
|
|
In our Mid-Continent region, gross refining margins increased
40% during 2006, reflecting lower feedstock costs due to higher
local crude production and strong diesel demand. During 2005,
margins in our Mid-Continent region were negatively impacted by
certain factors primarily during the first quarter, including
higher crude oil costs due to Canadian production constraints
and a depressed market in the Salt Lake City area due to record
high first quarter production in PADD IV.
|
|
|
|
In our Pacific Northwest region, gross refining margins
increased 19% year-over-year despite a scheduled turnaround at
our Washington refinery during the fourth quarter. Margins were
positively impacted by continued strong demand on the
U.S. West Coast along with higher than normal industry
maintenance and unscheduled refining industry downtime. By
comparison, certain factors negatively impacted our gross
refining margins in 2005. During the 2005 first quarter, margins
in our Pacific Northwest region were negatively impacted as our
Washington refinery completed a scheduled turnaround of the
crude and naphtha reforming units and incurred unscheduled
downtime of certain processing equipment. In addition, our gross
refining margins in the region during the first half of 2005
were negatively impacted as the increased differential between
light and heavy crude oil depressed the margins for heavy fuel
oils.
|
Refining Throughput. Total refining throughput
averaged 529 Mbpd in 2006 compared to 530 Mbpd during 2005.
During 2006, we continued to achieve near record throughput
levels reflecting on-going reliability and operating
efficiencies due to recent scheduled turnarounds. In addition,
our on-going process controls modernization programs at our
Golden Eagle and Washington refineries contributed to higher
throughput during the second half of 2006. Scheduled downtime
during 2006 and 2005 that negatively impacted refining
throughput is described in footnote (h) of the table above.
During 2006, we experienced unscheduled downtime at our Alaska
refinery as a result of the grounding of our time-chartered
vessel which impacted the supply of feedstocks to the refinery.
During 2005, we had unscheduled downtime at our Golden Eagle and
Washington refineries.
Refined Product Sales. Revenues from sales of
refined products increased 11% to $17.3 billion in 2006
from $15.6 billion in 2005, primarily due to significantly
higher average refined product sales prices, partially offset by
lower refined product sales volumes. Our average refined product
prices increased 16% to $81.26 per barrel reflecting the
continued strength in product demand. Total refined product
sales averaged 586 Mbpd in 2006, a
38
decrease of 23 Mbpd from 2005, reflecting recording certain
purchases and sales transactions on a net basis as described in
footnote (g) of the table above.
Expenses. Our average costs of sales increased
15% to $69.42 per barrel during 2006, reflecting significantly
higher average feedstock prices. Manufacturing and other
operating expenses increased to $867 million in 2006,
compared with $855 million in 2005, primarily due to
increased employee costs of $23 million, higher repairs and
maintenance of $11 million and increased catalyst and
chemical costs of $8 million. The increase was partially
offset by reclassifying certain pipeline and terminal costs of
$37 million in 2006 from other operating costs to costs of
sales. Depreciation and amortization increased to
$221 million in 2006, compared to $160 million in 2005
due in part to additional depreciation of $50 million due
to shortening the estimated lives and recording asset retirement
obligations of certain assets at our Golden Eagle refinery
beginning in the fourth quarter of 2005. The increase in
depreciation and amortization also reflects increasing capital
expenditures. Loss on asset disposals and impairments increased
to $41 million in 2006 from $10 million in 2005,
primarily due to pretax charges of $28 million related to
the termination of a delayed coker project at our Washington
refinery.
Retail
Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions except per gallon amounts)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel
|
|
$
|
2,946
|
|
|
$
|
1,060
|
|
|
$
|
944
|
|
Merchandise and other(a)
|
|
|
221
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
141
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues
|
|
$
|
3,167
|
|
|
$
|
1,204
|
|
|
$
|
1,085
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel Sales (millions of gallons)
|
|
|
1,098
|
|
|
|
434
|
|
|
|
449
|
|
Fuel Margin ($/gallon)(b)
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
$
|
0.17
|
|
|
$
|
0.16
|
|
Merchandise Margin (in millions)
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
$
|
38
|
|
|
$
|
36
|
|
Merchandise Margin (percent of revenues)
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
|
|
27
|
%
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
Average Number of Retail Stations (during the period)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company-operated
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
|
|
213
|
|
Branded jobber/dealer
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
|
261
|
|
|
|
281
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Average Retail Stations
|
|
|
746
|
|
|
|
465
|
|
|
|
494
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Margins
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel(c)
|
|
$
|
164
|
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
71
|
|
Merchandise and other non-fuel margin
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross margins
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Loss on asset disposals and impairments
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Operating Loss
|
|
$
|
(8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21
|
)
|
|
$
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Merchandise and other includes other revenues of
$16 million in 2007 and $3 million in both 2006 and
2005. |
|
(b) |
|
Management uses fuel margin per gallon to compare profitability
to other companies in the industry. Fuel margin per gallon is
calculated by dividing fuel gross margin by fuel sales volumes
and may not be calculated similarly by other companies.
Investors and analysts use fuel margin per gallon to help
analyze and compare |
39
|
|
|
|
|
companies in the industry on the basis of operating performance.
This financial measure should not be considered as an
alternative to segment operating income and revenues or any
other financial measure of financial performance presented in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. |
|
(c) |
|
Includes the effect of intersegment purchases from our refining
segment at prices which approximate market. See footnote
(a) on page 35. |
2007 Compared to 2006 The operating loss for
our retail segment was $8 million during 2007, compared to
an operating loss of $21 million in 2006. Total gross
margins increased by $120 million to $233 million
reflecting significantly increased fuel and merchandise volumes
due to the increase in retail stations, partially offset by
slightly lower fuel margins. Total gallons sold increased
664 million, reflecting the increase in the average retail
station count during 2007. The 414
Shell®
and USA
Gasolinetm
sites acquired in May 2007 contributed gross margins of
$118 million and fuel sales of 643 million gallons.
The remaining increase in gross margins of $2 million and
fuel sales of 21 million gallons reflects an increase in
our Tesoro-branded jobber/dealer retail stations. Fuel margin
decreased to $0.15 per gallon in 2007 as retail prices lagged
rising wholesale prices.
Revenues on fuel sales increased to $2.9 billion in 2007
from $1.1 billion in 2006, reflecting increased sales
volumes and higher sales prices. Revenues on fuel sales from our
acquired
Shell®
and USA
Gasolinetm
branded stations totaled $1.8 billion during 2007. Costs of
sales increased in 2007 due to increased sales volumes and
higher average prices for purchased fuel. Operating expenses
increased $95 million during 2007, of which
$84 million represents operating expenses incurred by our
acquired stations.
2006 Compared to 2005 The operating loss for
our retail segment was $21 million during 2006, compared to
an operating loss of $31 million in 2005. Total gross
margins increased to $113 million during 2006 from
$110 million during 2005 reflecting slightly higher fuel
margins, partly offset by lower sales volumes. Total gallons
sold decreased to 434 million from 449 million,
reflecting the decrease in average retail station count to 465
in 2006 from 494 in 2005. The decrease in average retail station
count reflects the rationalization of our retail assets,
including the sale of 13 company-operated retail stations
in August 2006.
Revenues on fuel sales increased to $1.1 billion in 2006
from $944 million in 2005, reflecting higher sales prices,
partly offset by lower sales volumes. Costs of sales increased
in 2006 due to higher average prices of purchased fuel, partly
offset by lower sales volumes.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses of
$263 million in 2007 increased from $176 million in
2006. The increase during 2007 was primarily due to higher
stock-based compensation costs of $31 million, higher
employee expenses of $31 million reflecting increases in
total employee head count, increased contract labor expenses of
$12 million primarily associated with software
implementation, and integration expenses related to our
acquisitions totaling $11 million.
Selling, general and administrative expenses of
$176 million in 2006 decreased from $179 million in
2005. The decrease during 2006 was primarily due to higher
employee expenses of $15 million in 2006, offset by lower
contract labor expenses of $8 million in 2006 and charges
in 2005 totaling $11 million for the termination and
retirement of certain executive officers.
Interest
and Financing Costs
Interest and financing costs were $95 million in 2007
compared to $77 million in 2006. The increase was primarily
due to the additional debt we incurred during the 2007 second
quarter in connection with our acquisition of the Los Angeles
Assets. See Capital Resources and Liquidity for
information on our borrowings associated with our acquisitions
in 2007.
Interest and financing costs were $77 million in 2006
compared to $211 million in 2005. During 2005, we incurred
debt refinancing and prepayment costs totaling $92 million
associated with the refinancing of our 8% senior secured
notes and
95/8% senior
subordinated notes, and charges of $3 million in connection
with voluntary debt prepayments. Excluding these refinancing and
prepayment costs, interest and financing costs decreased by
40
$39 million during 2006, primarily due to lower interest
expense associated with the refinancing and debt reduction
during 2005 totaling $191 million.
Interest
Income and Other
Interest income and other decreased to $33 million during
2007 from $46 million in 2006 reflecting a significant
decrease in our cash investments due to the use of cash to
partially fund our acquisitions in May 2007 and make repayments
on our revolver. See Capital Resources and Liquidity
for additional information on the use of cash to partially fund
our acquisitions in 2007.
Interest income and other increased to $46 million during
2006 from $15 million in 2005. The increase reflects the
significant increase in invested cash balances along with higher
interest rates and a $5 million gain associated with the
sale of our leased corporate headquarters by a limited
partnership in which we were a 50% partner.
Income
Tax Provision
The income tax provision amounted to $339 million in 2007
compared to $485 million in 2006 and $324 million in
2005. The fluctuations reflect changes in earnings before income
taxes. The combined federal and state effective income tax rates
were approximately 37%, 38% and 39% in 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. The decrease in our effective income tax rate
during 2007 was primarily a result of an increase in the federal
tax deduction for domestic manufacturing activities. The
decrease in our effective income tax rate from 2005 to 2006 was
primarily a result of a decrease in our state effective income
tax rate.
CAPITAL
RESOURCES AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
We operate in an environment where our capital resources and
liquidity are impacted by changes in the price of crude oil and
refined products, availability of trade credit, market
uncertainty and a variety of additional factors beyond our
control. These risks include, among others, the level of
consumer product demand, weather conditions, fluctuations in
seasonal demand, governmental regulations, geo-political
conditions and overall market and global economic conditions.
See Forward-Looking Statements on page 54 and
Risk Factors on page 20 for further information
related to risks and other factors. Future capital expenditures,
as well as borrowings under our credit agreement and other
sources of capital, may be affected by these conditions.
Our primary sources of liquidity have been cash flows from
operations and borrowing availability under revolving lines of
credit. We ended 2007 with $23 million of cash and cash
equivalents, $120 million of borrowings under our revolver,
and $1.4 billion in available borrowing capacity under our
credit agreement after $254 million in outstanding letters
of credit. We also have two separate letter of credit agreements
of which we had $126 million available after
$204 million in outstanding letters of credit as of
December 31, 2007. We believe available capital resources
will be adequate to meet our capital expenditures, working
capital and debt service requirements.
Acquisitions
On May 10, 2007, we acquired the Los Angeles Assets for
$1.82 billion (which includes $257 million for
petroleum inventories and direct costs of $16 million). To
fund the acquisition, we issued $500 million aggregate
principal amount of
61/2% senior
notes due 2017, borrowed $500 million under our amended and
restated credit agreement and paid the remainder with cash on
hand. The borrowings totaling $500 million under our
revolver were repaid in 2007 with cash flows from operating
activities. On May 1, 2007, we paid $286 million in
cash (including inventories of $15 million and direct costs
of $3 million) for the USA Petroleum Assets, including the
USA
Gasolinetm
brand name. See Note C of the consolidated financial
statements in Item 8 for further information.
Cash
Settlement with Tosco Corporation
On March 2, 2007, we settled our dispute with Tosco
Corporation concerning soil and groundwater conditions at the
Golden Eagle refinery. We received $58.5 million in cash
from ConocoPhillips as successor in interest to Tosco and
Phillips Petroleum, both former owners and operators of the
refinery. In exchange for the settlement
41
payment we released and agreed to indemnify ConocoPhillips from
both Toscos obligations concerning all environmental
conditions at the refinery and Phillips Petroleums
liabilities for environmental conditions as a former owner of
the refinery. Upon settlement, the $58.5 million settlement
was included in our environmental reserves. See
Environmental and Other below for further
information.
Cash
Dividends
On January 30, 2008, our Board of Directors declared a
quarterly cash dividend on common stock of $0.10 per share,
payable on March 17, 2008 to shareholders of record on
March 3, 2008. During 2007, we paid cash dividends on
common stock totaling $0.35 per share. In May 2007, our Board of
Directors increased our quarterly cash dividend from $0.05 per
share (post stock split) to $0.10 per share.
Capitalization
Our capital structure at December 31, 2007 was comprised of
(in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Debt, including current maturities:
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Agreement Revolving Credit Facility
|
|
$
|
120
|
|
61/4% Senior
Notes Due 2012
|
|
|
450
|
|
65/8% Senior
Notes Due 2015
|
|
|
450
|
|
61/2% Senior
Notes Due 2017
|
|
|
500
|
|
Junior subordinated notes due 2012
|
|
|
112
|
|
Capital lease obligations and other
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
1,659
|
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
3,052
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capitalization
|
|
$
|
4,711
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2007, our debt to capitalization ratio was
35%, compared to 29% at year-end 2006, reflecting the additional
indebtedness incurred for the acquisition of the Los Angeles
Assets and borrowings under our credit agreement.
Our credit agreement and senior notes impose various
restrictions and covenants as described below that could
potentially limit our ability to respond to market conditions,
raise additional debt or equity capital, pay cash dividends, or
repurchase stock. We do not believe that the limitations will
restrict our ability to pay cash dividends or repurchase stock
under our current programs.
Credit
Agreement Revolving Credit Facility
On May 11, 2007, we amended and restated our revolving
credit agreement to increase the revolvers total available
capacity to $1.75 billion from $750 million and
borrowed $500 million under the revolving credit facility
to partially fund the acquisition of the Los Angeles Assets. The
five-year amended credit agreement provides for borrowings
(including letters of credit) up to the lesser of the
agreements total capacity or the amount of a periodically
adjusted borrowing base ($2.2 billion as of
December 31, 2007), consisting of Tesoros eligible
cash and cash equivalents, receivables and petroleum
inventories, as defined. As of December 31, 2007, we had
$120 million in borrowings and $254 million in letters
of credit outstanding under the amended credit agreement,
resulting in total unused credit availability of
$1.4 billion or 80% of the eligible borrowing base.
Borrowings under the revolving credit facility bear interest at
either a base rate (7.25% at December 31, 2007) or a
Eurodollar rate (4.85% at December 31, 2007) plus an
applicable margin. The applicable margin at December 31,
2007 was 1.00% in the case of the Eurodollar rate, but varies
based upon our credit facility availability and credit ratings.
Letters of credit outstanding under the revolving credit
facility incur fees at an annual rate tied to the applicable
margin described above (1.00% at December 31, 2007). We
also incur commitment fees for the unused portion of the
revolving credit facility at an annual rate of 0.25% as of
December 31, 2007.
42
The credit agreement contains covenants and conditions that,
among other things, limit our ability to pay cash dividends,
incur indebtedness, create liens and make investments. Tesoro is
also required to maintain a certain level of available borrowing
capacity and specified levels of tangible net worth. For the
year ended December 31, 2007, we satisfied all of the
financial covenants under the credit agreement. The credit
agreement is guaranteed by substantially all of Tesoros
active subsidiaries and is secured by substantially all of
Tesoros cash and cash equivalents, petroleum inventories
and receivables. In February 2008, we amended our credit
agreement to allow up to $100 million of restricted
payments during any four quarter period subject to credit
availability exceeding 20% of the borrowing base.
Letter
of Credit Agreements
We have two separate letter of credit agreements for the
purchase of foreign crude oil providing up to $250 million
and $80 million in letters of credit. The $250 million
letter of credit agreement is secured by the crude oil
inventories supported by letters of credit issued under the
agreement and will remain in effect until terminated by either
party. Letters of credit outstanding under this agreement incur
fees at an annual rate of 1.00%. As of December 31, 2007,
we had $127 million in letters of credit outstanding under
this agreement, resulting in total unused credit availability of
$123 million, or 49% of total capacity under this credit
agreement.
The $80 million letter of credit agreement is secured by
the crude oil inventories supported by letters of credit issued
under the agreement and will remain in effect until terminated
by either party. Letters of credit outstanding under this
agreement incur fees at an annual rate of 0.80%. As of
December 31, 2007, we had $77 million in letters of
credit outstanding under this agreement, resulting in total
unused credit availability of $3 million, or 4% of total
capacity under this credit agreement.
364-Day
Term Loan
On May 11, 2007, we entered into a $700 million
364-day term
loan, which was used to partially fund the acquisition of the
Los Angeles Assets. On May 29, 2007, we repaid and
terminated this loan, using the net proceeds from the
61/2% senior
notes offering and cash on hand.
61/2% Senior
Notes Due 2017
On May 29, 2007, we issued $500 million aggregate
principal amount of
61/2% senior
notes due June 1, 2017. The proceeds from the notes
offering, together with cash on hand, were used to repay
borrowings under our
364-day term
loan. The notes have a ten-year maturity with no sinking fund
requirements and are subject to optional redemption by Tesoro
beginning June 1, 2012 at premiums of 3.25% through
May 31, 2013; 2.17% from June 1, 2013 through
May 31, 2014; 1.08% from June 1, 2014 through
May 31, 2015; and at par thereafter. We have the right to
redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal amount at a
redemption price of 106.5% with proceeds from certain equity
issuances through June 1, 2010. The indenture for the notes
contains covenants and restrictions that are customary for notes
of this nature. Substantially all of these covenants will
terminate before the notes mature if either Standard and
Poors or Moodys assigns the notes an investment
grade rating and no events of default exist under the indenture.
The terminated covenants will not be restored even if the credit
rating assigned to the notes subsequently falls below investment
grade. The notes are unsecured and are guaranteed by
substantially all of our domestic subsidiaries.
61/4% Senior
Notes Due 2012
In November 2005, we issued $450 million aggregate
principal amount of
61/4% senior
notes due November 1, 2012. The notes have a seven-year
maturity with no sinking fund requirements and are not callable.
We have the right to redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal
amount at a redemption price of 106% with proceeds from certain
equity issuances through November 1, 2008. The indenture
for the notes contains covenants and restrictions that are
customary for notes of this nature and are identical to the
covenants in the indenture for Tesoros
65/8% senior
notes due 2015. Substantially all of these covenants will
terminate before the notes mature if one of two specified
ratings agencies assigns the notes an investment grade rating
and no events of default exist under the indenture. The
43
terminated covenants will not be restored even if the credit
rating assigned to the notes subsequently falls below investment
grade. The notes are unsecured and are guaranteed by
substantially all of Tesoros active subsidiaries.
65/8% Senior
Notes Due 2015
In November 2005, we issued $450 million aggregate
principal amount of
65/8% senior
notes due November 1, 2015. The notes have a ten-year
maturity with no sinking fund requirements and are subject to
optional redemption by Tesoro beginning November 1, 2010 at
premiums of 3.3% through October 31, 2011, 2.2% from
November 1, 2011 to October 31, 2012, 1.1% from
November 1, 2012 to October 31, 2013, and at par
thereafter. We have the right to redeem up to 35% of the
aggregate principal amount at a redemption price of 106% with
proceeds from certain equity issuances through November 1,
2008. The indenture for the notes contains covenants and
restrictions that are customary for notes of this nature and are
identical to the covenants in the indenture for Tesoros
61/4% senior
notes due 2012. Substantially all of these covenants will
terminate before the notes mature if one of two specified
ratings agencies assigns the notes an investment grade rating
and no events of default exist under the indenture. The
terminated covenants will not be restored even if the credit
rating assigned to the notes subsequently falls below investment
grade. The notes are unsecured and are guaranteed by
substantially all of Tesoros active subsidiaries.
The indentures for our senior notes contain covenants and
restrictions which are customary for notes of this nature. These
covenants and restrictions limit, among other things, our
ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
pay dividends and other distributions with respect to our
capital stock and purchase, redeem or retire our capital stock;
|
|
|
|
incur additional indebtedness and issue preferred stock;
|
|
|
|
sell assets unless the proceeds from those sales are used to
repay debt or are reinvested in our business;
|
|
|
|
incur liens on assets to secure certain debt;
|
|
|
|
engage in certain business activities;
|
|
|
|
engage in certain merger or consolidations and transfers of
assets; and
|
|
|
|
enter into transactions with affiliates.
|
The indentures also limit our subsidiaries ability to
create restrictions on making certain payments and distributions.
95/8% Senior
Subordinated Notes Due 2012
On April 9, 2007, we voluntarily prepaid the remaining
$14 million outstanding principal balance of our
95/8% senior
subordinated notes at a redemption price of 104.8%. At
December 31, 2006, the notes were included in current
maturities of debt.
Junior
Subordinated Notes Due 2012
In connection with our acquisition of the Golden Eagle refinery,
Tesoro issued to the seller two ten-year junior subordinated
notes with face amounts totaling $150 million. The notes
consist of: (i) a $100 million junior subordinated
note, due July 2012, which was non-interest bearing through
May 16, 2007, and carries a 7.5% interest rate thereafter,
and (ii) a $50 million junior subordinated note, due
July 2012, which incurred interest at 7.47% from May 17,
2003 through May 16, 2007 and 7.5% thereafter. We initially
recorded these two notes at a combined present value of
approximately $61 million, discounted at rates of 15.625%
and 14.375%, respectively. We are amortizing the discount over
the term of the notes.
