exp-10k_20190331.htm

 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

ANNUAL REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the Fiscal Year Ended

March 31, 2019

Commission File No. 1-12984

 

EAGLE MATERIALS INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

Delaware (State of Incorporation)

75-2520779  (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

5960 Berkshire Lane, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75225 (Address of principal executive offices)

(214) 432-2000 (Registrant’s telephone number)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

Title of each class

 

Trading

Symbol(s)

 

Name of each exchange on which registered

Common Stock (par value $.01 per share)

 

EXP

 

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      NO

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.   YES      NO

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      NO

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit such files). YES       NO

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or emerging growth company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer                                                                                                                        Accelerated filer     

Non-accelerated filer                                                                                                          Smaller reporting company

Emerging growth company  

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.    

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). YES      NO

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by nonaffiliates of the Company at September 30, 2018 (the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter) was approximately $4.0 billion.

As of May 21, 2019, the number of outstanding shares of common stock was:

 

Class

 

Outstanding Shares

Common Stock, $.01 Par Value

 

44,117,946

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Eagle Materials Inc. to be held on August 6, 2019 are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Report.

 


 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

 

 

PAGE

 

 

 

PART I

 

 

 

 

 

Item 1.

 

Business

 

1

 

 

Overview

 

1

 

 

Employees

 

3

 

 

Industry Segment Information

 

3

 

 

Where You Can Find More Information

 

25

Item 1A.

 

Risk Factors

 

26

Item 1B.

 

Unresolved Staff Comments

 

39

Item 2.

 

Properties

 

39

Item 3.

 

Legal Proceedings

 

40

Item 4.

 

Mine Safety Disclosures

 

40

 

 

 

PART II

 

 

 

 

 

Item 5.

 

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

41

Item 6.

 

Selected Financial Data

 

43

Item 7.

 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

43

Item 7A.

 

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

 

63

Item 8.

 

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

 

64

Item 9.

 

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

 

106

Item 9A.

 

Controls and Procedures

 

106

Item 9B.

 

Other Information

 

108

 

 

 

PART III

 

 

 

 

 

Item 10.

 

Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

 

109

Item 11.

 

Executive Compensation

 

109

Item 12.

 

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

 

109

Item 13.

 

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

 

110

Item 14.

 

Principal Accounting Fees and Services

 

110

 

 

 

PART IV

 

 

 

 

 

Item 15.

 

Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules

 

111

 

 

 

 

 

INDEX TO EXHIBITS

 

112

 

 

 

SIGNATURES

 

117

 


PART I

ITEM 1. Business

Overview

Eagle Materials Inc., through its subsidiaries, (the Company, which may be referred to as we, our, or us) is a leading supplier of heavy construction materials, light building materials, and materials used for oil and natural gas extraction in the United States. Our products are commodities that are essential in commercial and residential construction; public construction projects; projects to build, expand, and repair roads and highways; and in oil and natural gas extraction. Demand for these products is generally cyclical and seasonal, depending on economic and geographic conditions. We distribute our products across many United States markets, which provides us with regional economic diversification.

The Company was founded in 1963 as a building materials subsidiary of Centex Corporation (Centex). It operated as a public company under the name Centex Construction Products, Inc. from April 19, 1994 to January 30, 2004, at which time Centex completed a tax-free distribution of its shares to its shareholders, and the company was renamed Eagle Materials Inc. (NYSE: EXP).

Strategy

We consistently and rigorously pursue four overarching strategic objectives that differentiate us and contribute to our margin performance and growth: being a low-cost producer in all our markets, maintaining a decentralized operating structure, focusing solely in U.S. geographical markets, and achieving profitable growth through both strategic acquisitions and the organic development of our asset network.

Improve our low-cost producer position

Our goal and the bedrock of our strategy, is to be a low-cost producer in each of the markets in which we compete. We focus diligently on reducing costs and making our operations more efficient. Maintaining our low-cost position provides meaningful competitive, financial, and environmental benefits.

The products we make are basic necessities, and competition is often based largely on price, with consistent quality and customer service also important considerations. Thus, being a low-cost producer is a competitive advantage and can lead to higher margins, better returns and stronger free cash flow generation.

Being a low-cost producer is not only key to our commercial success, it also fully aligns with and advances our commitment to sustainable environmental practices. To maintain our low-cost producer position, we are always innovating our production processes with the aim of using fewer resources to make the same commodities. We regularly invest in technologies at our facilities to control emissions and to modify the fuels that we burn.

1

 


 

Maintain decentralized operating structure

The Company operates through a decentralized structure: operations are managed separately, and products are branded and marketed by our individual companies. This local-market strategy provides several benefits, including increased familiarity with our customers, higher brand recognition, and lower transportation costs, which is a meaningful advantage in the construction materials industry. We view our cement and wallboard plant systems each as integrated networks, allowing us to ship products and minimize freight costs. The impact of regional construction cycles on our businesses is mitigated to some degree by our geographic diversification and integrated network of plants.

Operate in attractive markets

Demand for our products depends on construction activity which tends to correlate with population growth. While the Company’s markets include most of the United States, approximately 70% of our total revenue is generated in ten states: California, Colorado, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wyoming. Population growth, which is a major driver of construction products and building materials demand, is expected to grow approximately 28% between the 2010 census and 2040 for these ten states, compared to 23% population growth for the United States as a whole, according to the latest update in December 2018 by the Weldon Cooper Center at the University of Virginia. In our Light Materials sector, we have located operations primarily in the southern part of the United States, known as the Sun Belt. According to the same study, population in the Sun Belt is expected to grow by approximately 38% between the 2010 census and 2040.

Achieve profitable growth through acquisition and organic development

We seek to grow the Company through acquisitions and the organic development of our asset network. Since 2012, we have expanded the Heavy Materials sector principally through acquisitions, with total investments of approximately $1.2 billion. Most recently, in 2017, we acquired a cement plant from Cemex in Fairborn, Ohio (the Fairborn Acquisition). These investments have more than doubled our U.S. cement capacity, making us the largest U.S.-owned cement producer.