44
Cash
Flow Summary
Components of our cash flows are set forth below (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash Flows From (Used In):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities
|
|
$
|
1,322
|
|
|
$
|
1,139
|
|
|
$
|
758
|
|
Investing Activities
|
|
|
(2,838
|
)
|
|
|
(430
|
)
|
|
|
(254
|
)
|
Financing Activities
|
|
|
553
|
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
|
|
(249
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
$
|
(963
|
)
|
|
$
|
546
|
|
|
$
|
255
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from operating activities during 2007 totaled
$1.3 billion, compared to $1.1 billion from operating
activities in 2006. This increase was primarily due to favorable
working capital changes reflecting an increase in accounts
payable due to the acquisitions and higher crude oil costs, and
higher depreciation and amortization, partially offset by lower
cash earnings. Net cash used in investing activities of
$2.8 billion in 2007 was primarily for acquisitions and
capital expenditures. Net cash from financing activities
primarily reflects the indebtedness incurred as part of the
acquisition of the Los Angeles Assets and borrowings on the
revolver, partially offset by dividend payments of
$48 million. Gross borrowings under our revolving credit
agreement totaled $1 billion, and we repaid
$940 million of these borrowings during 2007. Working
capital totaled $106 million at December 31, 2007
compared to $1.1 billion at December 31, 2006,
primarily due to decreases in cash as a result of partially
funding the acquisitions with cash and repayments on our
revolver.
Net cash from operating activities during 2006 totaled
$1.1 billion, compared to $758 million from operating
activities in 2005. This increase was primarily due to higher
cash earnings and slightly lower working capital requirements.
Net cash used in investing activities of $430 million in
2006 was primarily for capital expenditures. Net cash used in
financing activities primarily reflects repurchases of our
common stock totaling $151 million (including
$148 million under our common stock repurchase program) and
dividend payments of $27 million. We did not have any
borrowings or repayments under the revolving credit facility
during 2006. Working capital totaled $1.1 billion at
December 31, 2006 compared to $713 million at
December 31, 2005, primarily due to the increase in cash
during 2006.
Net cash from operating activities during 2005 totaled
$758 million. Net cash used in investing activities of
$254 million in 2005 was primarily for capital
expenditures. Net cash used in financing activities primarily
reflects our voluntary prepayment of senior secured term loans,
prepayments of our outstanding 8% senior secured notes and
95/8% senior
subordinated notes in connection with the refinancing, and
associated debt refinancing and prepayment costs. We also
repurchased $15 million of common stock (including
$14 million associated with the common stock repurchase
program) and paid $14 million of dividends to stockholders.
Gross borrowings and repayments under the revolving credit
facility each amounted to $463 million during 2005.
Capital
Expenditures
During 2007, our capital expenditures totaled $789 million
(including accruals) and included the following major projects:
$372 million for the delayed coker modification project
(Golden Eagle), $41 million for the removal of atmospheric
blowdown towers (Golden Eagle); $19 million for
reconfiguring and replacing above-ground storage tank systems
and upgrading piping (Golden Eagle); $10 million for
control systems modernization (Golden Eagle); $18 million
for the wharf expansion project (Golden Eagle); $28 million
for a diesel desulfurizer unit (Alaska); and $19 million
for sulfur handling projects (Washington). At our Los Angeles
refinery we spent $41 million since acquisition during 2007.
Our 2008 capital budget is $966 million. Amounts included
in the 2008 capital budget are $55 million for a gasoline
hydrotreater (Utah), $76 million to complete the delayed
coker project (Golden Eagle), $45 million for a flare gas
recovery project (Los Angeles), $35 million for design work
related to a cogeneration facility and boiler replacement
project (Los Angeles), $30 million for design work related
to a heavy crude processing upgrade project (Los Angeles) and
$15 million for a selective hydrogenation unit (Washington).
See Business Strategy and Overview and
Environmental Capital Expenditures for additional
information.
45
Refinery
Turnaround Spending
For refinery turnarounds, we spent $120 million, primarily
at our Golden Eagle, Los Angeles and Utah refineries, and an
additional $23 million for other maintenance during 2007.
In 2008, we expect to spend approximately $113 million for
refinery turnarounds, primarily at our Golden Eagle, Los Angeles
and Washington refineries, and an additional $22 million
for other maintenance. Refining throughput and yields in 2008
will be affected by scheduled turnarounds at our Golden Eagle
and Washington refineries during the first quarter and our Los
Angeles refinery during the fourth quarter.
Long-Term
Commitments
Contractual
Commitments
We have numerous contractual commitments for purchases
associated with the operation of our refineries, debt service
and leases (see Notes I and M in our consolidated financial
statements in Item 8). We also have minimum contractual
spending requirements for certain capital projects. The
following table summarizes our annual contractual commitments as
of December 31, 2007 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractual Obligation
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Long-term debt obligations(1)
|
|
$
|
111
|
|
|
$
|
111
|
|
|
$
|
111
|
|
|
$
|
111
|
|
|
$
|
825
|
|
|
$
|
2,795
|
|
Capital lease obligations(2)
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Operating lease obligations(2)
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
417
|
|
Crude oil supply obligations(3)
|
|
|
33,622
|
|
|
|
1,295
|
|
|
|
1,087
|
|
|
|
618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other purchase obligations(4)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
Capital expenditure obligations
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected pension contributions(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Contractual Obligations
|
|
$
|
34,050
|
|
|
$
|
1,666
|
|
|
$
|
1,430
|
|
|
$
|
935
|
|
|
$
|
985
|
|
|
$
|
3,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes maturities of principal and interest payments,
excluding capital lease obligations. Amounts and timing may be
different from our estimated commitments due to potential
voluntary debt prepayments and borrowings. |
|
(2) |
|
Capital lease obligations include amounts classified as
interest. Operating lease obligations represent our future
minimum lease commitments. Operating lease commitments for 2008
include lease arrangements with initial terms of less than one
year. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents an estimate of our contractual purchase commitments
for the supply of crude oil feedstocks, with remaining terms
ranging from 6 months to 4 years. Prices under these
term agreements generally fluctuate with market-responsive
pricing provisions. To estimate our annual commitments under
these contracts, we estimated crude oil prices using actual
market prices as of December 31, 2007, ranging by crude oil
type from $71 per barrel to $90 per barrel, and volumes based on
the contracts minimum purchase requirements. We also
purchase additional crude oil feedstocks under short-term
renewable contracts and in the spot market, which are not
included in the table above. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents primarily long-term commitments to purchase
industrial gases, chemical processing services and utilities at
our refineries. These purchase obligations are based on the
contracts minimum volume requirements. |
|
(5) |
|
Although we have no minimum required contribution obligation to
our pension plan under applicable laws and regulations, we
currently project to voluntarily contribute approximately
$20 million in 2008. Amounts are subject to change based on
the performance of the assets in the plan, the discount rate
used to determine the obligation, and other actuarial
assumptions. See Critical Accounting Policies for
further information related to our pension plan. We are unable
to project benefit contributions beyond 2012. |
In addition to the amounts shown in the table above,
$44 million of unrecognized tax benefits have been recorded
as liabilities in accordance with FIN 48, and we are
uncertain as to when such amounts may be settled. Related to
these unrecognized tax benefits, we have also recorded a
liability for potential penalties and interest of
46
$23 million at December 31, 2007. See Note K in
our consolidated financial statements in Item 8 for further
information.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
Other than our leasing arrangements described in Note M to
our consolidated financial statements, we have not entered into
any transactions, agreements or other contractual arrangements
that would result in off-balance sheet liabilities.
Environmental
and Other Matters
Tesoro is subject to extensive federal, state and local
environmental laws and regulations. These laws, which change
frequently, regulate the discharge of materials into the
environment and may require us to remove or mitigate the
environmental effects of the disposal or release of petroleum or
chemical substances at various sites, install additional
controls, or make other modifications or changes in certain
emission sources.
Conditions may develop that cause increases or decreases in
future expenditures for our various sites, including, but not
limited to, our refineries, tank farms, pipelines, retail
stations (operating and closed locations) and refined products
terminals, and for compliance with the Clean Air Act and other
federal, state and local requirements. We cannot currently
determine the amounts of such future expenditures. For further
information on environmental matters and other contingencies,
see Note M in our consolidated financial statements in
Item 8.
Environmental
Liabilities
We are currently involved in remedial responses and have
incurred and expect to continue to incur cleanup expenditures
associated with environmental matters at a number of sites,
including certain of our previously owned properties. Our
accruals for environmental expenses include retained liabilities
for previously owned or operated properties, refining, pipeline
and terminal operations and retail stations. We believe these
accruals are adequate, based on currently available information,
including the participation of other parties or former owners in
remediation actions. These estimated environmental liabilities
require judgment to assess and estimate the future costs to
remediate. It is reasonably possible that additional remediation
costs will be incurred as more information becomes available
related to these environmental matters. Changes in our
environmental liabilities for the years ended December 31,
2007 and 2006 were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
Expenditures
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlement agreement
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year
|
|
$
|
90
|
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On March 2, 2007, we settled our dispute with Tosco
Corporation (Tosco) concerning soil and groundwater
conditions at the Golden Eagle refinery. We received
$58.5 million from ConocoPhillips as successor in interest
to Tosco and Phillips Petroleum, both former owners and
operators of the refinery. In exchange for the settlement
proceeds we assumed responsibility for certain environmental
liabilities arising from operations at the refinery prior to
August of 2000. At December 31, 2007, our accrual for these
environmental liabilities totaled $64 million. We expect to
have valid insurance claims under certain environmental
insurance policies that provide coverage up to $140 million
for liabilities in excess of the settlement proceeds
attributable to Tosco. Amounts recorded for these environmental
liabilities have not been reduced by possible insurance
recoveries.
We are continuing to investigate environmental conditions at
certain active wastewater treatment units at our Golden Eagle
refinery. This investigation is driven by an order from the
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality
47
Control Board that names us as well as two previous owners of
the Golden Eagle refinery. A reserve for this matter is included
in the environmental accruals referenced above.
In March 2007, we received an offer from the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (the District) to settle
77 Notices of Violation (NOVs) for $4 million.
The NOVs allege violations of air quality at our Golden Eagle
refinery. In January 2008, we agreed to settle this matter for
$1.5 million pending the negotiation of a final agreement
with the District. A reserve for this matter is included in the
environmental accruals referenced above.
In October 2005, we received an NOV from the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning our
Washington refinery. The EPA alleges certain modifications made
to the fluid catalytic cracking unit at our Washington refinery
prior to our acquisition of the refinery were made in violation
of the Clean Air Act. We have investigated the allegations and
believe the ultimate resolution of the NOV will not have a
material adverse effect on our financial position or results of
operations. A reserve for our response to the NOV is included in
the environmental accruals referenced above.
Other
Environmental Matters
We are a defendant, along with other manufacturing, supply and
marketing defendants, in ten pending cases alleging MTBE
contamination in groundwater. In December 2007, we agreed to
participate in a proposed settlement of seven and part of an
eighth of the pending cases subject to negotiation of settlement
documents. The defendants are being sued for having manufactured
MTBE and having manufactured, supplied and distributed gasoline
containing MTBE. The plaintiffs, all in California, are
generally water providers, governmental authorities and private
well owners alleging, in part, the defendants are liable for
manufacturing or distributing a defective product. The suits
generally seek individual, unquantified compensatory and
punitive damages and attorneys fees. A reserve for the
cases included in the proposed settlement is included in other
accrued liabilities. We believe the final resolution of these
cases will not have a material adverse effect on our financial
position or results of operations, but at this time we cannot
estimate the amount or the likelihood of the ultimate resolution
of the cases not subject to the settlement. We believe we have
defenses to the claims in the remaining cases and intend to
vigorously defend ourselves in those lawsuits.
On January 25, 2008 we received an offer of settlement from
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(ADEC) related to the grounding of a vessel in the
Alaska Cook Inlet on February 2, 2006. The ADEC has alleged
two vessels chartered by us violated provisions of our Cook
Inlet Vessel Oil Prevention and Contingency Plan during the
period from December 2004 to February 2006. The resolution of
this matter will not have a material adverse effect on our
financial position or results of operations.
In the ordinary course of business, we become party to or
otherwise involved in lawsuits, administrative proceedings and
governmental investigations, including environmental, regulatory
and other matters. Large and sometimes unspecified damages or
penalties may be sought from us in some matters for which the
likelihood of loss may be reasonably possible but the amount of
loss is not currently estimable, and some matters may require
years for us to resolve. As a result, we have not established
reserves for these matters. On the basis of existing
information, we believe that the resolution of these matters,
individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material
adverse effect on our financial position or results of
operations. However, we cannot provide assurance that an adverse
resolution of the matter described below during a future
reporting period will not have a material adverse effect on our
financial position or results of operations in future periods.
On December 12, 2007 we received an NOV from ADEC alleging
that our Alaska refinery violated provisions of its Clean Air
Act Title V operating permit. We are negotiating a
resolution of the NOV with ADEC and do not believe the
resolution will have a material adverse effect on our financial
position or results of operations.
Environmental
Capital Expenditures
EPA regulations related to the Clean Air Act require reductions
in the sulfur content in gasoline. We are installing a gasoline
hydrotreater at our Utah refinery to satisfy the requirements of
the regulations. During 2007, we spent $9 million and have
budgeted an additional $60 million through 2009 to complete
the project. Our other refineries will not require additional
capital spending to meet the low sulfur gasoline standards.
48
EPA regulations related to the Clean Air Act also require
reductions in the sulfur content in diesel fuel manufactured for
on-road consumption. In general, the new on-road diesel fuel
standards became effective on June 1, 2006. In May 2004,
the EPA issued a rule regarding the sulfur content of non-road
diesel fuel. The requirements to reduce non-road diesel sulfur
content will become effective in phases between 2007 and 2012.
In May 2007, we completed the diesel desulfurizer unit at our
Alaska refinery, enabling the refinery to manufacture ultra-low
sulfur diesel. We spent $28 million on this project in
2007. We are currently evaluating alternative projects that will
satisfy the future requirements under existing regulations at
our North Dakota, Utah and Hawaii refineries. Our Golden Eagle,
Los Angeles, Washington and Alaska refineries will not require
additional capital spending to meet the new diesel fuel
standards.
In February 2007, the EPA issued regulations for the reduction
of benzene in gasoline. We are still evaluating the impact of
this standard; however, based on our most recent estimates we
expect to spend approximately $300 million to
$400 million between 2008 and 2011 to meet the new
regulations at five of our refineries. These cost estimates are
subject to further review and analysis. Our Golden Eagle and Los
Angeles refineries will not require capital spending to meet the
new benzene reduction standards.
During the fourth quarter of 2005, we received approval by the
Hearing Board for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
to modify our existing fluid coker unit to a delayed coker at
our Golden Eagle refinery which is designed to lower emissions
while also enhancing the refinerys capabilities in terms
of reliability, lengthening turnaround cycles and reducing
operating costs. We negotiated the terms and conditions of the
Second Conditional Abatement Order with the District in response
to the January 2005 mechanical failure of the fluid coker boiler
at the Golden Eagle refinery. The total capital for this project
is estimated to be $575 million, which includes remaining
spending of $76 million in 2008. The project is currently
scheduled to be substantially completed during the first quarter
of 2008, with spending through the first half of 2008. We have
spent $499 million from inception of the project, of which
$372 million was spent in 2007.
The Los Angeles refinery is subject to extensive environmental
requirements. The Los Angeles refinery will reduce NOx emissions
by the end of 2010 in response to regulations imposed by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Our current plans
for compliance include the replacement of our less efficient
power cogeneration units and steam boilers. We expect to spend
approximately $250 million to $325 million with
estimated completion in late 2010. We also will replace
underground pipelines with above-ground pipelines as required by
an Order from the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board. This project is estimated to be completed in 2014 and
will cost approximately $80 million. Our regulatory
requirements also include a fuel gas treating unit designed to
reduce fuel gas sulfur and new flare gas recovery compressors
designed to meet flaring requirements of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District. We project to spend approximately
$75 million through 2011 to complete the fuel gas treating
unit project and approximately $50 million through 2009 to
install the flare gas recovery compressors. These cost estimates
are subject to further review and analysis.
We have developed a plan to eliminate the use of any atmospheric
blowdown towers by constructing alternative emission control
units at our refineries. We believe that this plan will provide
for safer operating conditions for our employees and will
address environmental regulatory issues related to monitoring
potential air emissions from components connected to the
blowdown towers. We have spent $41 million during 2007 and
we have budgeted an additional $135 million through 2010 to
complete this project at two of our refineries.
In connection with the 2002 acquisition of our Golden Eagle
refinery, we agreed to undertake projects at our Golden Eagle
refinery to reduce air emissions required by a Consent Decree
with the EPA concerning the Section 114 refinery
enforcement initiative under the Clean Air Act. We spent
$1 million during 2007 and have budgeted an additional
$17 million through 2011 to satisfy the requirements of the
Consent Decree.
We will spend additional capital at the Golden Eagle refinery
for reconfiguring and replacing above-ground storage tank
systems and upgrading piping within the refinery. We spent
$19 million during 2007 and we have budgeted an additional
$90 million through 2011. We also spent $3 million
during 2007 and we expect to spend an additional
$65 million through 2010 to upgrade a marine oil wharf at
the Golden Eagle refinery to meet engineering and maintenance
standards issued by the State of California in February 2006.
This cost estimate is preliminary and subject to further review.
49
In connection with our 2001 acquisition of our North Dakota and
Utah refineries, Tesoro assumed the sellers obligations
and liabilities under a consent decree among the United States,
BP Exploration and Oil Co. (BP), Amoco Oil Company
and Atlantic Richfield Company. BP entered into this consent
decree for both the North Dakota and Utah refineries for various
alleged violations. As the owner of these refineries, Tesoro is
required to address issues to reduce air emissions. We spent
$7 million during 2007 and we have budgeted an additional
$10 million through 2009 to comply with this consent
decree. We also agreed to indemnify the sellers for all losses
of any kind incurred in connection with the consent decree.
The California Air Resources Board regulations require the
installation of enhanced vapor recovery systems at all
California gasoline retail stations by April 2009. The enhanced
vapor recovery systems control and contain gasoline vapor
emissions during motor vehicle fueling. We spent $2 million
during 2007 and have budgeted approximately $17 million
through 2009 to satisfy the requirements of the enhanced vapor
recovery regulations.
In December 2007, the U.S. Congress passed the Energy
Independence and Security Act, which, among other things sets a
target of 35 miles per gallon for the combined fleet of
cars and light trucks by model year 2020 and modified the
industry requirements for Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). The RFS
now stands at 9 billion gallons in 2008 rising to
36 billion gallons by 2022. Both requirements could reduce
demand growth for petroleum products in the future. In the near
term, the RFS presents ethanol production and logistics
challenges for both the ethanol and refining industries and may
require additional capital expenditures or expenses by us to
accommodate increased ethanol use. These requirements are
currently under study.
In June 2007, the California Resources Air Board proposed
amendments to the predictive model for compliant gasoline in the
state of California that decreases the allowable sulfur levels
to a cap of 20 parts per million and allows for additional
ethanol to be blended into gasoline. The requirements begin
December 31, 2009 but may be postponed by individual
companies until December 31, 2011 through the use of the
Alternative Emission Reduction Plan which allows for the
acquisition of emissions offsets from sources not directly
related to petroleum fuel use. We expect both of our California
refineries to be in compliance with the regulation by the 2009
deadline and expect to spend approximately $32 million
through 2010 to meet the requirements.
Pension
Funding
For all eligible employees, we provide a qualified defined
benefit retirement plan with benefits based on years of service
and compensation. Our long-term expected return on plan assets
is 8.5%, and our funded employee pension plan assets experienced
a return of $24 million in 2007 and $30 million in
2006. Based on a 6.1% discount rate and fair values of plan
assets as of December 31, 2007, the fair values of the
assets in our funded employee pension plan were equal to
approximately 98% of the projected benefit obligation as of the
end of 2007. However, the funded employee pension plan was 111%
funded based on its current liability, which is a
funding measure defined under applicable pension regulations.
Although Tesoro had no minimum required contribution obligation
to its funded employee pension plan under applicable laws and
regulations in 2007, we voluntarily contributed $36 million
to improve the funded status of the plan. We currently have no
minimum required contribution obligation to our funded employee
pension plan under applicable laws and regulations in 2008;
however, we currently expect to contribute approximately
$20 million in 2008. Future contributions are affected by
returns on plan assets, employee demographics and other factors.
See Note L in our consolidated financial statements in
Item 8 for further discussion.
Claims
Against Third-Parties
In 1996, Tesoro Alaska Company filed a protest of the intrastate
rates charged for the transportation of its crude oil through
the Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). Our protest
asserted that the TAPS intrastate rates were excessive and
should be reduced. The Regulatory Commission of Alaska
(RCA) considered our protest of the intrastate rates
for the years 1997 through 2000. The RCA set just and reasonable
final rates for the years 1997 through 2000 in Order 151, and
held that we are entitled to receive approximately
$52 million in refunds, including interest through the
expected conclusion of appeals in 2008. In February 2008, the
Alaska Supreme Court, affirmed the RCAs Order 151.
50
In 2002, the RCA rejected the TAPS Carriers proposed
intrastate rate increases for
2001-2003
and maintained the permanent rate of $1.96 to the Valdez Marine
Terminal. That ruling is currently on appeal to the Alaska
Superior Court. The rate decrease has been in effect since June
2003. The TAPS Carriers subsequently attempted to increase their
intrastate rates for 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 without
providing the supporting information required by the RCAs
regulations and in a manner inconsistent with the RCAs
prior decision in Order 151. These filings were rejected by the
RCA. The rejection of these filings is currently on appeal to
the Alaska Superior Court where the decision is being held in
abeyance pending the decision in the appeals of the rates for
1997-2003.
If the RCAs decisions are upheld on appeal, we could be
entitled to refunds resulting from our shipments from January
2001 through mid-June 2003. If the RCAs decisions are not
upheld on appeal, we could potentially have to pay the
difference between the TAPS Carriers filed rates from
mid-June 2003 through December 31, 2007 (averaging
approximately $3.87 per barrel) and the RCAs approved rate
for this period ($1.96 per barrel) plus interest for the
approximately 48 million barrels we have transported
through TAPS in intrastate commerce during this period. We
cannot give any assurances of when or whether we will prevail in
these appeals. We also believe that, should we not prevail on
appeal, the amount of additional shipping charges cannot
reasonably be estimated since it is not possible to estimate the
permanent rate which the RCA could set, and the appellate courts
approve, for each year. In addition, depending upon the level of
such rates, there is a reasonable possibility that any refunds
for the period January 2001 through mid-July 2003 could offset
some or all of any additional payments due for the period
mid-June 2003 through December 31, 2007.