The Fairborn Acquisition also expanded our geographic footprint so that we now have a contiguous, integrated cement system from California to Ohio and south to Texas. We have completed additional bolt-on acquisitions, which also contribute to our expanded geographic footprint. 

The Company will continue to proactively pursue acquisition opportunities that further our growth across the Heavy Materials sector. Our free cash flow enables us to consider acquisitions and organic growth opportunities that align with our return on investment profitability objectives.

When an otherwise attractive potential acquisition or investment in organic growth does not meet our return requirements, our practice is to return cash to shareholders. Since becoming a public company in 1994, our share count is down approximately 35%, and we have returned approximately $1.8 billion to our shareholders, through a combination of share repurchases and dividends.

Ongoing Strategic Portfolio Review

On April 18, 2019, we announced that the Company, with the support of our independent financial and legal advisors, is conducting a strategic review of its portfolio of businesses. The review is ongoing and the Company is carefully considering the full range of options for maximizing value to our shareholders, including a separation of our businesses, potential transactions with third parties and other strategic and financial alternatives. We do not intend to publicly discuss or announce developments with respect to the

2


 

review process until the Board has approved a definitive action or until the process has otherwise been concluded. There can be no assurance that the strategic portfolio review will result in any particular action or that a transaction will be consummated, nor can there be any assurance regarding the timing of any action or transaction.

EMPLOYEES

As of March 31, 2019, the Company had approximately 2,300 employees, of which approximately 800 were employed under collective bargaining agreements and various supplemental agreements with local unions.

Industry Segment Information

Our business is organized into three sectors: Heavy Materials, which includes the Cement and Concrete and Aggregates segments; Light Materials, which includes the Gypsum Wallboard and Recycled Paperboard segments; and Oil and Gas Proppants, which are used in oil and gas extraction.

 

Sector

Primary End Markets

Business Segments

Heavy Materials

Infrastructure

Cement

 

Commercial and

Residential construction

Concrete and

Aggregates

Light Materials

Residential construction

Gypsum Wallboard

 

 

Recycled Paperboard

Oil and Gas Proppants

Oil and Gas

Extraction

Frac Sand

 

For information about the financial results of our business segments, including revenue, average net sales prices, sales volume and operating earnings, please see pages 45-52.

Heavy Materials

Our Heavy Materials sector provides cement and concrete and aggregates for use in infrastructure, commercial, and residential construction. This sector comprises the Cement and Concrete and Aggregates segments. Demand has been strong for these construction products over the last several years. Cement consumption in the United States, as estimated by the Portland Cement Association (PCA), was approximately 106.1 million short tons in calendar 2018, compared with 103.8 million short tons in calendar 2017, and imported cement consumption was 15% of total sales in calendar 2018 compared with 14% in calendar 2017.

Cement

Cement is the basic binding agent for concrete, a primary construction material. Some concrete mixes also include other cementitious materials, such as slag and fly ash, which act as cement extenders and improve the durability of concrete. The principal sources of demand for cementitious materials are infrastructure, commercial construction, and residential construction, with infrastructure accounting for approximately 50% of the demand for cement.


3


 

The manufacturing process for portland cement primarily involves four main steps, as shown in the graphic below:

 

 

All of our cement plants use dry-process technology, and approximately 75% of our clinker capacity is from preheater or preheater/pre-calciner kilns, which are generally more efficient kiln types.

We also sell slag cement and fly ash. Slag granules are obtained from a steel company and processed in our grinding facility. Slag is used in concrete mix designs to improve the durability of concrete and reduce future maintenance costs. Fly ash is a by-product of a coal-fired power plant and acts as an extender of cement in concrete.


4


 

Cement Plants

We operate seven cement plants (one of which is operated through a joint venture), one slag grinding facility, and 19 cement distribution terminals. Our 5.2 million tons of clinker capacity is approximately 5% of total U.S. clinker capacity. Our cement companies focus on the American heartland and operate as an integrated network selling product in Arkansas, California, Colorado, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming. Our joint venture includes a minority interest in an import terminal in Houston, Texas, from which we can purchase up to 495,000 short tons annually. Our slag facility is located near Chicago, Illinois, and our slag product is sold primarily in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Ohio, Minnesota, Missouri, and Kansas. The following table sets forth information regarding our cement plants (tons are in thousands of short tons):

 

Plant Location

 

Owned or

Leased

Reserves

 

Rated Annual

Clinker

Capacity (1)

 

 

Annual

Grinding

Capacity

 

 

Manufacturing

Process

 

Number

of Kilns

 

Kiln

Dedication

Date

 

Estimated

Minimum

Limestone

Reserves (2)

 

 

Estimated

Minimum

Limestone

Reserves

(Years) (3)

 

 

Fiscal

2019

Tons

Mined

 

Buda, TX

 

Owned

 

 

1,300

 

(4)

 

1,435

 

 

Dry – 4 Stage Preheater/

Pre-calciner

 

1

 

1983

 

 

224,550

 

 

50+

 

 

 

1,700

 

LaSalle, IL

 

Owned

 

 

1,000

 

 

 

1,100

 

 

Dry – 5 Stage Preheater/Pre-calciner

 

1

 

2006

 

 

44,760

 

 

 

39

 

 

 

1,065

 

Sugar Creek, MO

 

Owned

 

 

1,000

 

 

 

1,100

 

 

Dry – 5 Stage Preheater/Pre-calciner

 

1

 

2002

 

 

126,300

 

 

50+

 

 

 

1,060

 

 

 

Leased

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10,600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laramie, WY

 

Owned

 

 

650

 

 

 

800

 

 

Dry – 2 Stage Preheater

 

1

 

1988

 

 

98,100

 

 

50+

 

 

 

845

 

 

 

Leased

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

99,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dry – Long Dry Kiln

 

1

 

1996

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tulsa, OK

 

Owned

 

 

650

 

 

 

900

 

 

Dry – Long Dry Kiln

 

1

 

1961

 

 

38,900

 

 

 

42

 

 

 

815

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dry Long Dry Kiln

 

1

 

1964

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fernley, NV

 

Owned

 

 

500

 

 

 

550

 

 

Dry – Long Dry Kiln

 

1

 

1964

 

 

14,000

 

 

50+

 

 

 

635

 

 

 

Leased

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dry – 1 Stage Preheater

 

1

 

1969

 

 

69,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fairborn, OH

 

Owned

 

 

730

 

 

 

980

 

 

Dry – 4 Stage Preheater

 

1

 

1974

 

 

25,600

 

 

 

29

 

 

 

915

 

Total-Gross

 

 

 

 

5,830

 

 

 

6,865

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total-Net (5)

 

 

 

 

5,180

 

 

 

6,150

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1)

One short ton equals 2,000 pounds.

(2)

All limestone reserves are considered to be probable under the definition provided by Industry Guide 7.

(3)

Years of limestone reserves calculated using annual rated capacity.

(4)

The amount shown represents 100% of plant capacity and production. This plant is owned by a separate limited partnership in which the Company has a 50% interest.

(5)

Net of partner’s 50% interest in the Buda, Texas plant.

All of our cement subsidiaries are wholly owned except the Buda, Texas plant (the Joint Venture), which is owned by Texas Lehigh Cement Company LP, a limited partnership joint venture owned 50% by us and 50% by Lehigh Cement Company LLC, a subsidiary of Heidelberg Cement AG.

Our cement production, including our 50% share of the cement Joint Venture production, totaled 4.9 million short tons in fiscal 2019 and 5.0 million short tons in fiscal 2018. Total net cement sales, including our 50% share of cement sales from the Joint Venture, were 5.3 million and 5.4 million short tons in fiscal 2019 and fiscal 2018, respectively.

Raw Materials and Fuel Supplies

The principal raw material used in the production of portland cement is calcium carbonate in the form of limestone. Limestone is obtained primarily through mining and extraction operations conducted at quarries that we own or lease, and that are located in close proximity to our plants. We believe that the estimated recoverable limestone reserves we own or lease will permit each of our plants to operate at our

5


 

present production capacity for at least 25 years. The Company is actively seeking additional limestone reserves close to our plants and believes it will be able to acquire more reserves in the future. Other raw materials used in substantially smaller quantities than limestone are sand, clay, iron ore, and gypsum. These materials are readily available and can either be obtained from Company-owned or -leased reserves or be purchased from outside suppliers.

Coal and petroleum coke are the primary fuels used in our cement plants, but the plants are equipped to burn natural gas, if necessary. The cost of fuel increased in fiscal 2019, compared with fiscal 2018. The increase was due to higher coal and petroleum coke costs, as well as inbound freight costs to deliver the coal and petroleum coke. The Tulsa plant burns fuel-quality wastes, as well as coal and petroleum coke, and the Sugar Creek plant burns alternative fuels and petroleum coke. When we acquired Sugar Creek and Tulsa in late 2012, both plants had existing alternative fuels programs managed by a company that supplied alternative fuels and materials to the cement plants. In keeping with our commitment to sustainability and cost management, we continue to use these alternative fuels and materials programs at the Sugar Creek and Tulsa plants.

We have a long-term agreement with a steel manufacturer to supply granules necessary for grinding slag. This agreement requires us to purchase up to 550,000 tons of granules, which meet certain specifications, made available by the steel manufacturer each year.

Electric power is also a major cost component in the manufacturing process for both cement and slag, and we have sought to diminish overall power costs by adopting interruptible power supply agreements at certain locations. These agreements may expose us to some production interruptions during periods of power curtailment. Historically, we have not had many production interruptions under these agreements.

Demand, Sales, and Distribution

The principal sources of demand for cement and slag are infrastructure, commercial, and residential construction, with public works infrastructure comprising more than 50% of total demand. Cement consumption in the U.S. increased approximately 2% during calendar 2018 from calendar 2017, and the Portland Cement Association forecasts cement consumption will increase another approximately 2% in calendar 2019. Demand for cement is seasonal, particularly in northern states where inclement winter weather often affects construction activity. Cement sales are generally greatest from Spring through the middle of Autumn. Demand for slag has increased as the availability of fly ash has decreased due to the conversion of power plants from coal to natural gas.

The cement industry is extremely competitive: there are multiple domestic suppliers and foreign producers who import cement through various terminal operations. Approximately 85% of the U.S. cement industry is owned by foreign international companies.

Because of cement’s low value-to-weight ratio, the relative cost of transporting cement on land is high and limits the geographic area in which each company can market its products profitably. The low value-to-weight ratio generally limits shipments by truck to a 150-mile radius of each plant and up to 300 miles by rail; therefore, the U.S. cement industry is fragmented into regional geographic areas rather than a single national selling area. No single cement company has a distribution of plants extensive enough to serve all geographic areas, so profitability is sensitive to shifts in the balance between regional supply and demand.

6


 

Cement imports into the U.S. occur primarily to supplement domestic cement production or to supply a particular region. Cement is typically imported into deep water ports, along the coast or on the Great Lakes, or it is transported on the Mississippi River system near major population centers. This is done to take advantage of lower waterborne freight costs versus higher truck and rail transportation costs that U.S.-based manufacturers incur to deliver into the same areas.

The Portland Cement Association estimates that imports represented approximately 15% of cement used in the U.S. during calendar 2018, compared with 14% in calendar 2017.  The PCA also estimates that imports will represent approximately 16% of calendar 2019 consumption. Based on the normal distribution of cement into the market, we believe that no less than approximately 5% to 10% of the total consumption will consistently be served by imported cement.

The following table sets forth information regarding the geographic areas served by each of our cement and slag plants and the location of our distribution terminals in each area. We have a total of 19 cement storage and distribution terminals that are strategically located to extend the sales areas of our plants.