In January of 2005, Tesoro Alaska Company intervened in a
protest before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC), of the TAPS Carriers interstate rates
for 2005 and 2006. If Tesoro Alaska Company prevails and lower
rates are set, we could be entitled to refunds resulting from
our interstate shipments for 2005 and 2006. We cannot give any
assurances of when or whether we will prevail in this
proceeding. In July 2005, the TAPS Carriers filed a proceeding
at the FERC seeking to have the FERC assume jurisdiction under
Section 13(4) of the Interstate Commerce Act and set future
rates for intrastate transportation on TAPS. We filed a protest
in that proceeding, which has been consolidated with the other
FERC proceeding seeking to set just and reasonable interstate
rates on TAPS for 2005 and 2006. On May 17, 2007, the
presiding judge in this consolidated FERC proceeding lowered the
interstate rates and refused to revise the current intrastate
rates. The TAPS Carriers have requested that the FERC reverse
the presiding judge. We cannot give assurances of when or
whether we will prevail in this proceeding. If the TAPS carriers
should prevail, then the rates charged for all shipments of
Alaska North Slope crude oil on TAPS could be revised by the
FERC, but any FERC changes to rates for intrastate
transportation of crude oil supplies for our Alaska refinery
should be prospective only and should not affect prior
intrastate rates, refunds or additional payments.
ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS
Critical
Accounting Policies
Our accounting policies are described in Note A in our
consolidated financial statements in Item 8. We prepare our
consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America,
which require us to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures
of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and
expenses during the year. Actual results could differ from those
estimates. We consider the following policies to be the most
critical in understanding the judgments that are involved in
preparing our financial statements and the uncertainties that
could impact our financial condition and results of operations.
Receivables Our trade receivables are stated
at their invoiced amounts, less an allowance for potentially
uncollectible amounts. We monitor the credit and payment
experience of our customers and manage our loss exposure through
our credit policies and procedures. The estimated allowance for
doubtful accounts is based on our general loss experience and
identified loss exposures on individual accounts. Although
actual losses have not been significant to our results of
operations, global economic conditions and the related credit
environment could change, and actual losses could vary from
estimates.
51
Inventory Our inventories are stated at the
lower of cost or market. We use the LIFO method to determine the
cost of our crude oil and refined product inventories. The LIFO
cost of these inventories is usually much less than current
market value, however, a significant decline in market values of
crude oil and refined products could impair the carrying values
of these inventories. We had 29 million barrels of crude
oil and refined product inventories at December 31, 2007
with an average cost of approximately $43 per barrel on a LIFO
basis. If refined product prices decline below the average cost,
then we would be required to write down the value of our
inventories in future periods. The use of LIFO may also result
in increases or decreases to costs of sales in years when
inventory volumes decline and result in costs of sales
associated with inventory layers recorded in prior periods.
Property, Plant and Equipment and Acquired
Intangibles We calculate depreciation and
amortization using the straight-line method based on estimated
useful lives and salvage values of our assets. When assets are
placed into service, we make estimates with respect to their
useful lives that we believe are reasonable. However, factors
such as maintenance levels, global economic conditions impacting
the demand for these assets, and regulatory or environmental
matters could cause us to change our estimates, thus impacting
the future calculation of depreciation and amortization. We
evaluate these assets for potential impairment by identifying
whether indicators of impairment exist and, if so, assessing
whether the assets are recoverable from estimated future
undiscounted cash flows. The actual amount of impairment loss,
if any, to be recorded is equal to the amount by which the
assets carrying value exceeds its fair value. Fair market
value is generally based on the present values of estimated
future cash flows in the absence of quoted market prices.
Estimates of future undiscounted cash flows and fair market
values of assets require subjective assumptions with regard to
several factors, including an assessment of global market
conditions, future operating results and forecasting the
remaining useful lives of the assets. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
Goodwill As of December 31, 2007 and
2006, we had goodwill of $92 million and $89 million,
respectively. Goodwill is not amortized, but is tested for
impairment annually or more frequently when indicators of
impairment exist. We review the recorded value of our goodwill
for impairment annually during the fourth quarter, or sooner if
events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount
may exceed fair value. Recoverability is determined by comparing
the estimated fair value of a reporting unit to the carrying
value, including the related goodwill, of that reporting unit.
We use the present value of expected net cash flows and market
multiple analyses to determine the estimated fair value of our
reporting units. The impairment test is susceptible to change
from period to period as it requires us to make cash flow
assumptions including, among other things, future margins,
volumes, operating costs, capital expenditures and discount
rates. Our assumptions regarding future margins and volumes
require significant judgment as actual margins and volumes have
fluctuated in the past and will likely continue to do so.
Changes in market conditions could result in impairment charges
in the future.
Contingencies We record an estimated loss
from a contingency when information available before issuing our
financial statements indicates that (a) it is probable that
an asset has been impaired or a liability has been incurred at
the date of the financial statements and (b) the amount of
the loss can be reasonably estimated. We are required to use our
judgment to account for contingencies such as environmental,
legal and income tax matters. While we believe that our accruals
for these matters are adequate, the actual loss may differ from
our estimated loss, and we would record the necessary
adjustments in future periods. We do not record the benefits of
contingent recoveries or gains until the amount is determinable
and recovery is assured.
Environmental Liabilities - At December 31, 2007 and
2006, our total environmental liabilities included in accrued
liabilities and other liabilities were $90 million and
$23 million, respectively. We record environmental
liabilities when environmental assessments
and/or
proposed environmental remedies are probable and can be
reasonably estimated. Generally, the timing of our accruals
coincides with assessing the liability and then completing a
feasibility study or committing to a formal plan of action. When
we complete our analysis or when we commit to a plan of action,
we accrue a reasonably estimated cost based on the minimum range
of the expected costs, unless we consider another amount more
likely. We base our cost estimates on the extent of remedial
actions required by applicable governing agencies, experience
gained from similar environmental projects and the amounts to be
paid by other responsible parties. Accruals for our
environmental liabilities require judgment due to the
uncertainties related to the magnitude of the liability and
timing of the remediation effort. Our total accrued
environmental liability estimates are subject to change due to
potential changes in environmental laws, regulations or
interpretations, additional information related to the extent
and nature of the liability, and potential improvements in
remediation technologies. Our estimated liabilities are not
discounted to present value.
52
Income Taxes As part of the process of
preparing consolidated financial statements, we must assess the
likelihood that our deferred income tax assets will be recovered
through future taxable income. To the extent we believe that
recovery is not likely, a valuation allowance must be
established. Significant management judgment is required in
determining any valuation allowance recorded against net
deferred income tax assets. Based on our estimates of taxable
income in each jurisdiction in which we operate and the period
over which deferred income tax assets will be recoverable, we
have not recorded a valuation allowance as of December 31,
2007. In the event that actual results differ from these
estimates or we make adjustments to these estimates in future
periods, we may need to establish a valuation allowance.
Beginning January 1, 2007 with the adoption of FASB
Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes we recognize the financial statement effects
of a tax position when it is more likely than not that the
position will be sustained upon examination. Tax positions taken
or expected to be taken that are not recognized under the
pronouncement are recorded as liabilities (See New
Accounting Standards and Disclosures for additional
information).
Asset Retirement Obligations We record asset
retirement obligations in the period in which the obligations
are incurred and a reasonable estimate of fair value can be
made. We use the present value of expected cash flows to
estimate fair value. The calculation of fair value is based on
several estimates and assumptions, including, among other
things, projected cash flows, inflation, a credit-adjusted
risk-free rate, the settlement dates or a range of potential
settlement dates and the probabilities associated with the
potential settlement dates. We consider our past practice,
industry practice, managements intent and estimated
economic lives to estimate settlement dates. Actual results
could differ from those estimates. Our asset retirement
obligations totaled $82 million and $52 million at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. We cannot
currently make reasonable estimates of the fair values of some
retirement obligations, principally those associated with our
refineries, pipelines and certain terminals and retail stations,
because the related assets have indeterminate useful lives which
preclude development of assumptions about the potential timing
of settlement dates. Such obligations will be recognized in the
period in which sufficient information exists to estimate a
range of potential settlement dates.
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits
Accounting for pensions and other postretirement benefits
involves several assumptions and estimates including discount
rates, health care cost trends, inflation, retirement rates and
mortality rates. We must also assume a rate of return on funded
pension plan assets in order to estimate our obligations under
our defined benefit plans. Due to the nature of these
calculations, we engage an actuarial firm to assist with the
determination of these estimates and the calculation of certain
employee benefit expenses. We record an asset for our plans
overfunded status and a liability for our plans underfunded
status. The funded status represents the difference between the
fair value our plans assets and its projected benefit
obligations. While we believe that the assumptions used are
appropriate, significant differences in the actual experience or
significant changes in assumptions would affect pension and
other postretirement benefits costs and obligations. A
one-percentage-point change in the expected return on plan
assets and discount rate for the pension plans would have had
the following effects in 2007 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-Percentage-
|
|
|
1-Percentage-
|
|
|
|
Point Increase
|
|
|
Point Decrease
|
|
|
Expected Rate of Return
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on net periodic pension expense
|
|
$
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
2.5
|
|
Discount Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on net periodic pension expense
|
|
$
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
Effect on projected benefit obligation
|
|
$
|
(28.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
33.1
|
|
See Note L in our consolidated financial statements in
Item 8 for more information regarding costs and assumptions.
Stock-Based Compensation We follow the fair
value method of accounting for stock-based compensation. We
estimate the fair value of options and other stock-based awards
using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with assumptions
based primarily on historical data. The assumptions used in the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model require estimates of the
expected term the stock-based awards are held until exercised,
the estimated volatility of our stock price over the expected
term and the number of awards that will be forfeited prior to
the completion of their vesting requirements. Changes in our
assumptions may impact the expenses related to our stock-
53
based awards. The estimated fair value of our stock appreciation
rights are revalued at the end of each reporting period, and
changes in our assumptions may impact our liabilities and
expenses associated with these awards.
New
Accounting Standards and Disclosures
See Note A in our consolidated financial statements in
Item 8.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These
statements are included throughout this
Form 10-K
and relate to, among other things, expectations regarding
refining margins, revenues, cash flows, capital expenditures,
turnaround expenses, and other financial items. These statements
also relate to our business strategy, goals and expectations
concerning our market position, future operations, margins and
profitability. We have used the words anticipate,
believe, could, estimate,
expect, intend, may,
plan, predict, project,
will and similar terms and phrases to identify
forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Although we believe the assumptions upon which these
forward-looking statements are based are reasonable, any of
these assumptions could prove to be inaccurate and the
forward-looking statements based on these assumptions could be
incorrect. Our operations involve risks and uncertainties, many
of which are outside our control, and any one of which, or a
combination of which, could materially affect our results of
operations and whether the forward-looking statements ultimately
prove to be correct.
Actual results and trends in the future may differ materially
from those suggested or implied by the forward-looking
statements depending on a variety of factors including, but not
limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in global economic conditions;
|
|
|
|
changes in capital requirements or in execution of planned
capital projects;
|
|
|
|
the timing and extent of changes in commodity prices and
underlying demand for our refined products;
|
|
|
|
disruptions due to equipment interruption or failure at our
facilities or third-party facilities;
|
|
|
|
the availability and costs of crude oil, other refinery
feedstocks and refined products;
|
|
|
|
changes in our cash flow from operations;
|
|
|
|
changes in the cost or availability of third-party vessels,
pipelines and other means of transporting crude oil feedstocks
and refined products;
|
|
|
|
actions of customers and competitors;
|
|
|
|
direct or indirect effects on our business resulting from actual
or threatened terrorist incidents or acts of war;
|
|
|
|
political developments;
|
|
|
|
changes in our inventory levels and carrying costs;
|
|
|
|
seasonal variations in demand for refined products;
|
|
|
|
changes in fuel and utility costs for our facilities;
|
|
|
|
state and federal environmental, economic, safety and other
policies and regulations, any changes therein, and any legal or
regulatory delays or other factors beyond our control;
|
|
|
|
adverse rulings, judgments, or settlements in litigation or
other legal or tax matters, including unexpected environmental
remediation costs in excess of any reserves;
|
|
|
|
weather conditions affecting our operations or the areas in
which our refined products are marketed; and
|
|
|
|
earthquakes or other natural disasters affecting operations.
|
54
Many of these factors are described in greater detail in
Competition and Other on page 12 and Risk
Factors on page 20. All future written and oral
forward-looking statements attributable to us or persons acting
on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the
previous statements. We undertake no obligation to update any
information contained herein or to publicly release the results
of any revisions to any forward-looking statements that may be
made to reflect events or circumstances that occur, or that we
become aware of, after the date of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
|
|
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
Our primary source of market risk is the difference between
prices received from the sale of refined products and the prices
paid for crude oil and other feedstocks. We have a risk
management committee responsible for, among other things,
reviewing a quarterly assessment of risks to the corporation and
presenting a quarterly risk report to executive management for
consideration.
Commodity
Price Risks
Our earnings and cash flows from operations depend on the margin
above fixed and variable expenses (including the costs of crude
oil and other feedstocks) and the margin above those expenses at
which we are able to sell refined products. The prices of crude
oil and refined products have fluctuated substantially in recent
years. These prices depend on many factors, including the demand
for crude oil, gasoline and other refined products, which in
turn depend on, among other factors, changes in the economy, the
level of foreign and domestic production of crude oil and
refined products, geo-political conditions, the availability of
imports of crude oil and refined products, the marketing of
alternative and competing fuels and the impact of government
regulations. The prices we receive for refined products are also
affected by local factors such as local market conditions and
the level of operations of other suppliers in our markets.
The prices at which we sell our refined products are influenced
by the commodity price of crude oil. Generally, an increase or
decrease in the price of crude oil results in a corresponding
increase or decrease in the price of gasoline and other refined
products. However, the prices for crude oil and prices for our
refined products can fluctuate in different directions based on
global market conditions. In addition, the timing of the
relative movement of the prices, as well as the overall change
in refined product prices, can reduce profit margins and could
have a significant impact on our earnings and cash flows. In
addition, the majority of our crude oil supply contracts are
short-term in nature with market-responsive pricing provisions.
Our financial results can be affected significantly by price
level changes during the period between purchasing refinery
feedstocks and selling the manufactured refined products from
such feedstocks. We also purchase refined products manufactured
by others for resale to our customers. Our financial results can
be affected significantly by price level changes during the
periods between purchasing and selling such refined products.
Assuming all other factors remained constant, a $1.00 per barrel
change in average gross refining margins, based on our 2007
average throughput of 595 Mbpd, would change annualized pretax
operating income by approximately $217 million.
We maintain inventories of crude oil, intermediate products and
refined products, the values of which are subject to
fluctuations in market prices. Our inventories of refinery
feedstocks and refined products totaled 29 million barrels
and 26 million barrels at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively. The average cost of our refinery feedstocks and
refined products at December 31, 2007 was approximately $43
per barrel on a LIFO basis, compared to market prices of
approximately $93 per barrel. If market prices decline to a
level below the average cost of these inventories, we would be
required to write down the carrying value of our inventory.
Tesoro periodically enters into non-trading derivative
arrangements primarily to manage exposure to commodity price
risks associated with the purchase of feedstocks and blendstocks
and the purchase and sale of manufactured and purchased refined
products. To manage these risks, we typically enter into
exchange-traded futures and over-the-counter swaps, generally
with durations of one year or less. We mark to market our
non-hedging derivative instruments and recognize the changes in
their fair values in earnings. We include the carrying amounts
of our derivatives in other current assets or accrued
liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets. We did not
designate or account for any derivative instruments as hedges
during 2007 or 2006. Accordingly, no change in the value of the
related underlying physical asset is recorded.
55
During 2007, we settled derivative positions of approximately
466 million barrels of crude oil and refined products,
which resulted in losses of $10 million. At
December 31, 2007, we had open derivative positions of
approximately 21 million barrels, which will expire at
various times during 2008. We recorded the fair value of our
open positions, which resulted in an unrealized loss position of
$39 million at December 31, 2007, for an unrealized
mark-to-market net loss during 2007 of $51 million. During
2006, we settled derivative positions of approximately
138 million barrels of crude oil and refined products,
which resulted in gains of $33 million. At
December 31, 2006, we had open derivative positions of
approximately 10 million barrels, which expired at various
times during 2007. We recorded the fair value of our open
positions, which resulted in an unrealized gain position of
$12 million at December 31, 2006, for an unrealized
mark-to-market net gain during 2006 of $10 million.
We prepared a sensitivity analysis to estimate our exposure to
market risk associated with our derivative instruments. This
analysis may differ from actual results. The fair value of each
derivative instrument was based on quoted market prices. Based
on our open net positions of 21 million barrels as of
December 31, 2007, a $1.00
per-barrel
change in quoted market prices of our derivative instruments,
assuming all other factors remain constant, would change the
fair value of our derivative instruments and pretax operating
income by $21 million. As of December 31, 2006, a
$1.00
per-barrel
change in quoted market prices for our derivative instruments,
assuming all other factors remain constant, would have changed
the fair value of our derivative instruments and pretax
operating income by $10 million.
56
|
|
ITEM 8.
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
|
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board
of Directors and Stockholders of
Tesoro Corporation
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Tesoro Corporation and subsidiaries (the Company) as
of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, comprehensive income and
stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2007. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on the 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, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
Tesoro Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007
and 2006, and the results of their operations and their cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2007, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
As discussed in Note A to the consolidated financial
statements, in 2006 the Company changed its method of accounting
for refined product sales and purchases transactions with the
same counterparty that have been entered into in contemplation
of one another, and for its pension and other postretirement
plans.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission and our report dated February 28, 2008,
expressed an unqualified opinion on the Companys internal
control over financial reporting.
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San Antonio, Texas
February 28, 2008
57
TESORO
CORPORATION
STATEMENTS
OF CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions except
|
|
|
|
per share amounts)
|
|
|
REVENUES(1)
|
|
$
|
21,915
|
|
|
$
|
18,104
|
|
|
$
|
16,581
|
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs of sales and operating expenses(1)
|
|
|
20,308
|
|
|
|
16,314
|
|
|
|
15,170
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
179
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
357
|
|
|
|
247
|
|
|
|
186
|
|
Loss on asset disposals and impairments
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING INCOME
|
|
|
967
|
|
|
|
1,317
|
|
|
|
1,027
|
|
Interest and financing costs
|
|
|
(95
|
)
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
(211
|
)
|
Interest income and other
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EARNINGS BEFORE INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
905
|
|
|
|
1,286
|
|
|
|
831
|
|
Income tax provision
|
|
|
339
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
324
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET EARNINGS
|
|
$
|
566
|
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
|
$
|
507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET EARNINGS PER SHARE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
4.17
|
|
|
$
|
5.89
|
|
|
$
|
3.72
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
4.06
|
|
|
$
|
5.73
|
|
|
$
|
3.60
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE COMMON SHARES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
135.7
|
|
|
|
136.0
|
|
|
|
136.3
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
139.5
|
|
|
|
139.8
|
|
|
|
140.9
|
|
DIVIDENDS PER SHARE
|
|
$
|
0.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.10
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Includes excise taxes collected from our retail segment
|
|
$
|
240
|
|
|
$
|
102
|
|
|
$
|
108
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
58
TESORO
CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions except per share amounts)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
CURRENT ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
986
|
|
Receivables, less allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
1,243
|
|
|
|
861
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
872
|
|
Prepayments and other
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Assets
|
|
|
2,600
|
|
|
|
2,811
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining
|
|
|
5,021
|
|
|
|
3,207
|
|
Retail
|
|
|
642
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
Corporate and other
|
|
|
193
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,856
|
|
|
|
3,561
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(1,076
|
)
|
|
|
(874
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Property, Plant and Equipment
|
|
|
4,780
|
|
|
|
2,687
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER NONCURRENT ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
Acquired intangibles, net
|
|
|
290
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
366
|
|
|
|
205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Noncurrent Assets
|
|
|
748
|
|
|
|
406
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
8,128
|
|
|
$
|
5,904
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
2,004
|
|
|
$
|
1,270
|
|
Accrued liabilities
|
|
|
488
|
|
|
|
385
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Liabilities
|
|
|
2,494
|
|
|
|
1,672
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEFERRED INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
388
|
|
|
|
377
|
|
OTHER LIABILITIES
|
|
|
537
|
|
|
|
324
|
|
DEBT
|
|
|
1,657
|
|
|
|
1,029
|
|
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Note M)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value
$0.162/3;
authorized 200,000,000 shares; 144,505,356 shares
issued (143,414,204 in 2006)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
876
|
|
|
|
829
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
2,393
|
|
|
|
1,876
|
|
Treasury stock, 7,460,518 common shares (7,600,892 in 2006), at
cost
|
|
|
(151
|
)
|
|
|
(159
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(90
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Stockholders Equity
|
|
|
3,052
|
|
|
|
2,502
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders Equity
|
|
$
|
8,128
|
|
|
$
|
5,904
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
59
TESORO
CORPORATION
STATEMENTS
OF CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSIVE INCOME AND STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
AT JANUARY 1, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136.5
|
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
706
|
|
|
$
|
609
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Shares issued for stock options and benefit plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation arrangements
exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock grants and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum pension liability adjustment (net of related tax benefit
of $1) adjustment (net of related tax benefit of $1)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Comprehensive Income
|
|
$
|
505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AT DECEMBER 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141.7
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
782
|
|
|
$
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
801
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
801
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.8
|
)
|
|
|
(151
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Shares issued for stock options and benefit plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation arrangements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock grants and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to initially apply FASB Statement No. 158 (net
of related tax benefit of $42)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(66
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Comprehensive Income
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AT DECEMBER 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143.4
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
829
|
|
|
$
|
1,876
|
|
|
|
(7.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(159
|
)
|
|
$
|
(68
|
)
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
566
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
566
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Shares issued for stock options and benefit plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation arrangements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock grants and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension and other benefit liability adjustments (net of tax
benefit of $14)
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Comprehensive Income
|
|
|
544
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AT DECEMBER 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144.5
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
876
|
|
|
$
|
2,393
|
|
|
|
(7.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(151
|
)
|
|
$
|
(90
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
60
TESORO
CORPORATION
STATEMENTS
OF CONSOLIDATED CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
$
|
566
|
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
|
$
|
507
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net cash from operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
357
|
|
|
|
247
|
|
|
|
186
|
|
Amortization of debt issuance costs and discounts
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Write-off of unamortized debt issuance costs and discount
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
Loss on asset disposals and impairments
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation arrangements
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
Other changes in non-current assets and liabilities
|
|
|
(76
|
)
|
|
|
(110
|
)
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
Changes in current assets and current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables
|
|
|
(360
|
)
|
|
|
(143
|
)
|
|
|
(190
|
)
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
(338
|
)
|
Prepayments and other
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
845
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
510
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from operating activities
|
|
|
1,322
|
|
|
|
1,139
|
|
|
|
758
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM (USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(747
|
)
|
|
|
(436
|
)
|
|
|
(258
|
)
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
(2,105
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from asset sales
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(2,838
|
)
|
|
|
(430
|
)
|
|
|
(254
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM (USED IN) FINANCING ACTIVITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from debt offerings, net of issuance costs of $6 and
$10 in 2007 and 2005, respectively
|
|
|
494
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
890
|
|
Borrowings under term loan
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings under revolving credit agreement
|
|
|
1,060
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
463
|
|
Repayments on revolving credit agreement
|
|
|
(940
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(463
|
)
|
Repayments of debt
|
|
|
(216
|
)
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
(191
|
)
|
Debt refinanced
|
|
|
(500
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(900
|
)
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(151
|
)
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
Dividend payments
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
Proceeds from stock options exercised
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation arrangements
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
Financing costs and other
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(76
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
553
|
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
|
|
(249
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
(963
|
)
|
|
|
546
|
|
|
|
255
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF YEAR
|
|
|
986
|
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF YEAR
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
986
|
|
|
$
|
440
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW DISCLOSURES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid, net of capitalized interest
|
|
$
|
70
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
101
|
|
Income taxes paid
|
|
$
|
329
|
|
|
$
|
356
|
|
|
$
|
289
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF NON-CASH INVESTING ACTIVITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures included in accounts payable and accrued
liabilities
|
|
$
|
101
|
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
$
|
42
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
61
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE A SUMMARY
OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Description
and Nature of Business
Tesoro Corporation (Tesoro) was incorporated in
Delaware in 1968 and is an independent refiner and marketer of
petroleum products. We own and operate seven petroleum
refineries in the western and mid-continental United States with
a combined crude oil throughput capacity of 658 thousand barrels
per day (Mbpd), and we sell refined products to a
wide variety of customers. We market refined products to
wholesale and retail customers, as well as commercial end-users.