 

Plant Location

 

Type of Plant

 

Operating Company Name

 

Principal Geographic Areas

 

Distribution Terminals (1)

Buda, Texas

 

Cement

 

Texas Lehigh Cement Company LP

 

Texas and western

Louisiana

 

Corpus Christi, Texas; Houston, Texas;

Roanoke (Fort Worth), Texas; Waco,

Texas; Houston Cement Company

(Joint Venture), Houston, Texas

LaSalle, Illinois

 

Cement

 

Illinois Cement Company

 

Illinois, Michigan and

southern Wisconsin

 

Hartland, Wisconsin;

Ottawa, Illinois

Sugar Creek, Missouri

 

Cement

 

Central Plains Cement Company

 

Western Missouri, eastern

Kansas, eastern Nebraska

and Iowa

 

Sugar Creek, Missouri; Iola, Kansas;

Wichita, Kansas; Omaha, Nebraska;

Pleasant Hill, Iowa (2); Altoona, Iowa (3);

Springfield, Missouri;

Tulsa, Oklahoma

 

Cement

 

Central Plains Cement Company

 

Oklahoma, western

Arkansas and southern

Missouri

 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Laramie, Wyoming

 

Cement

 

Mountain Cement Company

 

Wyoming, Utah, Colorado

and western Nebraska

 

Salt Lake City, Utah; Denver, Colorado;

North Platte, Nebraska

Fernley, Nevada

 

Cement

 

Nevada Cement Company

 

Northern Nevada and

northern California

 

Sacramento, California

Fairborn, Ohio

 

Cement

 

Fairborn Cement Company

 

Ohio, eastern Indiana and

northern Kentucky

 

Columbus, Ohio

Chicago, Illinois

 

Slag

 

Skyway Cement Company

 

Illinois, Pennsylvania,

Iowa, Ohio, Minnesota,

Missouri and Kansas

 

Kansas City, Missouri; Etna, Pennsylvania;

Fairfield, Ohio (4)

 

(1)

Each of the above distribution terminals are capable of handling both cement and slag.

(2)

Currently under lease, which terminates during fiscal 2020. This terminal will be replaced by the Altoona terminal.

(3)

We also intend to sell slag cement from this terminal.

(4)

This facility is being leased.

During fiscal 2019, the leases we had with the former owner of the Skyway Plant for terminals in Cincinnati, Ohio; Des Moines, Iowa; St. Paul, Minnesota; and Tarentum, Pennsylvania expired and were not renewed. The terminal in Tarentum, Pennsylvania was replaced by the terminal in Etna, Pennsylvania; the terminal in Cincinnati, Ohio was replaced by the terminal in Fairfield, Ohio; and the terminal in Des Moines, Iowa was replaced by the terminal in Pleasant Hills, Iowa. The lease for the terminal at Pleasant Hills, Iowa expires in fiscal 2020 and is not expected to be renewed, and the terminal will be replaced by

7


 

the terminal in Altoona, Iowa. We are currently constructing a cement dome at Altoona, Iowa, which is expected to be completed by the end of fiscal 2020. We are leasing the new terminal in Fairfield, Ohio under an initial term of two years, with two one-year options.

Cement and slag are distributed directly to our customers mostly through customer pickups, and also by common carriers from our plants or distribution terminals. We transport cement and slag by barge and rail to our storage and distribution terminals.

No single customer accounted for more than 10% of our Cement segment sales during fiscal 2019. We do not typically enter into long-term sales contracts or have a significant level of order backlog. Cement and slag are generally sold to companies in private industry that contract with state and local entities for infrastructure and other public works projects.

Environmental Matters

Our cement operations are subject to numerous federal, state, and local laws and regulations pertaining to health, safety, and the environment. Some of these laws, such as the federal Clean Air Act and the federal Clean Water Act (and analogous state laws) impose environmental-permitting requirements and govern the nature and amount of emissions that may be generated when conducting particular operations. Some laws, such as the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (and analogous state laws) impose obligations to clean up or remediate spills of hazardous materials into the environment. Other laws require us to reclaim certain land upon completion of extraction and mining operations in our quarries. We believe that we have obtained all the material environmental permits that are necessary to conduct our operations. We further believe that we are conducting our operations in substantial compliance with these permits. In addition, none of our manufacturing sites is listed as a CERCLA Superfund site.

Eight environmental issues involving the cement manufacturing industry deserve special mention.

The first environmental issue involves cement kiln dust or CKD. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been evaluating the regulatory status of CKD under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) for several years. In 1999, the EPA proposed a rule that would allow states to regulate properly managed CKD as a non-hazardous waste under state laws and regulations governing solid waste. In contrast, CKD that was not properly managed would be treated as a hazardous waste under RCRA. In 2002, the EPA confirmed its intention to continue to exempt properly managed CKD from the hazardous waste requirements of RCRA. The agency announced that it would collect additional data over the next three to five years to determine if the states’ regulation of CKD is effective. To date, the EPA still has not completed its 1999 proposal to exempt properly managed CKD waste and establish protective CKD management standards. It is uncertain whether or when this proposal will be finalized. Nevertheless, in the interim, many state environmental agencies have been using the EPA’s 1999 proposed CKD management standards as general industry guidelines.

Currently, substantially all CKD produced in connection with our ongoing operations is recycled, and therefore such CKD is not viewed as a waste under RCRA. However, CKD was historically collected and stored on-site at our Illinois, Nevada, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Wyoming cement plants and at a former plant site in Corpus Christi, Texas, which is no longer producing cement. If either the EPA or the states decide to reclassify or impose new management standards on this CKD at some point in the future, we could incur additional costs to comply with those requirements with respect to our historically collected CKD. CKD that comes in contact with water might produce a leachate with an alkalinity high enough to be classified as hazardous and might also leach certain hazardous trace metals therein.

8


 

The second environmental issue involves the historical disposal of refractory brick containing chromium. Such refractory brick was formerly used widely in the cement industry to line cement kilns. We currently use a small amount of refractory brick containing chromium, all of which is properly disposed under applicable federal and state laws. Except for such chromium containing refractory, we crush substantially all of our refractory brick and use the crushed material as raw feed in the kiln.

The third environmental issue involves the potential regulation of our emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs), including carbon dioxide, under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The consequences of GHG emission reduction regulations for our cement operations will likely be significant because (1) the cement manufacturing process requires the combustion of large amounts of fuel to generate very high kiln temperatures; and (2) the production of carbon dioxide is a byproduct of the calcination process, whereby carbon dioxide is removed from calcium carbonate to produce calcium oxide.

In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, 127 S. Ct. 1438 (2007), that GHGs are air pollutants and, thus, potentially subject to regulation under the CAA, the EPA has taken steps to regulate GHG emissions from mobile and certain stationary sources. On September 22, 2009, the EPA issued a Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases final rule, which took effect December 29, 2009. This rule established a comprehensive scheme requiring operators of stationary sources in the United States emitting more than established annual thresholds of GHGs to monitor and report their GHG emissions annually on a facility-by-facility basis. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final rule finding that current and projected concentrations of six key GHGs in the atmosphere threaten public health and welfare. Based on this finding, on May 7, 2010, the EPA promulgated a final rule establishing GHG emission standards for new motor vehicles under Title II of the CAA, which was the first nationwide rule controlling or limiting GHG emissions. According to the EPA, because of the issuance of the motor vehicle rule meant that GHGs were regulated pollutants under the CAA, it triggered construction and operating permit requirements for large stationary sources of GHGs, including cement plants, under Title I of the CAA. On May 13, 2010, the EPA promulgated a final rule, known as the Tailoring Rule, addressing the thresholds at which stationary sources of GHGs trigger prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and Title V permitting requirements. PSD review requires an analysis of possible GHG controls and, potentially, the installation of GHG controls or emissions limitations.

On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion with respect to the Tailoring Rule holding that the EPA can require PSD controls for GHG emissions only for sources that are already subject to PSD review based on another pollutant – Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. E.P.A, 134 S. Ct. 2427 (2014). Following the Supreme Court decision, the EPA issued a memorandum clarifying that the EPA intends to continue to apply PSD requirements to GHG emissions if a source emits or has the potential to emit 75,000 tons per year (tpy) or more of GHGs until the EPA establishes a de minimis threshold for GHG emissions below which a source would not be subject to GHG PSD permitting requirements. The EPA announced its intention to propose a rule addressing the de minimis threshold for GHG PSD permitting in the summer of 2016. To date, the EPA has yet to propose such rule. Until the EPA issues a final rule addressing the de minimis threshold for GHG emissions, any major modification of our existing plants or construction of a new plant that triggers PSD review for non-GHG emissions also would trigger PSD review for GHG emissions if the proposed major modification or construction would result in a GHG emission increase of at least 75,000 tpy.

In October 2015, the EPA published a rule establishing guidelines for states to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from existing fossil fuel power plants (the Clean Power Plan). The Clean Power Plan established national performance rates for steam generating units and stationary combustion turbines as well as state emission reduction goals based on the application of the performance rates to a state’s unique generation mix. Numerous states and industry petitioners are challenging the Clean Power Plan

9


 

on multiple grounds. On February 9, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed implementation of the Clean Power Plan while the litigation is pending. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) held oral argument on the consolidated challenges to the Clean Power Plan on June 2, 2016. No opinion in that case has been issued. On April 28, 2017, at the request of the U.S. EPA, the D.C. Circuit issued a per curiam order holding the case in abeyance for 60 days to allow the U.S. EPA to determine whether to reconsider the Clean Power Plan. The EPA has indicated that it intends to significantly amend or repeal the Clean Power Plan. The D.C. Circuit has continued to hold the rule challenges in abeyance and the EPA must file status reports on its deliberations every 30 days.

On October 17, 2017, the EPA issued a proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan and set out a broad outline of options for replacing the Clean Power Plan. On August 31, 2018, the EPA proposed a new rule to replace the Clean Power Plan. The proposed rule, informally called the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, would limit GHG emission reductions to those that can occur with the fenceline of a power plant. The proposed rule identifies several qualifying technologies to improve heat rate at power plants. Under the proposed rule, standards of performance for GHG emissions would be established on a case-by-case basis by each state based on the qualifying heat rate improvement technologies.

In the future, it is possible that the EPA will propose performance standards for GHG emissions for other sectors, including cement manufacturing, so the ultimate outcome of the GHG regulations for power plants could affect the timing and form of standards for cement plants.

Several states have individually implemented or are presently considering measures to reduce emissions of GHGs, primarily through the planned development of GHG inventories or registries, or regional GHG cap and trade programs. California’s AB 32 program is the most advanced of such state initiatives, with regulations affecting all major sources of GHGs. The State of Washington also issued regulations imposing emission limitations on a broad set of industry sectors, although that rule, the Clean Air Rule, was invalidated by a state court judge on December 15, 2017. Washington appealed the ruling to its state supreme court, which heard oral arguments on March 19, 2019, but has not yet issued a decision. States also have joined together to form regional initiatives to reduce GHG emissions, including nine states in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). Two additional states are in the process of joining RGGI.

It is not possible at this time to predict how any future legislation that may be enacted or final EPA regulations that may be adopted to address GHG emissions would impact our business. However, any imposition of raw materials or production limitations, fuel-use or carbon taxes, or emission limitations or reductions could have a significant impact on the cement manufacturing industry and a material adverse effect on us and our results of operations.

The fourth environmental issue is the EPA’s promulgation on September 9, 2010 of final regulations establishing National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for portland cement plants (PC NESHAP) pursuant to Section 112 of the CAA. For specific hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), the final rule requires cement plants to meet certain emission and operating standards. The rule sets limits on mercury emissions from existing portland cement kilns and increases the stringency of emission limits for new kilns. The rule sets emission limits for total hydrocarbons, and also sets emission limits for particulate matter as a surrogate for non-volatile metal HAPS, from cement kilns of all sizes, and reduces hydrochloric acid emissions from kilns that are large emitters. As a result of industry challenges to the regulations, the EPA issued a revised rule on February 12, 2013. The revised rule made two notable changes to the 2010 HAP regulations. First, the rule established less stringent emission standards for total hydrocarbons and particulate matter. Second, the rule extended the deadline for existing sources to comply with the HAP regulations to September 9, 2015. We do not believe we are placed at a competitive

10


 

disadvantage by the revised rule. Pursuant to CAA Sections 112(d) and (f), the EPA determined on July 25, 2018, that no revisions to the HAP regulations are necessary to address residual risk from HAP emissions from portland cement plants, nor to account for developments in practices, process or control technologies. This determination has been challenged by environmental groups in the D.C. Circuit. The litigation in the D.C. Circuit is being held in abeyance while the EPA considers the environmental groups’ administrative petition for reconsideration of the determination.  