Our retail business includes a network of 449 branded stations
operated by Tesoro under the
Tesoro®,
Mirastar®,
Shell®
and USA
Gasolinetm
brands and 462 branded stations operated by independent dealers.
Tesoros earnings, cash flows from operations and liquidity
depend upon many factors, including producing and selling
refined products at margins above fixed and variable expenses.
The prices of crude oil and refined products have fluctuated
substantially in our markets. Our operating results have been
significantly influenced by the timing of changes in crude oil
costs and how quickly refined product prices adjust to reflect
these changes. These price fluctuations depend on numerous
factors beyond our control, including the demand for crude oil,
gasoline and other refined products, which are subject to, among
other things, changes in the global economy and the level of
foreign and domestic production of crude oil and refined
products, geo-political conditions, threatened or actual
terrorist incidents or acts of war, availability of crude oil
and refined product imports, the infrastructure to transport
crude oil and refined products, weather conditions, earthquakes
and other natural disasters, seasonal variations, government
regulations and local factors, including market conditions and
the level of operations of other suppliers in our markets. As a
result of these factors, margin fluctuations during any
reporting period can have a significant impact on our results of
operations, cash flows, liquidity and financial position.
Principles
of Consolidation and Basis of Presentation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of Tesoro and its subsidiaries. All intercompany
accounts and transactions have been eliminated. Certain
investments are carried at cost. These investments are not
material, either individually or in the aggregate, to
Tesoros financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Separate financial statements of Tesoros subsidiary
guarantors are not included because these subsidiary guarantors
are full and unconditional and jointly and severally liable for
Tesoros outstanding senior notes. In addition, the parent
company has no material independent assets or operations and
non-guarantee subsidiaries are minor. Further, net assets,
results of operations and equity of the subsidiary guarantors
are substantially equivalent to Tesoros consolidated net
assets, results of operations and equity.
Share and per share data (except par value) for the periods
presented reflect the effect of a two-for-one stock split
effected in the form of a stock dividend which was distributed
on May 29, 2007 (see Note N). The accompanying
financial statements include the results of operations of our
Los Angeles refinery and
Shell®
branded retail stations since acquired on May 10, 2007 and
our USA
Gasolinetm
branded retail stations since acquired on May 1, 2007 (see
Note C).
Use of
Estimates
We prepare Tesoros consolidated financial statements in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America (U.S. GAAP), which
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the year. We review our estimates on an
ongoing basis, based on currently available information. Changes
in facts and circumstances may result in revised estimates and
actual results could differ from those estimates.
62
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include bank deposits and low-risk
short-term investments with original maturities of three months
or less at the time of purchase. Our cash investment policy
excludes investments with sub-prime market exposure. Cash
equivalents are stated at cost, which approximates market value.
Financial
Instruments
The carrying amounts of financial instruments, including cash
and cash equivalents, receivables, accounts payable and certain
accrued liabilities, approximate fair value because of the short
maturities of these instruments. The carrying amounts of
Tesoros debt and other obligations may vary from our
estimates of the fair value of such items. We estimate that the
fair market value of our senior notes at December 31, 2007,
was approximately $1 million more than its total book value
of $1.4 billion.
Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. We use
last-in,
first-out (LIFO) as the primary method to determine
the cost of crude oil and refined product inventories in our
refining and retail segments. We determine the carrying value of
inventories of oxygenates and by-products using the
first-in,
first-out (FIFO) cost method. We value merchandise
and materials and supplies at average cost.
Property,
Plant and Equipment
We capitalize the cost of additions, major improvements and
modifications to property, plant and equipment. We compute
depreciation of property, plant and equipment on the
straight-line method, based on the estimated useful life of each
asset. The weighted average lives range from 23 to 28 years
for refineries, 9 to 16 years for terminals, 11 to
16 years for retail stations, 4 to 27 years for
transportation assets and 4 to 16 years for corporate
assets. We record property under capital leases at the lower of
the present value of minimum lease payments using Tesoros
incremental borrowing rate or the fair value of the leased
property at the date of lease inception. We amortize property
under capital leases over the term of each lease. Leasehold
improvements are depreciated over the lesser of the lease term
or the economic life of the asset.
We capitalize interest and labor as part of the cost of major
projects during the construction period. Capitalized interest
totaled $30 million, $11 million and $8 million
during 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively and is recorded as a
reduction to interest and financing costs in the statements of
consolidated operations.
Asset
Retirement Obligations
We accrue for asset retirement obligations in the period in
which the obligations are incurred and a reasonable estimate of
fair value can be made. We accrue these costs at estimated fair
value. When the related liability is initially recorded, we
capitalize the cost by increasing the carrying amount of the
related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is accreted
to its settlement value and the capitalized cost is depreciated
over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of
the liability, we recognize a gain or loss for any difference
between the settlement amount and the liability recorded. We
consider our past practice, industry practice, managements
intent and estimated economic lives to estimate settlement dates
or a range of settlement dates.
Environmental
Matters
We capitalize environmental expenditures that extend the life or
increase the capacity of facilities, as well as expenditures
that mitigate or prevent environmental contamination that is yet
to occur. We expense costs that relate to an existing condition
caused by past operations and that do not contribute to current
or future revenue generation. We record liabilities when
environmental assessments
and/or
remedial efforts are probable and can be reasonably estimated.
Cost estimates are based on the expected timing and the extent
of remedial actions required by applicable
63
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
governing agencies, experience gained from similar sites on
which environmental assessments or remediation have been
completed, and the amount of our anticipated liability
considering the proportional liability and financial abilities
of other responsible parties. Generally, the timing of these
accruals coincides with the completion of a feasibility study or
our commitment to a formal plan of action. Estimated liabilities
are not discounted to present value.
Goodwill
and Acquired Intangibles
Goodwill represents the excess of cost (purchase price) over the
fair value of net assets acquired. Goodwill acquired in a
business combination is not amortized. We review goodwill for
impairment annually or more frequently, if events or changes in
business circumstances indicate the carrying values of the
assets may not be recoverable. Acquired intangibles consist
primarily of air emissions credits, customer agreements and
contracts, the USA
Gasolinetm
trade name and software, which we recorded at fair value as of
the date acquired. We amortize acquired intangibles on a
straight-line basis over estimated useful lives of 2 to
28 years, and we include the amortization in depreciation
and amortization expense.
Other
Assets
We defer turnaround and catalyst costs and amortize the costs on
a straight-line basis over the expected periods of benefit,
generally ranging from 2 to 6 years. We periodically shut
down refinery processing units for scheduled maintenance or
turnarounds. Certain catalysts are used in refinery processing
units for periods exceeding one year. Amortization for these
deferred costs, which is included in depreciation and
amortization expense, amounted to $111 million,
$64 million and $50 million in 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
We defer debt issuance costs related to our credit agreement and
senior notes and amortize the costs over the estimated terms of
each instrument. We include the amortization in interest and
financing costs in our statements of consolidated operations. We
evaluate the carrying value of debt issuance costs when
modifications are made to the related debt instruments (see
Note I).
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets
We review property, plant and equipment and other long-lived
assets, including acquired intangible assets for impairment
whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate
the carrying values of the assets may not be recoverable. We
would record impairment losses if the undiscounted cash flows
estimated to be generated by those assets were less than the
carrying amount of those assets. Factors that would indicate
potential impairment include, but are not limited to,
significant decreases in the market value of a long-lived asset,
a significant change in the long-lived assets physical
condition, and operating or cash flow losses associated with the
use of the long-lived asset.
Revenue
Recognition
We recognize revenues from petroleum product sales upon delivery
to customers, which is the point at which title is transferred,
and when payment has either been received or collection is
reasonably assured. We include certain crude oil and refined
product purchases and resales used for trading purposes in
revenues on a net basis. Nonmonetary crude oil and refined
product exchange transactions, which are entered into primarily
to optimize our refinery supply requirements, are included in
costs of sales and operating expenses on a net basis.
We enter into a limited number of refined product sales and
purchases transactions with the same counterparty that have been
entered into in contemplation with one another. We record these
transactions for new arrangements or modifications of existing
arrangements on a net basis in costs of sales and operating
expenses in connection with our adoption of the Emerging Issues
Task Force (EITF) Issue
No. 04-13,
Accounting for Purchases and Sales of Inventory with the
Same Counterparty on January 1, 2006. Prior to our
adoption of this standard, we recorded these
64
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
purchases and sales on a gross basis in revenues and costs of
sales. Refined product sales and purchases associated with these
arrangements reported on a gross basis in 2005 totaled
approximately $670 million and $640 million,
respectively.
We include transportation fees charged to customers in revenues,
and we include the related costs in costs of sales in our
statements of consolidated operations. Federal excise and state
motor fuel taxes, which are remitted to governmental agencies
through our refining segment and collected from customers in our
retail segment, are included in both revenues and costs of
sales. These taxes, primarily related to sales of gasoline and
diesel fuel, totaled $240 million, $102 million and
$108 million in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Excise
taxes on other product sales in our refining segment are not
included in revenues and costs of sales.
Income
Taxes
We record deferred tax assets and liabilities for future income
tax consequences that are attributable to differences between
financial statement carrying amounts of assets and liabilities
and their income tax bases. We base the measurement of deferred
tax assets and liabilities on enacted tax rates that we expect
will apply to taxable income in the year when we expect to
settle or recover those temporary differences. We recognize the
effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of any change in
income tax rates in the period that includes the enactment date.
We provide a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets if it
is more likely than not that those items will either expire
before we are able to realize their benefit or their future
deductibility is uncertain. Beginning January 1, 2007 with
the adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
(FIN 48) we recognize the financial statement
effects of a tax position when it is more likely than not that
the position will be sustained upon examination. Tax positions
taken or expected to be taken that are not recognized under the
pronouncement are recorded as liabilities (See New
Accounting Standards and Disclosures for additional
information). For interest and penalties relating to income
taxes we recognize accrued interest in interest and financing
costs, and penalties in selling, general and administrative
expenses in the statements of consolidated operations.
Pension
and Other Postretirement Benefits
Effective December 31, 2006, Tesoro adopted Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 158,
Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other
Postretirement Plans An Amendment of FASB Statement
No. 87, 88, 106 and 132R. SFAS No. 158
requires the recognition of an asset for a plans
overfunded status or a liability for a plans underfunded
status in the statement of financial position, measurement of
the funded status of a plan as of the date of its year-end
statement of financial position and recognition for changes in
the funded status of a defined benefit postretirement plan in
the year in which the changes occur as a component of other
comprehensive income. No measurement adjustment was required as
Tesoro measures the funded status of its defined benefit pension
and postretirement plans as of year end. Upon adoption of
SFAS No. 158, we recorded an after-tax charge totaling
$66 million to accumulated other comprehensive loss of
stockholders equity at December 31, 2006. See
Note L for further information on our pension and other
postretirement benefits.
Stock-Based
Compensation
We estimate the fair value of certain stock-based awards using
the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The fair value of our
restricted stock awards on the date of grant is equal to the
fair market price of our common stock. We amortize the fair
value of our stock options and restricted stock using the
straight-line method. The fair value of our stock appreciation
rights and phantom stock is estimated at the end of each
reporting period and is recorded as a liability in our
consolidated balance sheets.
65
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Derivative
Instruments
We account for derivative instruments in accordance with
SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended and
interpreted. Tesoro periodically enters into non-trading
derivative arrangements primarily to manage exposure to
commodity price risks associated with the purchase of feedstocks
and blendstocks and the purchase and sale of manufactured and
purchased refined products. To manage these risks, we typically
enter into exchange-traded futures and over-the-counter swaps,
generally with durations of one year or less. We do not hold or
issue derivative instruments for trading purposes.
We mark to market our non-hedging derivative instruments and
recognize the changes in their fair values in earnings. We
include the carrying amounts of our derivatives in other current
assets or accrued liabilities in the consolidated balance
sheets. We did not designate or account for any derivative
instruments as hedges during 2007, 2006 or 2005. Accordingly, no
change in the value of the related underlying physical asset is
recorded. During 2007, we settled derivative positions of
approximately 466 million barrels of crude oil and refined
products, which resulted in losses of $10 million. Gains on
our settled derivative positions in 2006 totaled
$33 million, while losses in 2005 totaled $23 million.
At December 31, 2007, we had open net derivative positions
of approximately 21 million barrels, which will expire at
various times during 2008. We recorded the fair value of our
open positions, which resulted in an unrealized loss position of
$39 million at December 31, 2007 for an unrealized
mark-to-market net loss of $51 million, as compared to an
unrealized mark-to-market net gain totaling $10 million
during 2006. Our unrealized mark-to-market net gain during 2005
was nominal.
New
Accounting Standards and Disclosures
FIN No. 48
In July 2006, the FASB issued FIN 48, which prescribes a
recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. In
addition, FIN 48 provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, accounting in interim periods and disclosure
requirements for uncertain tax positions. We adopted the
provisions of FIN 48 on January 1, 2007 and recognized
an increase of approximately $1 million in the liability
for unrecognized tax benefits, the cumulative effect of which
was accounted for as an adjustment to decrease retained
earnings. As of the date of adoption and after the impact of
recognizing the increase in the liability noted above, our
unrecognized tax benefits totaled $44 million and we had
accrued approximately $19 million for interest and
penalties. At January 1, 2007, unrecognized tax benefits of
$18 million (net of the tax benefit on state issues and
interest) would lower the effective tax rate in any future
periods, if recognized.
SFAS No. 157
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which defines fair value,
establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements.
SFAS No. 157 applies under other accounting
pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements
and does not require any new fair value measurements. The
provisions of SFAS No. 157 are effective beginning
January 1, 2008. However, in February 2008, the FASB issued
FASB Staff Position (FSP)
No. 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157. The
FSP delays the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for
Tesoro until January 1, 2009 for nonfinancial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities, except for items that are recognized
or disclosed at fair value on a recurring basis. The provisions
of the standard effective as of January 1, 2008 had no
material impact on our financial position or results of
operations. We are currently evaluating the impact, if any, the
provisions of the standard for other nonfinancial assets and
liabilities will have on our financial position and results of
operations.
66
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
SFAS No. 159
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159,
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities, which permits entities to measure many
financial instruments and certain other items at fair value at
specified election dates that are not currently required to be
measured at fair value. Unrealized gains and losses on items for
which the fair value option has been elected should be reported
in earnings at each subsequent reporting date. The provisions of
SFAS No. 159 were effective for Tesoro as of
January 1, 2008. This standard is not expected to have a
material impact on our financial position or results of
operations.
SFAS No. 141(R)
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R),
Business Combinations, which requires that the
assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business
combination to be recorded at the acquisition-date fair value
with limited exceptions. SFAS No. 141(R) will change
the accounting treatment for certain specific acquisition
related items, including: (i) expensing acquisition related
costs as incurred; (ii) valuing noncontrolling interests at
fair value at the acquisition date; and (iii) expensing
restructuring costs associated with an acquired business. The
provisions of SFAS No. 141(R) shall be applied
prospectively to business combinations occurring on or after
January 1, 2009. We have not yet determined the impact of
SFAS No. 141(R) related to future acquisitions, if
any, on our financial position or results of operations.
NOTE B EARNINGS
PER SHARE
We compute basic earnings per share by dividing net earnings by
the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during
the period. Diluted earnings per share include the effects of
potentially dilutive shares, common stock options and unvested
restricted stock outstanding during the period. Share and per
share amounts have been adjusted to reflect the May 2007
two-for-one stock split. Earnings per share calculations are
presented below (in millions, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Basic:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
$
|
566
|
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
|
$
|
507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
135.7
|
|
|
|
136.0
|
|
|
|
136.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Earnings Per Share
|
|
$
|
4.17
|
|
|
$
|
5.89
|
|
|
$
|
3.72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
$
|
566
|
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
|
$
|
507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
135.7
|
|
|
|
136.0
|
|
|
|
136.3
|
|
Dilutive effect of stock options and unvested restricted stock
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total diluted shares
|
|
|
139.5
|
|
|
|
139.8
|
|
|
|
140.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Earnings Per Share
|
|
$
|
4.06
|
|
|
$
|
5.73
|
|
|
$
|
3.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE C ACQUISITIONS
Los
Angeles Assets
On May 10, 2007 we acquired a 100 Mbpd refinery and a 42
Mbpd refined products terminal located south of Los Angeles,
California along with a network of 276
Shell®
branded retail stations (128 are company-operated) located
throughout Southern California (collectively, the Los
Angeles Assets) from Shell Oil Products
U.S. (Shell). We will continue to operate the
retail stations using the
Shell®
brand under a long-term agreement.
67
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The purchase price for the Los Angeles Assets was
$1.82 billion (which includes $257 million for
petroleum inventories and direct costs of $16 million). To
fund the acquisition, we issued $500 million aggregate
principal amount of
61/2% senior
notes due 2017, borrowed $500 million under our amended and
restated credit agreement and paid the remainder with cash
on-hand. The borrowings totaling $500 million under our
revolver were repaid in 2007 with cash flows from operating
activities. The Los Angeles Assets complement our operations on
the Pacific Rim and enable us to realize synergies through our
crude oil purchasing and unique shipping logistics as well as
optimizing the output of our refineries to maximize the
production of clean fuels for the California market. Shell,
subject to certain limitations, retained certain obligations,
responsibilities, liabilities, costs and expenses, including
environmental matters arising out of the pre-closing operations
of the Los Angeles Assets. We assumed certain obligations,
responsibilities, liabilities, costs and expenses arising out of
or incurred in connection with decrees, orders and settlements
Shell entered into with governmental and non-governmental
entities prior to closing.
The purchase price was allocated to the assets acquired and
liabilities assumed based upon their respective fair market
values at the date of acquisition. Our purchase price allocation
is substantially complete pending potential changes to certain
employee benefits that are not expected to be material. Acquired
intangibles of $160 million include primarily air emission
credits and software licenses. The acquired intangibles will be
amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful
lives ranging from 3 to 28 years or a weighted-average life
of 23 years. Our assumed liabilities include employee costs
of $12 million primarily for postretirement benefits
associated with granted prior service credits, unfavorable
leases of $6 million associated with the acquired Shell
stations and environmental obligations of $3 million
primarily related to assessing environmental conditions and
assuming monitoring requirements. The purchase price allocation,
including direct costs incurred in the Los Angeles Assets
acquisition, is as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories (including materials and supplies of $7 million)
|
|
$
|
264
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
1,304
|
|
Acquired intangibles
|
|
|
160
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
112
|
|
Assumed employee costs and other liabilities
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price
|
|
$
|
1,819
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our unaudited pro forma financial information for the years
ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 gives effect to the
acquisition of the Los Angeles Assets and the related
financings, including (i) the issuance of $500 million
61/2% senior
notes due 2017, and (ii) $500 million in borrowings
under our credit agreement (see Note I), as if each had
occurred at the beginning of the periods presented. Included in
the unaudited pro forma results below are allocations of
corporate overhead reflected in the historical financial
statements of the Los Angeles Assets totaling $21 million,
and $51 million for the years ended December 31, 2007
and 2006, respectively. The unaudited pro forma information is
based on historical data (in millions except, per share amounts)
and we believe it is not indicative of the results of future
operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
22,787
|
|
|
$
|
20,978
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
$
|
554
|
|
|
$
|
839
|
|
Net earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
4.08
|
|
|
$
|
6.17
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
3.97
|
|
|
$
|
6.00
|
|
68
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
USA
Petroleum Retail Stations
On May 1, 2007, we acquired 138 retail stations located
primarily in California from USA Petroleum (the USA
Petroleum Assets). The purchase price of the assets and
the USA
Gasolinetm
brand name was paid in cash totaling $286 million
(including inventories of $15 million and direct costs of
$3 million). We recorded $3 million of goodwill, none
of which is expected to be deductible for tax purposes. This
acquisition provides us with retail stations near our Golden
Eagle and Los Angeles refineries that will allow us to optimize
production, invest in refinery improvements and deliver more
clean products into the California market. We assumed the
obligations under USA Petroleums leases, contracts,
permits and other agreements arising after the closing date. USA
Petroleum has retained certain pre-closing liabilities,
including environmental matters.