A fifth environmental issue involves excess emissions that may occur during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction. In June 2015, the EPA issued a rule requiring revisions to 36 state implementation plans (SIPs) that allowed exemptions or contained affirmative defenses to excess emissions during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM rule). The SIP revisions were submitted to the EPA in November 2016. The states required to revise their SIPs include states where the company has cement operations, such as Illinois, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Texas. Under the revised SIPs, companies would be required to comply with their emissions limits at all times, including during startup, shutdown, and malfunctions. States and members of industry have challenged the SSM rule in the D.C. Circuit. In addition, the State of Texas filed a petition with the EPA on March 15, 2017, requesting that the Agency reconsider the SSM rule as it applied to the Texas SIP.

On April 24, 2017, at the request of the EPA, the D.C. Circuit issued an order holding in abeyance the consolidated challenges to the SSM rule and canceling oral argument, which had been scheduled for May 8, 2017. In its motion, the EPA argued that oral argument should be delayed in light of the recent change in Administration. According to the motion, the EPA “intends to closely review the SSM rule, and the prior positions taken by the Agency with respect to the SSM rule may not necessarily reflect its ultimate conclusions after that review is complete.” The D.C. Circuit’s order requires the EPA to file status reports on the Agency’s review of the SSM rule at 90-day intervals. It further mandates that the parties file motions to govern future proceedings within 30 days of the EPA notifying the court and the parties what action it has or will be taking with respect to the SSM rule. As a result, we cannot predict how or whether the SSM rule will be changed.

On April 29, 2019, EPA Region 6 (which oversees a group of states that includes New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas) published a proposed finding that the affirmative defense provisions in Texas’s SIP applicable to excess emissions during periods of SSM are narrowly tailored and limited enough to be consistent with the CAA. Accordingly, EPA Region 6 also is proposing to withdraw the SSM rule as it applies to the Texas SIP, which means Texas would no longer be required to revise its SIP to address its existing affirmative defense provisions. The EPA is accepting public comment on the proposed rule through June 28, 2019. At this time, EPA Region 6 is not proposing to address other states’ affirmative defense SIP provisions; however, the Agency notes in the Texas proposal that it is considering reinstating the EPA’s prior policy that affirmative defense SIP provisions are generally approvable in Region 6 states.

The sixth environmental issue is the EPA’s promulgation pursuant to Section 129 of the CAA of revised regulations for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) units. CAA Section 129 requires the EPA to set standards for solid-waste incineration units. Affected sources must comply with the revised CISWI regulations the earlier of three years after State CISWI plan approval, or five years from the date of the final rule on reconsideration. On June 23, 2016, the EPA published a final rule reconsidering four provisions of the February 7, 2013 final CISWI rule, including relaxing the particulate matter standard for solid waste-burning kilns and eliminating the affirmative defense to penalties for non-compliance during well-documented malfunction events. On January 11, 2017, the EPA published a proposed federal plan that would implement the previously promulgated limits for existing CISWI units in states that have not submitted and received approval for a state plan. The proposed federal plan would have required owners or operators of impacted CISWI units to achieve compliance by February 7, 2018;

11


 

however, the EPA has yet to finalize the proposed federal plan. The EPA has approved several states’ implementation plans, including plans submitted by Colorado and Oklahoma. Compared to the PC NESHAP, the CISWI regulations contain requirements for more pollutants, and the requirement for dioxin/furans for existing and new sources is somewhat more stringent.

Whether a facility is a CISWI unit regulated under CAA Section 129 or a cement plant regulated under CAA Section 112 hinges on whether it combusts solid waste as that term is defined under Subtitle D of RCRA. On March 21, 2011, the EPA finalized (and on February 7, 2013, it revised) the Identification of Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials that Are Solid Waste (NHSM) rule. The NHSM rule’s primary purpose is to provide the definition of solid waste that is used to determine if a cement kiln is regulated under CISWI regulations or the PC NESHAP regulations. The rule lays out processing and legitimacy criteria that are used to determine if a non-traditional fuel is a solid waste. Combustion of a solid waste triggers applicability of the CISWI requirements. On July 29, 2016, the D.C. Circuit issued an opinion in U.S. Sugar v. EPA, No. 11-1108, largely upholding the 2011 and 2013 CISWI rules.

At some of our operations, kilns are or will be using non-hazardous secondary materials as a replacement for traditional fuels used in the manufacturing process. These kiln systems are capable of beneficially utilizing a wide array of NHSM and may be subject to the CISWI requirements, depending on whether these materials are identified as solid wastes under the NHSM rule. The EPA issued a rule clarifying the definition of solid waste and establishing a uniform recycling standard for all hazardous secondary materials recycling on January 13, 2015, which became effective on July 13, 2015. Solid waste–burning kilns must meet the CISWI emission and operating standards. Nonwaste-burning kilns must prove any alternative fuels used are not solid wastes. We do not believe we are placed at a competitive disadvantage by either the NHSM or the CISWI rule.

The seventh environmental issue is a revision to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for hazardous waste combustors (HWC NESHAP). The Tulsa, Oklahoma cement facility utilizes hazardous waste as fuel and is required to meet the emission and operating standards of the HWC NESHAP. This facility has demonstrated and remains in compliance with all of the requirements of the current HWC NESHAP. On October 12, 2005, the EPA promulgated final HWC regulations, with compliance required for all facilities by 2008. On October 28, 2008, the EPA promulgated a final rule addressing eight issues for which the EPA granted reconsideration of the 2005 rule. The final rule on reconsideration did not change the compliance date for existing sources established by the 2005 rule. Environmental and industry organizations filed lawsuits in the D.C. Circuit challenging the 2005 and 2008 regulations. The EPA subsequently agreed to revise the HWC NESHAP in accordance with an agreement with litigants, and the court in August 2009 granted EPA’s motion for voluntary remand, without vacatur, of the 2005 and 2008 regulations to the EPA for further consideration. The EPA has not indicated when it will issue a proposed rule amending the regulations. It is not possible to predict at this time the stringency or impact of revised HWC NESHAP regulations or timing required for compliance.

The eighth environmental issue is the EPA’s ongoing review and implementation of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone. In October 2015, the EPA strengthened the ozone NAAQS by lowering the primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) standards from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb. As a result of this change, the EPA was required to make attainment/nonattainment designations for the revised standards by October 2017. In November 2017, the EPA released a partial list of 2,649 counties (representing about 85 percent of U.S. counties) that meet the 2015 standards for ground level ozone or are not classifiable. States containing the remaining undesignated areas were notified by the EPA in December 2017 of the Agency’s intended recommendations and were given 120 days to provide additional information for the EPA to consider before making final designation decisions. On April 30, 2018, the agency released the area designations for all of the remaining undesignated

12


 

counties, except for eight counties in the San Antonio, Texas area.  The EPA designated 51 areas as nonattainment, one area as unclassifiable, and the remaining areas as attainment/unclassifiable. Most of the nonattainment areas were classified as marginal nonattainment. On July 17, 2018, the EPA released the area designations for the eight remaining Texas counties, seven of which were designated as attainment/unclassifiable and one, Bexar County, classified as being in marginal nonattainment. Nonattainment designations in or surrounding our areas of operations could have a material impact on our consolidated financial results. The CAA requires the EPA to review, and if necessary, revise the NAAQS every five years. Accordingly, the EPA is in the process of reviewing the ozone NAAQS, and is scheduled to complete this review in 2020.

We believe that our current procedures and practices in our operations, including those for handling and managing hazardous materials, are consistent with industry standards and are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations. Nevertheless, because of the complexity of our operations and the environmental laws to which we are subject, there can be no assurance that past or future operations will not result in violations, remediation costs, or other liabilities or claims. Moreover, we cannot predict what environmental laws will be enacted or adopted in the future or how such future environmental laws or regulations will be administered or interpreted. Compliance with more stringent environmental laws, or stricter interpretation of existing environmental laws, could necessitate significant capital outlays.

In fiscal 2019, we had $4.7 million of capital expenditures related to compliance with environmental regulations applicable to our cement operations. We anticipate spending $7.0 million during fiscal 2020.

Concrete and Aggregates

Readymix concrete is a versatile, low-cost building material used in almost all construction. The production of readymix concrete involves mixing cement, sand, gravel, or crushed stone and water to form concrete, which is then sold and distributed to numerous construction contractors. Concrete is produced in batch plants and transported to customers’ job sites in mixer trucks.

The aggregates business consists of mining, extracting, producing, and selling crushed stone, sand, gravel, and lightweight aggregates such as expanded clays and shales. Construction aggregates of suitable characteristics are employed in virtually all types of construction, including the production of readymix concrete and asphaltic mixes used in highway construction and maintenance.

Concrete and Aggregates Plants

We have 17 concrete batching plants and four aggregates facilities. We produce and distribute readymix concrete from company-owned sites north of Sacramento, California; Austin, Texas; and the greater Kansas City area. The following table sets forth information regarding these operations.

 

Location

 

Number of Plants

 

 

Number of Trucks

 

Northern California

 

 

3

 

 

 

25

 

Austin, Texas

 

 

6

 

 

 

85

 

Kansas City Area

 

 

8

 

 

 

91

 

Total

 

 

17

 

 

 

201

 

 

13


 

We conduct aggregate operations near our concrete facilities in northern California; Austin, Texas; and the greater Kansas City area. Aggregates are obtained principally by mining and extracting from quarries owned or leased by the Company. The following table sets forth certain information regarding these aggregate facilities.

 

Location

 

Owned or Leased

 

Types

of Aggregates

 

Estimated Annual

Production Capacity

(Thousand tons)

 

 

Estimated Minimum

Reserves

(Thousand Tons) (1)

 

 

 

Estimated Minimum

Reserves (Years)

 

 

Fiscal 2019

Tons Mined

(Thousand Tons)

 

Northern California

 

Owned

 

Sand and Gravel

 

 

4,000

 

 

 

910,900

 

 

 

100+

 

 

 

1,500

 

Austin, Texas

 

Owned

 

Limestone

 

 

3,000

 

 

 

4,300

 

 

 

 

23

 

 

 

1,965

 

 

 

Leased

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

65,300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kansas City Area

 

Owned

 

Limestone

 

 

700

 

 

 

57,000

 

(2)

 

50+

 

 

 

35

 

 

(1)

All reserves are considered to be probable under the definition of Industry Guide 7.

(2)

Includes reserves located in our underground mine that we believe can be economically used for aggregate supply.

Our total net aggregate sales were 3.2 million tons in fiscal 2019 and 3.5 million tons in fiscal 2018. Total aggregates production was 3.4 million tons in fiscal 2019 and 3.9 million tons in fiscal 2018. A portion of our total aggregates production is used internally by our readymix concrete operations in Texas, the greater Kansas City area, and California.

Raw Materials and Fuel Supplies

We obtain cement and aggregates for our concrete businesses from related companies, including our Joint Venture, as outlined below:

 

 

 

Percentage of Internally Supplied

 

Location

 

Cement

 

 

Aggregates

 

Northern California

 

 

100

%

 

 

80

%

Austin, Texas

 

 

35

%

 

 

45

%

Kansas City Area

 

 

100

%

 

 

25

%

 

We obtain the balance of our cement and aggregates requirements from multiple outside sources in each of these areas.

We mine and extract limestone, sand, and gravel, the principal raw materials used in the production of aggregates, from quarries owned or leased by us and located near our plants. The quarry serving our northern California business is estimated to contain more than nine hundred million tons of sand and gravel reserves. One of the quarries serving our Austin, Texas market is covered by a lease that expires in 2060. Based on current production capacity, we estimate our northern California and Austin, Texas quarries contain reserves of more than 100 years and approximately 23 years, respectively. Including reserves in our underground mine, our quarries in the Kansas City market currently have approximately 50 years of reserves. We are actively seeking additional, more economical reserves to extend the life of our reserves in the Kansas City market.