The purchase price was allocated based upon fair market values
at the date of acquisition. Acquired intangibles of
$35 million represent the USA
Gasolinetm
brand name, which will be amortized on a straight-line basis
over 20 years. Our assumed liabilities include employee
post-retirement benefits associated with prior service credits.
The purchase price allocation, including direct costs incurred
in the acquisition of the USA
Gasolinetm
stations, is as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
238
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
3
|
|
Deferred tax asset
|
|
|
2
|
|
Acquired intangibles
|
|
|
35
|
|
Assumed employee post-retirement benefits
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price
|
|
$
|
286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma financial information has not been presented for the
USA Petroleum Assets acquisition as it is insignificant to our
consolidated financial statements.
NOTE D RECEIVABLES
Concentrations of credit risk with respect to accounts
receivable are influenced by the large number of customers
comprising Tesoros customer base and their dispersion
across various industry groups and geographic areas of
operations. We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our
customers financial condition, and in certain
circumstances, require prepayments, letters of credit or other
collateral arrangements. We include an allowance for doubtful
accounts as a reduction in our trade receivables, which amounted
to $7 million and $6 million at December 31, 2007
and 2006, respectively.
NOTE E INVENTORIES
Components of inventories at December 31, 2007 and 2006
were (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Crude oil and refined products, at LIFO cost
|
|
$
|
1,107
|
|
|
$
|
798
|
|
Oxygenates and by-products, at FIFO cost
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
Merchandise, at average cost
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Materials and supplies, at average cost
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Inventories
|
|
$
|
1,200
|
|
|
$
|
872
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories valued at LIFO cost were less than replacement cost
by approximately $1.4 billion and $770 million, at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. During 2006, a
reduction in inventory quantities resulted in a
69
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
liquidation of applicable LIFO inventory quantities carried at
higher costs in the prior year. This LIFO liquidation resulted
in an increase in costs of sales of $5 million and a
decrease in earnings of $3 million aftertax or $0.04 per
share.
NOTE F GOODWILL
AND ACQUIRED INTANGIBLES
Goodwill is not amortized but tested for impairment at least
annually. We review the recorded value of goodwill for
impairment during the fourth quarter of each year, or sooner if
events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount
may exceed fair value. Our annual evaluation of goodwill
impairment requires us to make significant estimates to
determine the fair value of our reporting units. Our estimates
may change from period to period because we must make
assumptions about future cash flows, profitability and other
matters. It is reasonably possible that future changes in our
estimates could have a material effect on the carrying amount of
goodwill. Goodwill in our refining segment totaled
$84 million at both December 31, 2007 and 2006. In our
retail segment, goodwill totaled $8 million and
$5 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
All of our acquired intangible assets are subject to
amortization. The following table provides the gross carrying
amount and accumulated amortization for each major class of
acquired intangible assets, excluding goodwill (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Air emissions credits
|
|
$
|
211
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
187
|
|
|
$
|
99
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
Refinery permits and plans
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Customer agreements and contracts
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
USA
Gasolinetm
tradename
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Software
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Favorable leases
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other intangibles
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
351
|
|
|
$
|
61
|
|
|
$
|
290
|
|
|
$
|
157
|
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
|
$
|
112
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted average estimated lives of acquired intangible
assets are: air emission credits 23 years;
refinery permits and plans 20 years; customer
agreements and contracts 12 years; USA
Gasolinetm
tradename 20 years; software
3 years; favorable retail station leases
18 years; and other intangible assets
21 years. Amortization expense of acquired intangible
assets amounted to $16 million, $7 million and
$8 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006
and 2005, respectively. Our estimated amortization expense for
each of the following five years is: 2008
$22 million, 2009 $22 million,
2010 $18 million,
2011 $15 million; and 2012
$9 million.
70
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE G OTHER
NONCURRENT ASSETS
Other noncurrent assets at December 31, 2007 and 2006
consisted of (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred maintenance costs, including refinery turnarounds, net
of amortization
|
|
$
|
310
|
|
|
$
|
166
|
|
Debt issuance costs, net of amortization
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Notes receivable from employees
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Other assets, net of amortization
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Assets
|
|
$
|
366
|
|
|
$
|
205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006, notes receivable from employees
included two non-interest bearing notes due from an employee who
subsequently became an executive officer. These notes, assumed
in connection with the acquisition of our Golden Eagle refinery
in May 2002, totaled approximately $1 million at
December 31, 2006. During 2007 one of these notes was paid
in full. The remaining balance on the other note at
December 31, 2007 is nominal.
NOTE H ACCRUED
LIABILITIES
The Companys current accrued liabilities and noncurrent
other liabilities at December 31, 2007 and 2006 included
(in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Accrued Liabilities Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxes other than income taxes, primarily excise taxes
|
|
$
|
205
|
|
|
$
|
139
|
|
Employee costs
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
Environmental liabilities
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
Asset retirement obligations
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
Liability for unrecognized tax benefits, including interest and
penalties
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Casualty insurance payable
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Pension and other postretirement benefits
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
Deferred income tax liability
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Other
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Accrued Liabilities Current
|
|
$
|
488
|
|
|
$
|
385
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Liabilities Noncurrent:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension and other postretirement benefits
|
|
$
|
348
|
|
|
$
|
240
|
|
Liability for unrecognized tax benefits, including interest and
penalties
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset retirement obligations
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
Environmental liabilities
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Other
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Liabilities Noncurrent
|
|
$
|
537
|
|
|
$
|
324
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE I DEBT
At December 31, 2007 and 2006, debt consisted of (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Credit Agreement Revolving Credit Facility
|
|
$
|
120
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
61/2% Senior
Notes Due 2017
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
|
|
|
61/4% Senior
Notes Due 2012
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
450
|
|
65/8% Senior
Notes Due 2015
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
450
|
|
95/8% Senior
Subordinated Notes Due 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Junior subordinated notes due 2012 (net of unamortized discount
of $38 in 2007 and $46 in 2006)
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
104
|
|
Capital lease obligations and other
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
1,659
|
|
|
|
1,046
|
|
Less current maturities
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt, less current maturities
|
|
$
|
1,657
|
|
|
$
|
1,029
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The aggregate maturities of Tesoros debt for each of the
five years following December 31, 2007 were:
2008 $2 million; 2009
$2 million; 2010 $3 million;
2011 $1 million; and 2012
$721 million.
See Note N for information related to limits imposed by our
debt agreements on restricted payments (as defined in our debt
agreements) which include cash dividends, stock repurchases or
voluntary prepayments of subordinated debt.
Credit
Agreement Revolving Credit Facility
On May 11, 2007, we amended and restated our revolving
credit agreement to increase the revolvers total available
capacity to $1.75 billion from $750 million and
borrowed $500 million under the revolving credit facility
to partially fund the acquisition of the Los Angeles Assets. The
five-year amended credit agreement provides for borrowings
(including letters of credit) up to the lesser of the
agreements total capacity or the amount of a periodically
adjusted borrowing base ($2.2 billion as of
December 31, 2007), consisting of Tesoros eligible
cash and cash equivalents, receivables and petroleum
inventories, as defined. As of December 31, 2007, we had
$120 million in borrowings and $254 million in letters
of credit outstanding under the amended credit agreement,
resulting in total unused credit availability of
$1.4 billion or 80% of the eligible borrowing base.
Borrowings under the revolving credit facility bear interest at
either a base rate (7.25% at December 31, 2007) or a
Eurodollar rate (4.85% at December 31, 2007) plus an
applicable margin. The applicable margin at December 31,
2007 was 1.00% in the case of the Eurodollar rate, but varies
based upon our credit facility availability and credit ratings.
Letters of credit outstanding under the revolving credit
facility incur fees at an annual rate tied to the applicable
margin described above (1.00% at December 31, 2007). We
also incur commitment fees for the unused portion of the
revolving credit facility at an annual rate of 0.25% as of
December 31, 2007.
The credit agreement contains covenants and conditions that,
among other things, limit our ability to pay cash dividends,
incur indebtedness, create liens and make investments. Tesoro is
also required to maintain a certain level of available borrowing
capacity and specified levels of tangible net worth. For the
year ended December 31, 2007, we satisfied all of the
financial covenants under the credit agreement. The credit
agreement is guaranteed by substantially all of Tesoros
active subsidiaries and is secured by substantially all of
Tesoros cash and cash equivalents, petroleum inventories
and receivables. In February 2008, we amended our credit
agreement to allow up to $100 million of restricted
payments during any four quarter period subject to credit
availability exceeding 20% of the borrowing base.
72
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Letter
of Credit Agreements
We also have two separate letter of credit agreements for the
purchase of foreign crude oil providing up to $250 million
and $80 million in letters of credit. The $250 million
letter of credit agreement is secured by the crude oil
inventories supported by letters of credit issued under the
agreement and will remain in effect until terminated by either
party. Letters of credit outstanding under this agreement incur
fees at an annual rate of 1.00%. As of December 31, 2007,
we had $127 million in letters of credit outstanding under
this agreement, resulting in total unused credit availability of
$123 million, or 49% of total capacity under this credit
agreement.
The $80 million letter of credit agreement is secured by
the crude oil inventories supported by letters of credit issued
under the agreement and will remain in effect until terminated
by either party. Letters of credit outstanding under this
agreement incur fees at an annual rate of 0.80%. As of
December 31, 2007, we had $77 million in letters of
credit outstanding under this agreement, resulting in total
unused credit availability of $3 million, or 4% of total
capacity under this credit agreement.
364-Day
Term Loan
On May 11, 2007, we entered into a $700 million
364-day term
loan, which was used to partially fund the acquisition of the
Los Angeles Assets. On May 29, 2007, we repaid and
terminated this loan, using the net proceeds from the
61/2% senior
notes offering and cash on-hand.
61/2% Senior
Notes Due 2017
On May 29, 2007, we issued $500 million aggregate
principal amount of
61/2% senior
notes due June 1, 2017. The proceeds from the notes
offering, together with cash on hand, were used to repay
borrowings under our
364-day term
loan. The notes have a ten-year maturity with no sinking fund
requirements and are subject to optional redemption by Tesoro
beginning June 1, 2012 at premiums of 3.25% through
May 31, 2013; 2.17% from June 1, 2013 through
May 31, 2014; 1.08% from June 1, 2014 through
May 31, 2015; and at par thereafter. We have the right to
redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal amount at a
redemption price of 106.5% with proceeds from certain equity
issuances through June 1, 2010. The indenture for the notes
contains covenants and restrictions that are customary for notes
of this nature. Substantially all of these covenants will
terminate before the notes mature if either Standard and
Poors or Moodys assigns the notes an investment
grade rating and no events of default exist under the indenture.
The terminated covenants will not be restored even if the credit
rating assigned to the notes subsequently falls below investment
grade. The notes are unsecured and are guaranteed by
substantially all of our domestic subsidiaries.
61/4% Senior
Notes Due 2012
In November 2005, we issued $450 million aggregate
principal amount of
61/4% senior
notes due November 1, 2012. The notes have a seven-year
maturity with no sinking fund requirements and are not callable.
We have the right to redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal
amount at a redemption price of 106% with proceeds from certain
equity issuances through November 1, 2008. The indenture
for the notes contains covenants and restrictions that are
customary for notes of this nature and are identical to the
covenants in the indenture for Tesoros
65/8% senior
notes due 2015. Substantially all of these covenants will
terminate before the notes mature if one of two specified
ratings agencies assigns the notes an investment grade rating
and no events of default exist under the indenture. The
terminated covenants will not be restored even if the credit
rating assigned to the notes subsequently falls below investment
grade. The notes are unsecured and are guaranteed by
substantially all of Tesoros active subsidiaries.
73
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
65/8% Senior
Notes Due 2015
In November 2005, we issued $450 million aggregate
principal amount of
65/8% senior
notes due November 1, 2015. The notes have a ten-year
maturity with no sinking fund requirements and are subject to
optional redemption by Tesoro beginning November 1, 2010 at
premiums of 3.3% through October 31, 2011, 2.2% from
November 1, 2011 to October 31, 2012, 1.1% from
November 1, 2012 to October 31, 2013, and at par
thereafter. We have the right to redeem up to 35% of the
aggregate principal amount at a redemption price of 106% with
proceeds from certain equity issuances through November 1,
2008. The indenture for the notes contains covenants and
restrictions that are customary for notes of this nature and are
identical to the covenants in the indenture for Tesoros
61/4% senior
notes due 2012. Substantially all of these covenants will
terminate before the notes mature if one of two specified
ratings agencies assigns the notes an investment grade rating
and no events of default exist under the indenture. The
terminated covenants will not be restored even if the credit
rating assigned to the notes subsequently falls below investment
grade. The notes are unsecured and are guaranteed by
substantially all of Tesoros active subsidiaries.
95/8% Senior
Subordinated Notes Due 2012
On April 9, 2007, we voluntarily prepaid the remaining
$14 million outstanding principal balance of our
95/8% senior
subordinated notes at a redemption price of 104.8%. At
December 31, 2006, the notes were included in current
maturities of debt.
Junior
Subordinated Notes Due 2012
In connection with our acquisition of the Golden Eagle refinery,
Tesoro issued to the seller two ten-year junior subordinated
notes with face amounts totaling $150 million. The notes
consist of: (i) a $100 million junior subordinated
note, due July 2012, which was non-interest bearing through
May 16, 2007, and carries a 7.5% interest rate thereafter,
and (ii) a $50 million junior subordinated note, due
July 2012, which incurred interest at 7.47% from May 17,
2003 through May 16, 2007 and 7.5% thereafter. We initially
recorded these two notes at a combined present value of
approximately $61 million, discounted at rates of 15.625%
and 14.375%, respectively. We are amortizing the discount over
the term of the notes.
Capital
Lease Obligations
Our capital lease obligations are comprised primarily of 30
retail stations that we sold and leased-back in 2002 with
initial terms of 17 years, with four
5-year
renewal options. The portions of the leases attributable to land
are classified as operating leases, and the portions
attributable to depreciable buildings and equipment are
classified as capital leases. The combined present value of
minimum lease payments related to the leased buildings and
equipment totaled $22 million at December 31, 2007.
Tesoro also has capital leases for tugs and barges used to
transport refined products, over varying terms ending in 2008
through 2010, in which the combined present value of minimum
lease payments totaled $4 million at December 31,
2007. At both December 31, 2007 and 2006, the total cost of
assets under capital leases was $39 million gross, with
accumulated amortization of $19 million and
$16 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively. We include amortization of the cost of assets
under capital leases in depreciation and amortization.
74
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Future minimum annual lease payments, including interest, as of
December 31, 2007 for capital leases were (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
2009
|
|
|
5
|
|
2010
|
|
|
4
|
|
2011
|
|
|
3
|
|
2012
|
|
|
3
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
|
44
|
|
Less amount representing interest
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE J ASSET
RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS
We have recorded asset retirement obligations for requirements
imposed by certain regulations pertaining to hazardous materials
disposal and other cleanup obligations. These efforts consist
primarily of projects at our Golden Eagle refinery to retire
certain above-ground storage tanks currently estimated between
2008 and 2012 and to modify our existing coker unit to a delayed
coker (see Environmental Capital Expenditures in
Note M). Asset retirement obligations have also been
recorded for certain lease agreements associated with our retail
and terminal operations which generally require that we remove
certain improvements, primarily underground storage tanks, upon
lease termination. In connection with the acquisitions of the
Los Angeles Assets and USA Petroleum Assets, we recorded asset
retirement obligations for asbestos removal associated with the
replacement of certain processing equipment, pipeline removal
and underground storage tank removal at certain leased stations.
Changes in asset retirement obligations for the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006 were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
$
|
46
|
|
Additions to accrual
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Accretion expense
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Additions to accrual resulting from acquisitions
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlements
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Changes in timing and amount of estimated cash flows
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We cannot currently make reasonable estimates of the fair values
of some retirement obligations. These retirement obligations
primarily include (i) hazardous materials disposal (such as
petroleum manufacturing by-products, chemical catalysts and
sealed insulation material containing asbestos), site
restoration, removal or dismantlement requirements associated
with the closure of our refining and terminal facilities or
pipelines, (ii) hazardous materials disposal and other
removal requirements associated with the demolition or removal
of certain major processing units, buildings, tanks, pipelines
or other equipment and (iii) removal of underground storage
tanks at our owned retail stations at or near the time of
closure. We cannot estimate the fair value for these obligations
primarily because we cannot estimate settlement dates or a range
of settlement dates associated with these assets. Such
obligations will be recognized in the period in which sufficient
information exists to determine a reasonable estimate. We
believe that these assets have indeterminate useful lives which
preclude development of assumptions about the potential timing
of settlement dates based on the following: (i) there are
no plans or
75
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
expectations of plans to retire or dispose of these core assets;
(ii) we plan on extending these core assets estimated
economic lives through scheduled maintenance projects at our
refineries and other normal repair and maintenance and by
continuing to make improvements based on technological advances;
(iii) we have rarely or never retired similar assets in the
past; and (iv) industry practice for similar assets has
historically been to extend the economic lives through regular
repair and maintenance and implementation of technological
advances. Also, we have not historically incurred significant
retirement obligations for hazardous materials disposal or other
removal costs associated with asset retirements or replacements
during scheduled maintenance projects.
NOTE K INCOME
TAXES
The income tax provision was comprised of (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
279
|
|
|
$
|
315
|
|
|
$
|
195
|
|
State
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
State
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Tax Provision
|
|
$
|
339
|
|
|
$
|
485
|
|
|
$
|
324
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We provide deferred income taxes and benefits for differences
between financial statement carrying amounts of assets and
liabilities and their respective tax bases. Temporary
differences and the resulting deferred tax assets and
liabilities at December 31, 2007 and 2006 were (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred Tax Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued pension and other postretirement benefits
|
|
$
|
131
|
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
Asset retirement obligations
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
Other accrued employee costs
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Accrued environmental remediation liabilities
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
Other
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Deferred Tax Assets
|
|
$
|
283
|
|
|
$
|
180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred Tax Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated depreciation and property related items
|
|
$
|
(434
|
)
|
|
$
|
(438
|
)
|
Deferred maintenance costs, including refinery turnarounds
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
|
|
(57
|
)
|
Amortization of intangible assets
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
Inventory
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
(28
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Deferred Tax Liabilities
|
|
$
|
(668
|
)
|
|
$
|
(610
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Deferred Tax Liabilities
|
|
$
|
(385
|
)
|
|
$
|
(430
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The net deferred income tax liability is classified in the
consolidated balance sheets as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Current Assets
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Current Liabilities
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
53
|
|
Noncurrent Liabilities
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
377
|
|
The realization of deferred tax assets depends on Tesoros
ability to generate future taxable income. Although realization
is not assured, we believe it is more likely than not that we
will realize the deferred tax assets, and therefore, we did not
record a valuation allowance as of December 31, 2007 or
2006. The reconciliation of income tax expense at the
U.S. statutory rate to the income tax expense follows (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Income Taxes at U.S. Federal Statutory Rate
|
|
$
|
317
|
|
|
$
|
450
|
|
|
$
|
291
|
|
Effect of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State income taxes, net of federal income tax effect
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
Manufacturing activities deduction
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Tax Provision
|
|
$
|
339
|
|
|
$
|
485
|
|
|
$
|
324
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2007, we had $8 million in state
alternative minimum tax credits, no Federal alternative minimum
tax credits and no Federal or state net operating loss
carry-forwards.
We account for uncertainties in income taxes in accordance with
FIN 48 and are subject to U.S. federal income tax, and
income tax in multiple state jurisdictions and a few foreign
jurisdictions. Our unrecognized tax benefits totaled
$44 million as of December 31, 2007, of which
$19 million (net of the tax benefit on state issues and
interest) would affect the effective tax rate if recognized.
Within the next twelve months we expect to settle or otherwise
conclude approximately $18 million of the liability for
uncertain tax positions, including all federal income tax
assessments for years through 2003. At January 1, 2007 and
December 31, 2007, we had accrued approximately
$19 million and $23 million, respectively, for
interest and penalties. During the year ended December 31,
2007, we recognized $4 million in interest associated with
unrecognized tax benefits. The federal tax years 1997 to 2006
remain open to audit, and in general the state tax years open to
audit range from 1994 to 2006. A reconciliation of the beginning
and ending amounts of gross unrecognized tax benefits is as
follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Balance upon adoption at January 1, 2007
|
|
$
|
44
|
|
Increases related to prior year tax positions
|
|
|
1
|
|
Decreases related to prior year tax positions
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
Increases related to current year tax positions
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE L
BENEFIT PLANS
Pension
and Other Postretirement Benefits
Tesoro sponsors four defined benefit pension plans, including a
funded employee retirement plan, an unfunded executive security
plan, an unfunded non-employee director retirement plan and an
unfunded restoration retirement plan. The funded employee
retirement plan provides benefits to all eligible employees
based on years of service and compensation. Although our funded
employee retirement plan fully meets all of the funding
requirements under applicable laws and regulations, during 2007
and 2006, we voluntarily contributed $36 million and
$26 million, respectively, to improve the funded status of
the retirement plan. We also expect to voluntarily contribute
77
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
$20 million to the retirement plan during 2008. The
retirement plans assets are primarily comprised of common
stock and bond funds.
Tesoros unfunded executive security plan provides certain
executive officers and other key personnel with supplemental
death or retirement benefits. These benefits are provided by a
nonqualified, noncontributory plan and are based on years of
service and compensation. During 2007, we made payments of
$1 million for current retiree obligations under the plan.
Tesoro had previously established an unfunded non-employee
director retirement plan that provided eligible directors
retirement payments upon meeting certain age and other
requirements. In 1997, that plan was frozen with accrued
benefits of current directors transferred to the board of
directors phantom stock plan (see Note O). After the
amendment and transfer, only those retired directors or
beneficiaries who had begun to receive benefits remained
participants in the previous plan.
Our unfunded restoration retirement plan, which became effective
July 1, 2006, provides for the restoration of retirement
benefits to certain executives and other senior employees of
Tesoro that are not available due to the limits imposed by the
Internal Revenue Code on our funded employee retirement plan.
During 2007, we voluntarily contributed $5 million to the
plan for payment of current retiree obligations.
Tesoro provides to retirees who met certain service requirements
and were participating in our group insurance program at
retirement, health care benefits and, to those who qualify, life
insurance benefits. Health care is available to qualified
dependents of participating retirees. These benefits are
provided through unfunded, defined benefit plans or through
contracts with area health-providers on a premium basis. The
health care plans are contributory, with retiree contributions
adjusted periodically, and contain other cost-sharing features
such as deductibles and coinsurance. The life insurance plan is
noncontributory. We fund our share of the cost of postretirement
health care and life insurance benefits on a pay-as-you go basis.
Our total pension and other postretirement liability was
$356 million and $246 million at December 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively. Changes in benefit obligations and
plan assets and the funded status for our pension plans and
other postretirement benefits as of December 31, 2007 and
2006, were (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Pension Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change in benefit obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligations at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
320
|
|
|
$
|
259
|
|
|
$
|
192
|
|
|
$
|
194
|
|
Service cost
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
Actuarial (gain) loss
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
Business combinations
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
Plan amendments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligations at end of year
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
320
|
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
|
192
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Pension Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change in plan assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year
|
|
|
266
|
|
|
|
224
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual return on plan assets
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employer contributions
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at end of year
|
|
|
311
|
|
|
|
266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status at end of year
|
|
$
|
(64
|
)
|
|
$
|
(54
|
)
|
|
$
|
(292
|
)
|
|
$
|
(192
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accumulated benefit obligation for our pension plans at
December 31, 2007 and 2006 was $291 million and
$252 million, respectively. Amounts included in our
consolidated balance sheet related to our defined benefit
pension and postretirement plans as of December 31, 2007
and 2006 consisted of (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
$
|
348
|
|
|
$
|
240
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total amount recognized
|
|
$
|
356
|
|
|
$
|
246
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The components of pension and postretirement benefit expense
included in the consolidated statements of operations for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 were (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Pension Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Components of net periodic benefit expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$
|
27
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of prior service cost
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized net actuarial loss
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special termination benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit expense
|
|
$
|
36
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
29
|
|
|
$
|
35
|
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive loss before
income taxes at December 31, 2007 and 2006 for our defined
benefit pension and postretirement plans are presented below (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
77
|
|
|
$
|
69
|
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
122
|
|
|
$
|
81
|
|
Prior service cost
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
95
|
|
|
$
|
90
|
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
|
$
|
147
|
|
|
$
|
111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table summarizes the pretax change in accumulated
other comprehensive income for the year ended December 31,
2007 related to our pension and postretirement plans (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
90
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
Prior service cost recognized during the year
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Net losses recognized during the year
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
Net gains occurring during the year
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income at end of year
|
|
$
|
95
|
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive loss before
income taxes as of December 31, 2007 that are expected to
be recognized as components of net periodic benefit cost in 2008
for our defined benefit pension and postretirement plans was as
follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
Prior service cost
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant assumptions included in estimating Tesoros
pension and other postretirement benefits obligations were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Pension Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Projected Benefit Obligation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed weighted average % as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate(a)
|
|
|
6.10
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
|
|
|
5.50
|
|
|
|
6.40
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
|
|
|
5.50
|
|
Rate of compensation increase
|
|
|
3.81
|
|
|
|
3.72
|
|
|
|
3.23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Periodic Pension Cost:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed weighted average % as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate(a)
|
|
|
6.00
|
|
|
|
5.52
|
|
|
|
5.75
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
|
|
|
5.50
|
|
|
|
5.75
|
|
Rate of compensation increase
|
|
|
3.95
|
|
|
|
3.61
|
|
|
|
3.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected return on plan assets(b)
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
We determine the discount rate primarily by reference to rates
of high-quality, long-term corporate bonds that mature in a
pattern similar to the expected payments to be made under the
plans. |
|
(b) |
|
The expected return on plan assets reflects the weighted-average
of the expected long term rates of return for the broad
categories of investments held in the plans. The expected
long-term rate of return is adjusted when there are fundamental
changes in expected returns on the plans investments. |
80
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The assumed health care cost trend rates used to determine the
projected postretirement benefit obligation are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Health care cost trend rate assumed for next year
|
|
|
9.00
|
%
|
|
|
9.00
|
%
|
Ultimate health care cost trend rate
|
|
|
5.00
|
%
|
|
|
5.00
|
%
|
Year that the rate reaches the ultimate trend rate
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect
on the amounts reported for the health care and life insurance
plans. A one-percentage-point change in assumed health care cost
trend rates could have the following effects (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-Percentage-Point
|
|
|
1-Percentage-Point
|
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Decrease
|
|
|
Effect on total of service and interest cost components
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
(5
|
)
|
Effect on postretirement benefit obligations
|
|
$
|
46
|
|
|
$
|
(37
|
)
|
Our pension plans follow an investment return approach in which
investments are allocated to broad investment categories,
including equities, debt and real estate, to maximize the
long-term return of the plan assets at a prudent level of risk.
The 2007 target allocations for the pension plan assets were 68%
equity securities (with sub-category allocation targets), 26%
debt securities and 6% real estate. Investments that have
potential exposure to sub-prime markets totaled less than one
percent of total pension plan assets at December 31, 2007.
Our other postretirement benefit plans contained no assets at
December 31, 2007 and 2006. The weighted-average asset
allocations in our pension plans at December 31, 2007 and
2006 were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan Assets at
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Asset Category
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Equity Securities
|
|
|
68
|
%
|
|
|
69
|
%
|
Debt Securities
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
Real Estate
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following estimated future benefit payments, which reflect
expected future service, as appropriate, are expected to be paid
in the years indicated (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
27
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
2009
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
2010
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
2011
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
2012
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
2013-2017
|
|
|
256
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
Thrift
Plan
Tesoro sponsors an employee thrift plan that provides for
contributions, subject to certain limitations, by eligible
employees into designated investment funds with a matching
contribution by Tesoro. Employees may elect tax-deferred
treatment in accordance with the provisions of
Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. Tesoro matches
100% of employee contributions, up to 7% of the employees
eligible earnings, with at least 50% of the matching
contribution directed for initial investment in Tesoros
common stock. The maximum matching
81
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
contribution is 6% for employees covered by collective
bargaining agreement at the Golden Eagle refinery. Participants
with the exception of executive officers are eligible to
transfer out of Tesoros common stock at any time, on an
unlimited basis. Tesoros contributions to the thrift plan
amounted to $20 million, $16 million and
$15 million during 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, of
which $12 million, $11 million and $8 million
consisted of treasury stock reissuances in 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
The unfunded executive deferred compensation plan, which became
effective January 1, 2007, provides to certain executives
and other employees the ability to defer compensation and
receive a matching contribution by Tesoro that is not available
under the employee thrift plan due to salary deferral limits
imposed by the Internal Revenue Code.
Retail
Savings Plan
Tesoro sponsors a savings plan, in lieu of the thrift plan, for
eligible retail employees who have completed one year of service
and have worked at least 1,000 hours within that time.
Eligible employees receive a mandatory employer contribution
equal to 3% of eligible earnings. If employees elect to make
pretax contributions, Tesoro also contributes an employer match
contribution equal to $0.50 for each $1.00 of employee
contributions, up to 6% of eligible earnings. At least 50% of
the matching employer contributions must be directed for initial
investment in Tesoro common stock. Participants are eligible to
transfer out of Tesoros common stock at any time, on an
unlimited basis. Tesoros contributions amounted to
$0.5 million in 2007 and $0.4 million in both 2006 and
2005, of which $0.1 million consisted of treasury stock
reissuances in 2007, 2006 and 2005.
NOTE M
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Operating
Leases
Tesoro has various cancellable and noncancellable operating
leases related to land, office and retail facilities, ship
charters and equipment and other facilities used in the storage,
transportation, production and sale of crude oil feedstocks and
refined products. These leases have remaining primary terms
generally up to 10 years and generally contain multiple
renewal options. Total rental expense for all operating leases,
excluding marine charters, amounted to approximately
$64 million in 2007, $45 million in 2006 and
$52 million in 2005. Total marine charter expense for our
time charters was $161 million in 2007, $148 million
in 2006 and $117 million in 2005. See Note I for
information related to capital leases.
As of December 31, 2007, we term-chartered four
U.S. flagged ships and six foreign-flagged ships, used to
transport crude oil and refined products with remaining terms
through 2010. Most of our time charters contain terms of three
to eight years with renewal options. We have also entered into
term-charters for four U.S. flag tankers to be built and
delivered between 2009 and 2010, each with three-year terms. All
four time charters have options to renew. In January 2008, we
took delivery of a foreign flagged term-charter, which runs
through 2011, and we have an agreement for one additional
foreign-flagged tanker to be delivered in 2008 with a term
through 2013. We have also entered into various lease agreements
for tugs and barges at our Hawaii and Washington refineries to
transport our refined products. Our operating leases for tugs
and barges have remaining terms up through September 2015 with
options to renew. Our annual lease commitments for our ship
charters is summarized below.
Tesoro has operating leases for most of its retail stations with
primary remaining terms up to 36 years, and generally
containing renewal options. As part of the acquisitions
discussed in Note C, we assumed operating leases for 50
Shell retail stations and 30 USA Gasoline retail stations. Our
aggregate annual lease commitments for our retail stations total
approximately $9 million to $16 million over the next
five years. These leases include the 30 retail stations
that we sold and leased back in 2002 with initial terms of
17 years and four five-year renewal options. We classified
the portion of each lease attributable to land as an operating
lease, and the portion attributable to depreciable buildings and
equipment as a capital lease (See Note I). Tesoro also has
an agreement with Wal-Mart to build and operate retail stations
at selected existing and future Wal-Mart stores in the western
United States.
82
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Under the agreement, each site is subject to a lease with a
ten-year primary term and an option, exercisable at our
discretion, to extend a sites lease for two additional
five-year options.
Prior to 2006, we leased our corporate headquarters from a
limited partnership, in which we owned a 50% limited interest.
In February 2006, the limited partnership sold the building to a
third-party resulting in a gain to Tesoro of $5 million. We
continue to lease our corporate headquarters from the
third-party with an initial lease term through 2014 and two
five-year renewal options. In 2007, we entered into a lease
agreement for a new office campus expected to be completed in
mid-2009. The initial lease term is 20 years with four
5-year
renewal options and has annual payments of approximately
$13 million with a 1.5% escalation provision. The lease
term will commence upon occupancy of the office campus. The
lease agreement will be accounted for as an operating lease.
Tesoros minimum annual lease payments as of
December 31, 2007, for operating leases having initial or
remaining noncancellable lease terms in excess of one year were
(in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charters(a)
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
116
|
|
|
$
|
84
|
|
|
$
|
200
|
|
2009
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
2010
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
2011
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
2012
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
397
|
|
|
|
417
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes minimum annual lease payments for tugs and barges,
which range between $16 million and $33 million over
the next five years. |
Purchase
Obligations and Other Commitments
Tesoros contractual purchase commitments consist primarily
of crude oil supply contracts for our refineries from several
suppliers with noncancellable remaining terms ranging up to
4 years with renewal provisions. Prices under the term
agreements generally fluctuate with market prices. Assuming
actual market crude oil prices as of December 31, 2007,
ranging by crude oil type from $71 per barrel to $90 per barrel,
our minimum crude oil supply commitments for the following years
are: 2008 $33.6 billion; 2009
$1.3 billion; 2010 $1.1 billion; and
2011 $618 million. We also purchase crude oil
at market prices under short-term renewable agreements and in
the spot market. In addition to these purchase commitments, we
also have minimum contractual capital spending commitments,
totaling approximately $61 million in 2008.
We also have long-term take-or-pay commitments to purchase
industrial gases, chemical processing services and utilities
associated with the operation of our refineries. The minimum
annual payments under these take-or-pay agreements are estimated
to total $51 million in 2008, $51 million in 2009,
$51 million in 2010, $52 million in 2011, and
$43 million in 2012. The remaining minimum commitments
total approximately $31 million over 13 years. Tesoro
paid approximately $108 million, $125 million and
$90 million in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, under
these take-or-pay contracts, which included a power agreement
containing a take or pay provision through 2007.
Environmental
and Other Matters
We are a party to various litigation and contingent loss
situations, including environmental and income tax matters,
arising in the ordinary course of business. Where required, we
have made accruals in accordance with SFAS No. 5,
Accounting for Contingencies, in order to provide
for these matters. We cannot predict the ultimate effects of
these matters with certainty, and we have made related accruals
based on our best estimates, subject to future developments. We
believe that the outcome of these matters will not result in a
material adverse effect on our
83
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
liquidity and consolidated financial position, although the
resolution of certain of these matters could have a material
adverse impact on interim or annual results of operations.
Tesoro is subject to audits by federal, state and local taxing
authorities in the normal course of business. It is possible
that tax audits could result in claims against Tesoro in excess
of recorded liabilities. We believe, however, that when these
matters are resolved, they will not materially affect
Tesoros consolidated financial position or results of
operations.
Tesoro is subject to extensive federal, state and local
environmental laws and regulations. These laws, which change
frequently, regulate the discharge of materials into the
environment and may require us to remove or mitigate the
environmental effects of the disposal or release of petroleum or
chemical substances at various sites, install additional
controls, or make other modifications or changes in certain
emission sources.
Conditions may develop that cause increases or decreases in
future expenditures for our various sites, including, but not
limited to, our refineries, tank farms, pipelines, retail
stations (operating and closed locations) and refined products
terminals, and for compliance with the Clean Air Act and other
federal, state and local requirements. We cannot currently
determine the amounts of such future expenditures.
Environmental
Liabilities
We are currently involved in remedial responses and have
incurred and expect to continue to incur cleanup expenditures
associated with environmental matters at a number of sites,
including certain of our previously owned properties. Our
accruals for environmental expenses include retained liabilities
for previously owned or operated properties, refining, pipeline
and terminal operations and retail stations. We believe these
accruals are adequate, based on currently available information,
including the participation of other parties or former owners in
remediation actions. These estimated environmental liabilities
require judgment to assess and estimate the future costs to
remediate. It is reasonably possible that additional remediation
costs will be incurred as more information becomes available
related to these environmental matters. Changes in our
environmental liabilities for the years ended December 31,
2007 and 2006 were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
Expenditures
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlement agreement
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year
|
|
$
|
90
|
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On March 2, 2007, we settled our dispute with Tosco
Corporation (Tosco) concerning soil and groundwater
conditions at the Golden Eagle refinery. We received
$58.5 million from ConocoPhillips as successor in interest
to Tosco and Phillips Petroleum, both former owners and
operators of the refinery. In exchange for the settlement
proceeds we assumed responsibility for certain environmental
liabilities arising from operations at the refinery prior to
August of 2000. At December 31, 2007, our accrual for these
environmental liabilities totaled $64 million. We expect to
have valid insurance claims under certain environmental
insurance policies that provide coverage up to $140 million
for liabilities in excess of the settlement proceeds
attributable to Tosco. Amounts recorded for these environmental
liabilities have not been reduced by possible insurance
recoveries.
We are continuing to investigate environmental conditions at
certain active wastewater treatment units at our Golden Eagle
refinery. This investigation is driven by an order from the
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality
84
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Control Board that names us as well as two previous owners of
the Golden Eagle refinery. A reserve for this matter is included
in the environmental accruals referenced above.
In March 2007, we received an offer from the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (the District) to settle
77 Notices of Violation (NOVs) for $4 million.
The NOVs allege violations of air quality at our Golden Eagle
refinery. In January 2008, we agreed to settle this matter for
$1.5 million pending the negotiation of a final agreement
with the District. A reserve for this matter is included in the
environmental accruals referenced above.
In October 2005, we received an NOV from the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning our
Washington refinery. The EPA alleges certain modifications made
to the fluid catalytic cracking unit at our Washington refinery
prior to our acquisition of the refinery were made in violation
of the Clean Air Act. We have investigated the allegations and
believe the ultimate resolution of the NOV will not have a
material adverse effect on our financial position or results of
operations. A reserve for our response to the NOV is included in
the environmental accruals referenced above.
Other
Environmental Matters
We are a defendant, along with other manufacturing, supply and
marketing defendants, in ten pending cases alleging MTBE
contamination in groundwater. In December 2007 we agreed to
participate in a proposed settlement of seven and part of an
eighth of the pending cases subject to negotiation of settlement
documents. The defendants are being sued for having manufactured
MTBE and having manufactured, supplied and distributed gasoline
containing MTBE. The plaintiffs, all in California, are
generally water providers, governmental authorities and private
well owners alleging, in part, the defendants are liable for
manufacturing or distributing a defective product. The suits
generally seek individual, unquantified compensatory and
punitive damages and attorneys fees. A reserve for the
cases included in the proposed settlement is included in other
accrued liabilities. We believe the final resolution of these
cases will not have a material adverse effect on our financial
position or results of operations, but at this time we cannot
estimate the amount or the likelihood of the ultimate resolution
of the cases not subject to the settlement. We believe we have
defenses to the claims in the remaining cases and intend to
vigorously defend ourselves in those lawsuits.
On January 25, 2008 we received an offer of settlement from
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(ADEC) related to the grounding of a vessel in the
Alaska Cook Inlet on February 2, 2006. The ADEC has alleged
two vessels chartered by us violated provisions of our Cook
Inlet Vessel Oil Prevention and Contingency Plan during the
period from December 2004 to February 2006. The resolution of
this matter will not have a material adverse effect on our
financial position or results of operations.
In the ordinary course of business, we become party to or
otherwise involved in lawsuits, administrative proceedings and
governmental investigations, including environmental, regulatory
and other matters. Large and sometimes unspecified damages or
penalties may be sought from us in some matters for which the
likelihood of loss may be reasonably possible but the amount of
loss is not currently estimable, and some matters may require
years for us to resolve. As a result, we have not established
reserves for these matters. On the basis of existing
information, we believe that the resolution of these matters,
individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material
adverse effect on our financial position or results of
operations. However, we cannot provide assurance that an adverse
resolution of the matter described below during a future
reporting period will not have a material adverse effect on our
financial position or results of operations in future periods.
On December 12, 2007 we received an NOV from ADEC alleging
that our Alaska refinery violated provisions of its Clean Air
Act Title V operating permit. We are negotiating a
resolution of the NOV with ADEC and do not believe the
resolution will have a material adverse effect on our financial
position or results of operations.
85
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Environmental
Capital Expenditures
EPA regulations related to the Clean Air Act require reductions
in the sulfur content in gasoline. We are installing a gasoline
hydrotreater at our Utah refinery to satisfy the requirements of
the regulations. During 2007, we spent $9 million and have
budgeted an additional $60 million through 2009 to complete
the project. Our other refineries will not require additional
capital spending to meet the low sulfur gasoline standards.
EPA regulations related to the Clean Air Act also require
reductions in the sulfur content in diesel fuel manufactured for
on-road consumption. In general, the new on-road diesel fuel
standards became effective on June 1, 2006. In May 2004,
the EPA issued a rule regarding the sulfur content of non-road
diesel fuel. The requirements to reduce non-road diesel sulfur
content will become effective in phases between 2007 and 2012.
In May 2007, we completed the diesel desulfurizer unit at our
Alaska refinery, enabling the refinery to manufacture ultra-low
sulfur diesel. We spent $28 million on this project in
2007. We are currently evaluating alternative projects that will
satisfy the future requirements under existing regulations at
our North Dakota, Utah and Hawaii refineries. Our Golden Eagle,
Los Angeles, Washington and Alaska refineries will not require
additional capital spending to meet the new diesel fuel
standards.
In February 2007, the EPA issued regulations for the reduction
of benzene in gasoline. We are still evaluating the impact of
this standard; however, based on our most recent estimates we
expect to spend approximately $300 million to
$400 million between 2008 and 2011 to meet the new
regulations at five of our refineries. These cost estimates are
subject to further review and analysis. Our Golden Eagle and Los
Angeles refineries will not require capital spending to meet the
new benzene reduction standards.
During the fourth quarter of 2005, we received approval by the
Hearing Board for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
to modify our existing fluid coker unit to a delayed coker at
our Golden Eagle refinery which is designed to lower emissions
while also enhancing the refinerys capabilities in terms
of reliability, lengthening turnaround cycles and reducing
operating costs. We negotiated the terms and conditions of the
Second Conditional Abatement Order with the District in response
to the January 2005 mechanical failure of the fluid coker boiler
at the Golden Eagle refinery. The total capital for this project
is estimated to be $575 million, which includes remaining
spending of $76 million in 2008. The project is currently
scheduled to be substantially completed during the first quarter
of 2008, with spending through the first half of 2008. We have
spent $499 million from inception of the project, of which
$372 million was spent in 2007.
The Los Angeles refinery is subject to extensive environmental
requirements. The Los Angeles refinery will reduce NOx emissions
by the end of 2010 in response to regulations imposed by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Our current plans
for compliance include the replacement of our less efficient
power cogeneration units and steam boilers. We expect to spend
approximately $250 million to $325 million with
estimated completion in late 2010. We also will replace
underground pipelines with above-ground pipelines as required by
an Order from the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board. This project is estimated to be completed in 2014 and
will cost approximately $80 million. Our regulatory
requirements also include a fuel gas treating unit designed to
reduce fuel gas sulfur and new flare gas recovery compressors
designed to meet flaring requirements of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District. We project to spend approximately
$75 million through 2011 to complete the fuel gas treating
unit project and approximately $50 million through 2009 to
install the flare gas recovery compressors. These cost estimates
are subject to further review and analysis.
We have developed a plan to eliminate the use of any atmospheric
blowdown towers by constructing alternative emission control
units at our refineries. We believe that this plan will provide
for safer operating conditions for our employees and will
address environmental regulatory issues related to monitoring
potential air emissions from components connected to the
blowdown towers. We have spent $41 million during 2007 and
we have budgeted an additional $135 million through 2010 to
complete this project at two of our refineries.
In connection with the 2002 acquisition of our Golden Eagle
refinery, we agreed to undertake projects at our Golden Eagle
refinery to reduce air emissions required by a Consent Decree
with the EPA concerning the
86
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Section 114 refinery enforcement initiative under the Clean
Air Act. We spent $1 million during 2007 and have budgeted
an additional $17 million through 2011 to satisfy the
requirements of the Consent Decree.
We will spend additional capital at the Golden Eagle refinery
for reconfiguring and replacing above-ground storage tank
systems and upgrading piping within the refinery. We spent
$19 million during 2007 and we have budgeted an additional
$90 million through 2011. We also spent $3 million
during 2007 and we expect to spend an additional
$65 million through 2010 to upgrade a marine oil wharf at
the Golden Eagle refinery to meet engineering and maintenance
standards issued by the State of California in February 2006.
This cost estimate is preliminary and subject to further review.
In connection with our 2001 acquisition of our North Dakota and
Utah refineries, Tesoro assumed the sellers obligations
and liabilities under a consent decree among the United States,
BP Exploration and Oil Co. (BP), Amoco Oil Company
and Atlantic Richfield Company. BP entered into this consent
decree for both the North Dakota and Utah refineries for various
alleged violations. As the owner of these refineries, Tesoro is
required to address issues to reduce air emissions. We spent
$7 million during 2007 and we have budgeted an additional
$10 million through 2009 to comply with this consent
decree. We also agreed to indemnify the sellers for all losses
of any kind incurred in connection with the consent decree.
The California Air Resources Board regulations require the
installation of enhanced vapor recovery systems at all
California gasoline retail stations by April 2009. The enhanced
vapor recovery systems control and contain gasoline vapor
emissions during motor vehicle fueling. We spent $2 million
during 2007 and have budgeted approximately $17 million
through 2009 to satisfy the requirements of the enhanced vapor
recovery regulations.
In December 2007, the U.S. Congress passed the Energy
Independence and Security Act, which, among other things sets a
target of 35 miles per gallon for the combined fleet of
cars and light trucks by model year 2020 and modified the
industry requirements for Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). The RFS
now stands at 9 billion gallons in 2008 rising to
36 billion gallons by 2022. Both requirements could reduce
demand growth for petroleum products in the future. In the near
term, the RFS presents ethanol production and logistics
challenges for both the ethanol and refining industries and may
require additional capital expenditures or expenses by us to
accommodate increased ethanol use. These requirements are
currently under study.
In June 2007, the California Resources Air Board proposed
amendments to the predictive model for compliant gasoline in the
state of California that decreases the allowable sulfur levels
to a cap of 20 parts per million and allows for additional
ethanol to be blended into gasoline. The requirements begin
December 31, 2009 but may be postponed by individual
companies until December 31, 2011 through the use of the
Alternative Emission Reduction Plan which allows for the
acquisition of emissions offsets from sources not directly
related to petroleum fuel use. We expect both of our California
refineries to be in compliance with the regulation by the 2009
deadline and expect to spend approximately $32 million
through 2010 to meet the requirements.
The cost estimates for the environmental projects described
above are subject to further review and analysis and include
estimates for capitalized interest and labor costs.
Claims
Against Third-Parties
In 1996, Tesoro Alaska Company filed a protest of the intrastate
rates charged for the transportation of its crude oil through
the Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). Our protest
asserted that the TAPS intrastate rates were excessive and
should be reduced. The Regulatory Commission of Alaska
(RCA) considered our protest of the intrastate rates
for the years 1997 through 2000. The RCA set just and reasonable
final rates for the years 1997 through 2000 in Order 151, and
held that we are entitled to receive approximately
$52 million in refunds, including interest through the
conclusion of appeals in 2008. In February 2008, the Alaska
Supreme Court affirmed the RCAs Order 151.
87
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In 2002, the RCA rejected the TAPS Carriers proposed
intrastate rate increases for
2001-2003
and maintained the permanent rate of $1.96 to the Valdez Marine
Terminal. That ruling is currently on appeal to the Alaska
Superior Court. The rate decrease has been in effect since June
2003. The TAPS Carriers subsequently attempted to increase their
intrastate rates for 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 without
providing the supporting information required by the RCAs
regulations and in a manner inconsistent with the RCAs
prior decision in Order 151. These filings were rejected by the
RCA. The rejection of these filings is currently on appeal to
the Alaska Superior Court where the decision is being held in
abeyance pending the decision in the appeals of the rates for
1997-2003.
If the RCAs decisions are upheld on appeal, we could be
entitled to refunds resulting from our shipments from January
2001 through mid-June 2003. If the RCAs decisions are not
upheld on appeal, we could potentially have to pay the
difference between the TAPS Carriers filed rates from
mid-June 2003 through December 31, 2007 (averaging
approximately $3.87 per barrel) and the RCAs approved rate
for this period ($1.96 per barrel) plus interest for the
approximately 48 million barrels we have transported
through TAPS in intrastate commerce during this period. We
cannot give any assurances of when or whether we will prevail in
these appeals. We also believe that, should we not prevail on
appeal, the amount of additional shipping charges cannot
reasonably be estimated since it is not possible to estimate the
permanent rate which the RCA could set, and the appellate courts
approve, for each year. In addition, depending upon the level of
such rates, there is a reasonable possibility that any refunds
for the period January 2001 through mid-July 2003 could offset
some or all of any additional payments due for the period
mid-June 2003 through December 31, 2007.
In January of 2005, Tesoro Alaska Company intervened in a
protest before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC), of the TAPS Carriers interstate rates
for 2005 and 2006. If Tesoro Alaska Company prevails and lower
rates are set, we could be entitled to refunds resulting from
our interstate shipments for 2005 and 2006. We cannot give any
assurances of when or whether we will prevail in this
proceeding. In July 2005, the TAPS Carriers filed a proceeding
at the FERC seeking to have the FERC assume jurisdiction under
Section 13(4) of the Interstate Commerce Act and set future
rates for intrastate transportation on TAPS. We filed a protest
in that proceeding, which has been consolidated with the other
FERC proceeding seeking to set just and reasonable interstate
rates on TAPS for 2005 and 2006. On May 17, 2007, the
presiding judge in this consolidated FERC proceeding lowered the
interstate rates and refused to revise the current intrastate
rates. The TAPS Carriers have requested that the FERC reverse
the presiding judge. We cannot give assurances of when or
whether we will prevail in this proceeding. If the TAPS carriers
should prevail, then the rates charged for all shipments of
Alaska North Slope crude oil on TAPS could be revised by the
FERC, but any FERC changes to rates for intrastate
transportation of crude oil supplies for our Alaska refinery
should be prospective only and should not affect prior
intrastate rates, refunds or additional payments.
NOTE N STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY
Our credit agreement and the
61/2%,
61/4%
and
65/8% senior
notes each limit our ability to pay cash dividends or repurchase
stock. The limitation in each of our debt agreements is based on
limits on restricted payments (as defined in our debt
agreements), which include dividends, stock repurchases or
voluntary prepayments of subordinate debt. The aggregate amount
of restricted payments cannot exceed an amount defined in each
of the debt agreements. We do not believe that the limitations
will restrict our ability to pay dividends or repurchase stock
under our current programs.
See Note O for information relating to stock-based
compensation and common stock reserved for exercise of options.
88
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock
Split
On May 1, 2007, our Board of Directors approved a
two-for-one stock split effected in the form of a stock
dividend, which was distributed on May 29, 2007 to
shareholders of record at the close of business on May 14,
2007. All references to the number of shares of common stock and
per share amounts (other than par value) have been adjusted to
reflect the split for all periods presented.
Cash
Dividends
On January 30, 2008, our Board of Directors declared a
quarterly cash dividend on common stock of $0.10 per share,
payable on March 17, 2008 to shareholders of record on
March 3, 2008. During 2007, we paid cash dividends on
common stock totaling $0.35 per share. In May 2007, our Board of
Directors increased our quarterly cash dividend from $0.05 per
share (post stock split) to $0.10 per share.
Common
Stock Repurchase Program
In November 2005, our Board of Directors authorized a
$200 million share repurchase program, which represented
approximately 5% of our common stock then outstanding. Under the
program, we may repurchase our common stock from time to time in
the open market. Purchases will depend on price, market
conditions and other factors. Under the program, we repurchased
2.4 million shares of common stock for $148 million in
2006, or an average cost per share of $62.33, and
240,000 shares for $14 million in 2005, or an average
cost per share of $58.83. No shares were repurchased under the
plan during 2007. As of December 31, 2007, $38 million
remained available for future repurchases under the program.
Stockholder
Rights Plan
On November 20, 2007, our Board of Directors adopted a
stockholder rights plan, declaring that each stockholder of
record on December 3, 2007 receive a dividend of one right
for each outstanding share of common stock held. The dividend
entitles the registered holder to purchase one one-thousandth
(1/1000) of a share of Series B Junior Participating
Preferred Stock, no par value, at a price of $200, subject to
adjustment. The shareholder rights are not exercisable until the
tenth day following a public announcement that a person or group
of affiliated or associated persons has acquired beneficial
ownership of 20% or more of the outstanding shares of our common
stock. The rights will expire on November 20, 2010, unless
our Boards of Directors extends, redeems, or exchanges the
rights.
Tender
Offer
On October 26, 2007, Tracinda Corporation, a private
investment corporation, announced that it intended to make a
cash tender offer for up to 21,875,000 shares of our common
stock (or 16% of our total outstanding shares at
October 25, 2007) at a price of $64.00 per share. On
November 27, 2007, Tracinda Corporation withdrew their
tender offer, which was scheduled to expire on December 6,
2007.
NOTE O STOCK-BASED
COMPENSATION
Stock-based compensation expense for our stock-based awards for
2007, 2006 and 2005 was as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Stock options
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
Restricted stock
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Stock appreciation rights
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phantom stock
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Stock-Based Compensation
|
|
$
|
53
|
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock-based compensation during 2005 included charges totaling
$5 million associated with the termination and retirement
of certain executive officers. The income tax benefit realized
from tax deductions associated with stock-based compensation
totaled $26 million, $20 million and $29 million
during 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Incentive
Stock Plans
We issue stock-based awards as described below to employees
under the 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan and non-employee
directors under the 1995 Non-Employee Director Stock Option
Plan, as amended. We also issue common stock to our eligible
non-employee directors as payment for a portion of director fees
under the 2005 Director Compensation Plan. Prior to May
2006, we issued stock-based awards under the Amended and
Restated Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan, which has expired.
We also have outstanding stock options under our Key Employee
Stock Option Plan for which future grants have been suspended.
At December 31, 2007, Tesoro had 9,925,062 shares of
unissued common stock reserved for these plans.
The 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (2006 Plan)
permits the grant of options, restricted stock, deferred stock
units, performance stock awards, other stock-based awards and
cash-based awards. The 2006 Plan became effective in May 2006
and no awards may be granted under the 2006 Plan on or after
May 3, 2016. The maximum amount of common stock which may
be issued under the 2006 Plan may not exceed
3,000,000 shares of which up to 750,000 shares in the
aggregate may be granted as restricted stock, deferred stock
units, performance shares, performance units and other
stock-based awards. Stock options may be granted at exercise
prices not less than the fair market value on the date the
options are granted. The options granted become exercisable
after one year in 33% annual increments and expire ten years
from the date of grant. Generally, when stock options are
exercised or when restricted stock is granted we issue new
shares rather than issuing treasury shares. At December 31,
2007, we had 1,498,600 options and 111,100 restricted stock
outstanding and 1,390,300 shares available for future
grants under this plan.
Under the Amended and Restated Executive Long-Term Incentive
Plan, shares of common stock were granted in a variety of forms,
including restricted stock, nonqualified stock options, stock
appreciation rights and performance share and performance unit
awards. The plan expired as to the issuance of awards in May
2006 upon shareholder approval of the 2006 Plan. At
December 31, 2007, we had 6,022,472 options and 850,144
restricted shares outstanding under this plan.
The Key Employee Stock Option Plan provided stock option grants
to eligible employees who were not executive officers of Tesoro.
We granted stock options to purchase 1,594,000 shares of
common stock, of which 252,738 shares were outstanding at
December 31, 2007, which become exercisable one year after
grant in 25% annual increments. The options expire ten years
after the date of grant. Our Board of Directors has suspended
future grants under this plan.
The 1995 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan provides for
the grant of up to 900,000 nonqualified stock options over the
life of the plan to eligible non-employee directors of Tesoro.
These automatic, non-discretionary stock options are granted at
an exercise price equal to the fair market value per share of
Tesoros common stock at the date of grant. The term of
each option is ten years, and an option becomes exercisable six
months after it is granted. This plan will expire, unless
earlier terminated, as to the issuance of awards in February
2010. At December 31, 2007, Tesoro had 316,000 options
outstanding and 364,000 shares available for future grants
under this plan.
90
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock
Options
A summary of stock option activity for all plans is set forth
below (shares in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Contractual Term
|
|
|
Intrinsic Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
7,528
|
|
|
$
|
12.80
|
|
|
|
6.1 years
|
|
|
$
|
151
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,567
|
|
|
$
|
43.13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(972
|
)
|
|
$
|
9.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired
|
|
|
(33
|
)
|
|
$
|
29.14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
8,090
|
|
|
$
|
19.02
|
|
|
|
5.9 years
|
|
|
$
|
232
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested or expected to vest at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
7,840
|
|
|
$
|
18.62
|
|
|
|
5.8 years
|
|
|
$
|
228
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
5,413
|
|
|
$
|
10.82
|
|
|
|
4.6 years
|
|
|
$
|
200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The estimated weighted-average grant-date fair value per share
of options granted during 2007, 2006 and 2005 was $20.62, $16.01
and $9.26, respectively. The total intrinsic value for options
exercised during 2007, 2006 and 2005 was $37 million,
$44 million and $70 million, respectively. Total
unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested stock
options totaled $26 million as of December 31, 2007,
which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average
period of 1.9 years. The income tax benefit realized from
tax deductions associated with stock options exercised during
2007 totaled $14 million.
We estimate the fair value of each option on the date of grant
using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. We amortize the
estimated fair value of stock options granted over the vesting
period using the straight-line method. Expected volatilities are
based on the historical volatility of our stock. We use
historical data to estimate option exercise and employee
termination within the valuation model. The expected life of
options granted is based on historical data and represents the
period of time that options granted are expected to be
outstanding. The risk-free rate for periods within the
contractual life of the option is based on the
U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
Tesoros weighted average assumptions are presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Expected life (years)
|
|
6
|
|
6
|
|
7
|
Expected volatility
|
|
45% - 46%
|
|
46% - 48%
|
|
45% - 49%
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
0.53% - 1.00%
|
|
0.63% - 0.79%
|
|
0.16% - 0.24%
|
Weighted average volatility
|
|
46%
|
|
48%
|
|
48%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
4.8%
|
|
4.6%
|
|
4.0%
|
91
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Restricted
Stock
The fair value of each restricted share on the date of grant is
equal to its fair market price. We amortize the estimated fair
value of our restricted stock granted over the vesting period
using the straight-line method. Our restricted shares vest in
three or five year increments assuming continued employment at
the vesting dates. A summary of our restricted stock activity is
set forth below (shares in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Grant-Date
|
|
|
|
Restricted Shares
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Nonvested at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
1,126
|
|
|
$
|
12.57
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
41.78
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
15.10
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
961
|
|
|
$
|
15.23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted average grant date fair value per share of
restricted stock granted during 2007, 2006 and 2005 was $41.78,
$33.31 and $16.62, respectively. Total unrecognized compensation
cost related to non-vested restricted stock totaled
$7 million as of December 31, 2007, which is expected
to be recognized over a weighted-average period of
1.6 years. The total fair value of restricted shares vested
in 2007, 2006 and 2005 was $13 million, $8 million,
and $4 million, respectively.
Stock
Appreciation Rights
In February 2006, our Board of Directors approved the 2006
Long-Term Stock Appreciation Rights Plan (the SAR
Plan). The SAR Plan permits the grant of stock
appreciation rights (SARs) to key managers and other
employees of Tesoro. A SAR granted under the SAR Plan entitles
an employee to receive cash in an amount equal to the excess of
the fair market value of one share of common stock on the date
of exercise over the grant price of the SAR. Unless otherwise
specified, all SARs under the SAR Plan vest ratably during a
three-year period following the date of grant. The term of a SAR
granted under the SAR Plan shall be determined by the
Compensation Committee on the grant date provided that no SAR
shall be exercisable on or after the seventh anniversary date of
its grant. During 2007, we paid cash of $1 million to
settle stock appreciation rights upon exercise. Prior to 2007,
we did not have any SARs that were exercised. During 2007 and
2006, the estimated weighted-average grant-date fair value for
each SAR granted was $18.12 and $16.09, respectively, using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The option-pricing model
weighted-average assumptions used to calculate the fair value of
SARS are similar to those used to calculate the fair value of
options as described above. At December 31, 2007 and 2006,
the liability associated with our SARs recorded in accrued
liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet totaled
$17 million and $3 million, respectively.
92
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A summary of stock appreciation right activity for the SAR plan
is set forth below (shares in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Contractual Term
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
632
|
|
|
$
|
33.30
|
|
|
|
6.1 years
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,213
|
|
|
$
|
42.61
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(62
|
)
|
|
$
|
33.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
$
|
38.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
1,701
|
|
|
$
|
39.68
|
|
|
|
5.8 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested or expected to vest at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
1,668
|
|
|
$
|
39.60
|
|
|
|
5.8 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
148
|
|
|
$
|
33.30
|
|
|
|
5.1 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Compensation Plan
The 2005 Director Compensation Plan provides for the grant
of up to 100,000 shares of common stock to our eligible
non-employee directors as payment for a portion of director
retainer fees. We granted 8,418 shares of common stock
during 2007 at a weighted-average grant-date price per share of
$51.69. At December 31, 2007, we had 80,952 shares
available for future grants under the plan.
Non-Employee
Director Phantom Stock Plan
Under the Non-Employee Director Phantom Stock Plan, a yearly
credit, limited to 15 full annual credits, of $7,250 is made in
units to an account of each non-employee director, based upon
the closing market price of Tesoros common stock on the
date of credit, which vests with three years of service. A
director also may elect to have the value of his cash retainer
fee deposited quarterly into the account as units that are
immediately vested. Retiring directors who are committee
chairpersons receive an additional $5,000 credit to their
accounts. The value of each vested account balance, which is a
function of changes in market value of Tesoros common
stock, is payable in cash commencing at termination or at
retirement, death or disability. Payments may be made as a total
distribution or in annual installments, not to exceed ten years.
At December 31, 2007 and 2006, the liability associated
with our non-employee director phantom stock plan recorded in
accrued liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets totaled
$5 million and $4 million, respectively.
Phantom
Stock Options
Tesoro granted 350,000 phantom stock options in 1997 to our
chief executive officer with a term of ten years at 100% of the
fair value of Tesoros common stock on the grant date, or
$8.4922 per share. During 2007, all of the granted phantom stock
options were exercised prior to termination in October 2007.
Upon exercise, our chief executive officer received in cash, the
difference between the fair market value of the common stock on
the date of the phantom stock option grant and the fair market
value of common stock on the date of exercise. During 2007, we
paid $17 million to settle the exercised phantom stock
options. The fair value of each phantom stock option was
estimated at the end of each reporting period using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model with assumptions similar to
those used to calculate the fair value of options as described
above. At December 31, 2006, the liability associated with
our phantom stock awards recorded in accrued liabilities in the
consolidated balance sheets totaled $9 million.
NOTE P OPERATING
SEGMENTS
The Companys revenues are derived from our two operating
segments, refining and retail. Our refining segment owns and
operates seven petroleum refineries located in California,
Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, North
93
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Dakota and Utah. These refineries manufacture gasoline and
gasoline blendstocks, jet fuel, diesel fuel, residual fuel oils
and other refined products. We sell these refined products,
together with refined products purchased from third parties, at
wholesale through terminal facilities and other locations,
primarily in Alaska, California, Nevada, Hawaii, Idaho,
Minnesota, North Dakota, Utah, Oregon and Washington. Our
refining segment also sells refined products to unbranded
marketers and occasionally exports refined products to other
markets in the Asia/Pacific area. Our retail segment sells
gasoline, diesel fuel and convenience store items through
company-operated retail stations and branded jobber/dealers in
17 western states from Minnesota to Alaska and Hawaii. Retail
operates under the
Tesoro®,
Mirastar®,
Shell®,
USA
Gasolinetm
and 2-Go
Tesoro®
brands. We developed our
Mirastar®
brand exclusively for use at Wal-Mart stores in an agreement
covering 13 western states. We operate under the
Shell®
brand at certain stations in California through a long-term
agreement entered into in connection with our acquisition of the
Los Angeles Assets. The
Tesoro®
and USA
Gasolinetm
brands are both owned by Tesoro.
The operating segments adhere to the accounting policies used
for Tesoros consolidated financial statements, as
described in the summary of significant accounting policies in
Note A. We evaluate the performance of our segments based
primarily on segment operating income. Segment operating income
includes those revenues and expenses that are directly
attributable to management of the respective segment.
Intersegment sales from refining to retail are made at
prevailing market rates. Income taxes, interest and financing
costs, interest income and other, corporate depreciation and
corporate general and administrative expenses are excluded from
segment operating income. Identifiable assets are those utilized
by the segment. Corporate assets are principally cash and other
assets that are not associated with a specific operating
segment. Segment information as of and for each of the three
years ended December 31, 2007 is as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined products
|
|
$
|
20,906
|
|
|
$
|
17,323
|
|
|
$
|
15,587
|
|
Crude oil resales and other(a)
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
782
|
|
Retail:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel(b)
|
|
|
2,946
|
|
|
|
1,060
|
|
|
|
944
|
|
Merchandise and other
|
|
|
221
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
141
|
|
Intersegment sales from Refining to Retail
|
|
|
(2,785
|
)
|
|
|
(987
|
)
|
|
|
(873
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues
|
|
$
|
21,915
|
|
|
$
|
18,104
|
|
|
$
|
16,581
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining(c)
|
|
$
|
1,188
|
|
|
$
|
1,476
|
|
|
$
|
1,194
|
|
Retail
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Segment Operating Income
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
1,455
|
|
|
|
1,163
|
|
Corporate and Unallocated Costs
|
|
|
(213
|
)
|
|
|
(138
|
)
|
|
|
(136
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income
|
|
|
967
|
|
|
|
1,317
|
|
|
|
1,027
|
|
Interest and Financing Costs
|
|
|
(95
|
)
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
(211
|
)
|
Interest Income and Other
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings Before Income Taxes
|
|
$
|
905
|
|
|
$
|
1,286
|
|
|
$
|
831
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining
|
|
$
|
314
|
|
|
$
|
221
|
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
Retail
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Depreciation and Amortization
|
|
$
|
357
|
|
|
$
|
247
|
|
|
$
|
186
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94
TESORO
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining
|
|
$
|
720
|
|
|
$
|
401
|
|
|
$
|
214
|
|
Retail
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capital Expenditures
|
|
$
|
789
|
|
|
$
|
453
|
|
|
$
|
262
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identifiable Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining
|
|
$
|
7,068
|
|
|
$
|
4,486
|
|
|
$
|
4,204
|
|
Retail
|
|
|
771
|
|
|
|
207
|
|
|
|
222
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
289
|
|
|
|
1,211
|
|
|
|
671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
8,128
|
|
|
$
|
5,904
|
|
|
$
|
5,097
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
To balance or optimize our refinery supply requirements, we sell
certain crude oil that we purchase under our supply contracts. |
|
(b) |
|
Federal excise and state motor fuel taxes on sales by our retail
segment are included in revenues and costs of sales. These taxes
totaled $240 million, $102 million and
$108 million for the years ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005, respectively. |
|
(c) |
|
Refining operating income for 2006 includes a pretax charge of
$28 million related to the termination of a delayed coker
project at our Washington refinery in July 2006. The charge is
included in loss on asset disposals and impairments in the
statements of consolidated operations. |
NOTE Q QUARTERLY
FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarters
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
(In millions except per share amounts)
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
3,876
|
|
|
$
|
5,604
|
|
|
$
|
5,902
|
|
|
$
|
6,533
|
|
|
$
|
21,915
|
|
Costs of sales and operating expenses
|
|
$
|
3,548
|
|
|
$
|
4,710
|
|
|
$
|
5,651
|
|
|
$
|
6,399
|
|
|
$
|
20,308
|
|
Operating Income (loss)
|
|
$
|
188
|
|
|
$
|
729
|
|
|
$
|
99
|
|
|
$
|
(49
|
)
|
|
$
|
967
|
|
Net Earnings (loss)
|
|
$
|
116
|
|
|
$
|
443
|
|
|
$
|
47
|
|
|
$
|
(40
|
)
|
|
$
|
566
|
|
Net Earnings (loss) Per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.86
|
|
|
$
|
3.26
|
|
|
$
|
0.35
|
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
4.17
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.84
|
|
|
$
|
3.17
|
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
4.06
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
3,877
|
|
|
$
|
4,929
|
|
|
$
|
5,278
|
|
|
$
|
4,020
|
|
|
$
|
18,104
|
|
Costs of sales and operating expenses
|
|
$
|
3,689
|
|
|
$
|
4,276
|
|
|
$
|
4,697
|
|
|
$
|
3,652
|
|
|
$
|
16,314
|
|
Operating Income
|
|
$
|
81
|
|
|
$
|
543
|
|
|
$
|
446
|
|
|
$
|
247
|
|
|
$
|
1,317
|
|
Net Earnings
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
|
$
|
326
|
|
|
$
|
274
|
|
|
$
|
158
|
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
Net Earnings Per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
$
|
2.40
|
|
|
$
|
2.01
|
|
|
$
|
1.17
|
|
|
$
|
5.89
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.30
|
|
|
$
|
2.33
|
|
|
$
|
1.96
|
|
|
$
|
1.14
|
|
|
$
|
5.73
|
|
95
|
|
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
None.
|
|
ITEM 9A.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
|
Disclosure
Controls and Procedures
We carried out an evaluation required by the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), under
the supervision and with the participation of our management,
including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our
disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to
Rule 13a-15
under the Exchange Act as of the end of the year. Based upon
that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures
are effective. During the fourth quarter of 2007, there have
been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting
that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Management
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We, as management of Tesoro Corporation and its subsidiaries
(the Company), are responsible for establishing and
maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting
as defined in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
Rule 13a-15(f).
The Companys internal control system is 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 in the United States of America. Due to
its inherent limitations, internal control over financial
reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Therefore,
even those systems determined to be effective can provide only
reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement
preparation and presentation.
Management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, using the
criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control
Integrated Framework. Based on such assessment, we believe
that as of December 31, 2007, the Companys internal
control over financial reporting is effective.
Managements assessment of and conclusion on the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
excludes the internal control over financial reporting of the
Los Angeles Assets and USA Petroleum Assets, both of which we
acquired in May 2007 (as defined and described in Note C of
our notes to consolidated financial statements in Item 8).
The acquisitions contributed approximately 14 percent of
our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2007 and
accounted for approximately 32 percent of our total assets
as of December 31, 2007. Registrants are permitted to
exclude acquisitions from their assessment of internal control
over financial reporting during the first year if, among other
circumstances and factors, there is not adequate time between
the consummation date of the acquisition and the assessment date
for assessing internal controls.
The independent registered public accounting firm of
Deloitte & Touche LLP, as auditors of the
Companys consolidated financial statements, has issued an
attestation report on the effectiveness of the Companys
internal control over financial reporting, included herein.
96
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Tesoro Corporation
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of
Tesoro Corporation and subsidiaries (the Company) as
of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. As described in Management Report on Internal
Control over Financial Reporting, management excluded from its
assessment the internal control over financial reporting of the
acquired Los Angeles Assets and USA Petroleum Assets, which were
acquired in May 2007 and whose financial statements constitute
32% of total assets and 14% of total revenues of the
consolidated financial statement amounts as of and for the year
ended December 31, 2007. Accordingly, our audit did not
include the internal control over financial reporting of the Los
Angeles Assets and USA Petroleum Assets. The Companys
management is responsible for maintaining effective internal
control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
included in the accompanying Management Report on Internal
Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on the Companys internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed by, or under the supervision of, the
companys principal executive and principal financial
officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected
by the companys board of directors, management, and other
personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over
financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or
improper management override of controls, material misstatements
due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting
to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007 of the Company and our report dated
February 28, 2008, expressed an unqualified opinion on
those financial statements and included an explanatory paragraph
relating to a change in the Companys method of accounting
for refined product sales and purchases transactions with the
same counterparty that have been entered into in contemplation
of one another, and for its pension and other postretirement
plans.
/s/ Deloitte &
Touche LLP
San Antonio, Texas
February 28, 2008
97
|
|
ITEM 9B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
In February 2008, we amended the Fourth Amended and Restated
Credit Agreement to allow up to $100 million of restricted
payments during any four quarter period subject to credit
availability exceeding 20% of the borrowing base. The First
Amendment to the Fourth Amended and Restated Credit Agreement is
filed as Exhibit 10.2 to this annual report on
Form 10-K.
PART III
|
|
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
|
Information required under this Item will be contained in the
Companys 2008 Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by
reference. See also Executive Officers of the Registrant under
Business in Item 1 hereof.
You can access our code of business conduct and ethics for
senior financial executives on our website at
www.tsocorp.com, and you may receive a copy, free of
charge by writing to Tesoro Corporation, Attention: Investor
Relations, 300 Concord Plaza Drive, San Antonio, Texas
78216-6999.
|
|
ITEM 11.
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
Information required under this Item will be contained in the
Companys 2008 Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by
reference.
|
|
ITEM 12.
|
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
Information required under this Item will be contained in the
Companys 2008 Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by
reference.
|
|
ITEM 13.
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
Information required under this Item will be contained in the
Companys 2008 Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by
reference.
|
|
ITEM 14.
|
PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
|
Information required under this Item will be contained in the
Companys 2008 Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by
reference.
98
PART IV
|
|
ITEM 15.
|
EXHIBITS AND
FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
(a)1. Financial Statements
The following consolidated financial statements of Tesoro
Corporation and its subsidiaries are included in Part II,
Item 8 of this
Form 10-K:
2. Financial Statement Schedules
No financial statement schedules are submitted because of the
absence of the conditions under which they are required, the
required information is insignificant or because the required
information is included in the consolidated financial statements.
3. Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description of Exhibit
|
|
|
2
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Stock Sale Agreement, dated March 18, 1998, among the
Company, BHP Hawaii Inc. and BHP Petroleum Pacific Islands Inc.
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 2.1 to
Registration Statement
No. 333-51789).
|
|
2
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Stock Sale Agreement, dated May 1, 1998, among Shell
Refining Holding Company, Shell Anacortes Refining Company and
the Company (incorporated by reference herein to the
Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the period ended March 31, 1998, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
2
|
.3
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated July 16, 2001, by and among
the Company, BP Corporation North America Inc. and Amoco Oil
Company (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 2.1 to
the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on September 21, 2001, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
2
|
.4
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated July 16, 2001, by and among
the Company, BP Corporation North America Inc. and Amoco Oil
Company (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 2.2 to
the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on September 21, 2001, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
2
|
.5
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated July 16, 2001, by and among
the Company, BP Corporation North America Inc. and BP Pipelines
(North America) Inc. (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2001, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
2
|
.6
|
|
|
|
Sale and Purchase Agreement for Golden Eagle Refining and
Marketing Assets, dated February 4, 2002, by and among
Ultramar Inc. and Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company,
including First Amendment dated February 20, 2002 and
related Purchaser Parent Guaranty dated February 4, 2002,
and Second Amendment dated May 3, 2002 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 2.12 to the Companys
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001, File
No. 1-3473,
and Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on May 9, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
2
|
.7
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement by and between the Company and Shell
Oil Products U.S. dated as of January 29, 2007
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 2.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 1, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description of Exhibit
|
|
|
2
|
.8
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement by and between the Company and
Shell Oil Products U.S. dated as of January 29, 2007
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 2.2 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 1, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
2
|
.9
|
|
|
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions by and
among the Company and USA Petroleum Corporation, USA Gasoline
Corporation, Palisades Gas and Wash, Inc. and USA San Diego
LLC dated as of January 26, 2007 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 2.3 to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
filed on February 1, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
**2
|
.10
|
|
|
|
Letter Agreement to the Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint
Escrow Instructions dated April 30, 2007 between the
Company and USA Petroleum Corporation, Palisades Gas and Wash,
Inc. and USA San Diego, LLC (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 2.1 to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 3 to the
Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1993, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
|
|
By-Laws of the Company, as amended through February 2, 2005
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 3.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.3
|
|
|
|
Amendment to the By-Laws of the Company, effective March 6,
2006 (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 3.3 to
the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.4
|
|
|
|
Amendment to Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Company adding a new Article IX limiting Directors
Liability (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 3(b)
to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1993, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.5
|
|
|
|
Certificate of Amendment, dated as of May 4, 2006, to
Certificate of Incorporation of the Company, amending
Article IV, increasing the number of authorized shares of
common stock from 100 million to 200 million
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 3.1 to the
Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the period ended March 31, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.6
|
|
|
|
Certificate of Designation Establishing a Series A
Participating Preferred Stock, dated as of December 16,
1985 (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 3(d) to
the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1993, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.7
|
|
|
|
Certificate of Amendment, dated as of February 9, 1994, to
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company amending
Article IV, Article V, Article VII and
Article VIII (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 3(e) to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1993, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.8
|
|
|
|
Certificate of Amendment, dated as of August 3, 1998, to
Certificate of Incorporation of the Company, amending
Article IV, increasing the number of authorized shares of
Common Stock from 50 million to 100 million
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 3.1 to the
Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 1998, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
3
|
.9
|
|
|
|
Certificate of Ownership of Merger merging Tesoro Merger Corp.
into Tesoro Petroleum Corporation and changing the name of
Tesoro Petroleum Corporation to Tesoro Corporation, dated
November 8, 2004 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 3.1 to the Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on November 9, 2004).
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Form of Indenture relating to the
61/4% Senior
Notes due 2012, dated as of November 16, 2005, among Tesoro
Corporation, certain subsidiary guarantors and U.S. Bank
National Association, as Trustee (including form of note)
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on November 17, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
4
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Form of Indenture relating to the
65/8% Senior
Notes due 2015, dated as of November 16, 2005, among Tesoro
Corporation, certain subsidiary guarantors and U.S. Bank
National Association, as Trustee (including form of note)
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 4.2 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on November 17, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description of Exhibit
|
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
|
|
Form of Registration Rights Agreement relating to the
61/4% Senior
Notes due 2012, dated as of November 16, 2005, among Tesoro
Corporation, certain subsidiary guarantors and Lehman Brothers
Inc., Goldman, Sachs & Co. and J.P. Morgan
Securities, Inc. (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 4.3 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on November 17, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
4
|
.4
|
|
|
|
Form of Registration Rights Agreement relating to the
65/8% Senior
Notes due 2015, dated as of November 16, 2005, among Tesoro
Corporation, certain subsidiary guarantors and Lehman Brothers,
Inc., Goldman, Sachs & Co. and J.P. Morgan
Securities, Inc. (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 4.4 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on November 17, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
4
|
.5
|
|
|
|
Form of Indenture relating to the
61/2% Senior
Notes due 2017, dated as of May 29, 2007, among Tesoro
Corporation, certain subsidiary guarantors and U.S. Bank
National Association, as Trustee (including form of note)
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on June 4, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
4
|
.6
|
|
|
|
Form of Registration Rights Agreement relating to the
61/2% Senior
Notes due 2017, dated as of May 29, 2007, among Tesoro
Corporation, certain subsidiary guarantors, Lehman Brothers,
Inc., Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Greenwich Capital
Markets, Inc. (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 4.2 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on June 4, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
4
|
.7
|
|
|
|
Rights Agreement dated as of November 20, 2007 between
Tesoro Corporation and American Stock Transfer &
Trust Company as Rights Agent, including the form of
Certificate of Designations of Series B Junior
Participating Preferred Stock, the forms of Right Certificate,
Assignment and Election to Purchase, and the Summary of Rights
attached thereto as Exhibits A, B and C, respectively
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on November 20, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Fourth Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of
May 11, 2007, among the Company, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A
as administrative agent and a syndicate of banks, financial
institutions and other entities (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on May 15, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
*10
|
.2
|
|
|
|
First Amendment to the Fourth Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement, dated as of February 22, 2008, among the
Company, JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA as administrative agent and a
syndicate of banks, financial institutions and other entities.
|
|
10
|
.3
|
|
|
|
$100 million Promissory Note, dated as of May 17,
2002, payable by the Company to Ultramar Inc. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current
Report on
Form 8-K
filed on May 24, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
|
|
$50 million Promissory Note, dated as of May 17, 2002,
payable by the Company to Ultramar Inc. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Current
Report on
Form 8-K
filed on May 24, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Executive Security Plan effective as
January 1, 2005 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed February 8, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan
effective as of February 2, 2006 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.3 to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
|
|
2006 Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan dated as of May 3,
2006 (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit A to the
Companys Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of
Stockholders held on May 3, 2006).
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
|
|
First Amendment to the 2006 Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan
dated as of August 1, 2006 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
for the period ended June 30, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Employment Agreement between the Company
and Bruce A. Smith dated December 3, 2003 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10.14 to the Companys
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, File
No. 1-3473).
|
101
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description of Exhibit
|
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
|
|
Form of First Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment
Agreement between the Company and Bruce A. Smith dated as of
February 2, 2006 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10.4 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
|
|
Second Amendment to the Amended and Restated Employment
Agreement between the Company and Bruce A. Smith dated as of
November 1, 2006 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
|
|
Agreement between the Company and Bruce A. Smith as of
November 1, 2006 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10.3 to the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
|
|
Employment Agreement between the Company and William J. Finnerty
dated as of February 2, 2005 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K/A
filed on February 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
|
|
Form of First Amendment to Employment Agreement between the
Company and William J. Finnerty dated as of February 2,
2006 (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.5 to
the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
|
|
Form of Second Amendment to Employment Agreement between the
Company and William J. Finnerty dated as of July 11, 2007
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on July 16, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
|
|
Employment Agreement between the Company and Everett D. Lewis
dated as of February 2, 2005 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K/A
filed on February 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
|
|
Form of First Amendment to Employment Agreement between the
Company and Everett D. Lewis dated as of February 2, 2006
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.6 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
|
|
Form of Second Amendment to Employment Agreement between the
Company and Everett D. Lewis dated as of July 11, 2007
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on July 16, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
|
|
Employment Agreement between the Company and Gregory A. Wright
dated as of August 26, 2004 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.4 to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
filed on August 31, 2004, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
|
|
Form of First Amendment to Employment Agreement between the
Company and Gregory A. Wright dated as of February 2, 2006
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.7 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
|
|
Second Amendment to Employment Agreement between the Company and
Gregory A. Wright dated as of June 8, 2007 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys
Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on June 13, 2007, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.22
|
|
|
|
Management Stability Agreement between the Company and W. Eugene
Burden dated November 8, 2002 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.23 to the Companys Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
|
|
Management Stability Agreement between the Company and Claude A.
Flagg dated February 2, 2005 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Management Stability Agreement between the
Company and J. William Haywood dated August 2, 2005
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on August 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
|
|
Management Stability Agreement between the Company and Joseph M.
Monroe dated November 6, 2002 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.30 to the Companys Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description of Exhibit
|
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Management Stability Agreement between the
Company and Daniel J. Porter dated August 2, 2005
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on August 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.27
|
|
|
|
Management Stability Agreement between the Company and Arlen O.
Glenewinkel, Jr. dated August 2, 2005 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10.28 to the Companys
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.28
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Management Stability Agreement between the
Company and Susan A. Lerette dated February 2, 2005
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.29
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Management Stability Agreement between the
Company and Charles S. Parrish dated May 3, 2006
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on May 25, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Management Stability Agreement between the
Company and Otto C. Schwethelm dated February 2, 2005
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.4 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2005, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
|
|
Management Stability Agreement between the Company and Sarah S.
Simpson dated August 2, 2005 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.32 to the Companys Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.32
|
|
|
|
Management Stability Agreement between the Company and G. Scott
Spendlove dated January 24, 2002 (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.33
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Management Stability Agreement between the
Company and Lynn D. Westfall dated as of May 3, 2006
(incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on May 25, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.34
|
|
|
|
Tesoro Corporation Restoration Retirement Plan dated as of
August 9, 2006 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on August 10, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.35
|
|
|
|
Tesoro Corporation 2006 Executive Deferred Compensation Plan
dated November 2, 2006 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.36
|
|
|
|
Copy of the Companys Key Employee Stock Option Plan dated
November 12, 1999 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10.3 to the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.37
|
|
|
|
2006 Long-Term Stock Appreciation Rights Plan of Tesoro
Corporation (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed on February 8, 2006, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.38
|
|
|
|
Copy of the Companys Non-Employee Director Retirement Plan
dated December 8, 1994 (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 10(t) to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1994, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.39
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated 1995 Non-Employee Director Stock Option
Plan, as amended through March 15, 2000 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10.2 to the Companys
Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2002, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.40
|
|
|
|
Amendment to the Companys Amended and Restated 1995
Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10.41 to the Companys
Registration Statement
No. 333-92468).
|
|
10
|
.41
|
|
|
|
Amendment to the Companys 1995 Non-Employee Director Stock
Option Plan effective as of May 11, 2004 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 4.19 to the Companys
Registration Statement
No. 333-120716).
|
|
10
|
.42
|
|
|
|
Copy of the Companys Board of Directors Deferred
Compensation Plan dated February 23, 1995 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10(u) to the Companys
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1994, File
No. 1-3473).
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description of Exhibit
|
|
|
10
|
.43
|
|
|
|
Copy of the Companys Board of Directors Deferred
Compensation Trust dated February 23, 1995 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10(v) to the Companys
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1994, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.44
|
|
|
|
Copy of the Companys Board of Directors Deferred Phantom
Stock Plan (incorporated by reference herein to Exhibit 10
to the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 1997, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.45
|
|
|
|
2005 Director Compensation Plan (incorporated by reference
herein to Exhibit A to the Companys Proxy Statement
for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on May 4, 2005,
File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.46
|
|
|
|
Phantom Stock Option Agreement between the Company and Bruce A.
Smith dated effective October 29, 1997 (incorporated by
reference herein to Exhibit 10.20 to the Companys
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1997, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
10
|
.47
|
|
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Company and its
officers and directors (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit B to the Companys Proxy Statement for the
Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on February 25, 1987,
File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
14
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for Senior Financial
Executives (incorporated by reference herein to
Exhibit 14.1 to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, File
No. 1-3473).
|
|
*21
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Company.
|
|
*23
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
*31
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
|
*31
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
|
*32
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
*32
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
** |
|
Confidential treatment has been granted for certain portions of
this Exhibit pursuant to
Rule 24b-2
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which portions have been
omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. |
|
|
|
Identifies management contracts or compensatory plans or
arrangements required to be filed as an exhibit hereto pursuant
to Item 15(a)(3) of
Form 10-K. |
Copies of exhibits filed as part of this
Form 10-K
may be obtained by stockholders of record at a charge of $0.15
per page, minimum $5.00 each request. Direct inquiries to the
Corporate Secretary, Tesoro Corporation, 300 Concord Plaza
Drive, San Antonio, Texas,
78216-6999.
104
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
TESORO CORPORATION
Bruce A. Smith
Chairman of the Board of Directors,
President and Chief Executive Officer
Dated: February 28, 2008
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/ BRUCE
A. SMITH
Bruce
A. Smith
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ OTTO
C. SCHWETHELM
Otto
C. Schwethelm
|
|
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer)
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ARLEN
O. GLENEWINKEL, JR.
Arlen
O. Glenewinkel, Jr.
|
|
Vice President and Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ STEVEN
H. GRAPSTEIN
Steven
H. Grapstein
|
|
Lead Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JOHN
F. BOOKOUT, III
John
F. Bookout, III
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ RODNEY
F. CHASE
Rodney
F. Chase
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT
W. GOLDMAN
Robert
W. Goldman
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ WILLIAM
J. JOHNSON
William
J. Johnson
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ J.W.
(JIM) NOKES
J.W.
(Jim) Nokes
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DONALD
H. SCHMUDE
Donald
H. Schmude
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ MICHAEL
E. WILEY
Michael
E. Wiley
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2008
|
105