Demand, Sales, and Distribution

Demand for readymix concrete and aggregates largely depends on local levels of construction activity. Construction activity is also subject to weather conditions, the availability of financing at reasonable rates, and overall fluctuations in local economies, and therefore tends to be cyclical. We sell readymix concrete to numerous contractors and other customers in each plant’s marketing area. Our batch plants in Austin, Texas, the greater Kansas City area, and northern California are strategically located to serve each marketing area. Concrete is delivered from the batch plants primarily by company-owned trucks.

14


 

We sell aggregates to building contractors and other customers engaged in a wide variety of construction activities. Aggregates are delivered from our aggregate plants by common carriers and customer pick-up. We are continuing our efforts to secure a rail link from our principal aggregates deposit north of Sacramento, California to supply extended markets in northern California. No customer accounted for more than 10% of fiscal 2019 segment revenue.

The concrete and aggregates industry is highly fragmented, with numerous participants operating in each local area. Because the cost of transporting concrete and aggregates is very high relative to product values, producers of concrete and aggregates typically can profitably sell their products only in areas within 50 miles of their production facilities. Barriers to entry in each industry are low, except with respect to environmental permitting requirements for new aggregates production facilities and zoning of land to permit mining and extraction of aggregates.

Environmental Matters

The concrete and aggregates industry is subject to environmental regulations similar to those governing our Cement operations. (See pages 8-13.)

In fiscal 2019, we had $0.5 million of capital expenditures related to compliance with environmental regulations applicable to our Concrete and Aggregates operations. We anticipate spending approximately $0.5 million in fiscal 2020.

Light Materials

Our Light Materials sector produces gypsum wallboard, which is used in residential and commercial buildings, and recycled paperboard, which is used primarily in the manufacture of gypsum wallboard. The sector comprises the Gypsum Wallboard and Recycled Paperboard segments. Operations in this sector are concentrated in the Sun Belt of the United States, where the population is projected to grow approximately 38% between 2010 and 2040, according to the latest update in December 2018 by the Weldon Cooper Center at the University of Virginia. Population growth is a key long-term driver of demand for gypsum wallboard and recycled paperboard.

Gypsum Wallboard

 

Gypsum wallboard is used to finish the interior walls and ceilings in residential, commercial, and industrial structures. Our gypsum wallboard products are marketed under the name American Gypsum.

The gypsum wallboard manufacturing process involves four main steps, as shown in the graphic below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15


 

Gypsum Wallboard Plants

We own and operate five gypsum wallboard plants, outlined in the table below, and market our products under the name American Gypsum. We anticipate running all of our facilities at the level required to meet customer demand, up to maximum capacity. Our gypsum wallboard is distributed in the geographic markets nearest to our production facilities.

The following table sets forth certain information regarding our gypsum wallboard plants.

 

Location

 

Owned or Leased

Reserves (1)

 

Approximate Annual

Gypsum Wallboard

Capacity (MMSF) (2)

 

 

Estimated

Minimum Gypsum

Reserves

(Thousand Tons) (3)

 

 

 

Estimated

Minimum Gypsum

Reserves

(Years) (4)

 

 

 

Fiscal 2019

Tons Mined

(Thousand Tons)

 

Albuquerque, New Mexico

 

Owned

 

 

425

 

 

 

10,490

 

(5)

 

50+

 

(5)

 

 

330

 

 

 

Leased

 

 

 

 

 

 

54,700

 

(5)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bernalillo, New Mexico

 

 

 

 

550

 

 

 

 

 

(5)

 

50+

 

(5)

 

 

105

 

Gypsum, Colorado

 

Owned

 

 

700

 

 

 

21,200

 

 

 

 

31

 

 

 

 

460

 

Duke, Oklahoma

 

Owned

 

 

1,300

 

 

 

22,550

 

 

 

 

23

 

 

 

 

685

 

 

 

Leased

 

 

 

 

 

 

2,900

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Georgetown, South Carolina (6)

 

 

 

 

900

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

49

 

(6)

 

 

 

Total

 

 

 

 

3,875

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1)

Owned reserves include mining claims.

(2)

Million Square Feet (MMSF) based on anticipated product mix.

(3)

All gypsum tons are deemed probable under the definition provided by Industry Guide 7.

(4)

At 100% capacity utilization.

(5)

The same reserves serve both New Mexico plants.

(6)

We have a 60-year supply agreement with Santee Cooper for synthetic gypsum that expires in 2068.

Our Gypsum Wallboard production totaled 2,691 MMSF in fiscal 2019 and 2,614 MMSF in fiscal 2018. Total Gypsum Wallboard sales were 2,651 MMSF in fiscal 2019 and 2,555 MMSF in fiscal 2018.

Raw Materials and Fuel Supplies

We mine and extract natural gypsum rock, the principal raw material used in the manufacture of gypsum wallboard, from mines and quarries owned, leased, or subject to mining claims owned by the Company and located near our plants. Certain of our New Mexico reserves are under lease with the Pueblo of Zia. Gypsum ore reserves at the Gypsum, Colorado plant are contained within a total of 115 placer claims encompassing 2,300 acres. Included in this are 94 unpatented mining claims where mineral rights can be developed upon completion of permitting requirements. We currently own land containing gypsum in the area of Duke, Oklahoma, with additional reserves controlled through a lease agreement. Other gypsum deposits are located near the plant in Duke, which we believe may be obtained at a reasonable cost when needed. We are currently in the tenth year of a 60-year supply agreement (original 20-year term with two 20-year extension options) with a public utility in South Carolina for synthetic gypsum, which we use at our Georgetown, South Carolina plant. If the utility is unable to generate the agreed-upon amount of gypsum, it is responsible for providing gypsum from a third party to fulfill its obligations.

Through our modern low-cost paperboard mill, we manufacture sufficient quantities of paper necessary for our gypsum wallboard production. Paper is a significant cost component in the manufacture of gypsum wallboard, currently representing approximately one-third of our cost of production.

Our gypsum wallboard manufacturing operations use natural gas and electrical power. A significant portion of the Company’s natural gas requirements for our gypsum wallboard plants are currently provided by three gas producers under gas-supply agreements expiring in August 2019 for New Mexico and October 2019 for South Carolina, Colorado, and Oklahoma. If the agreements are not renewed, we

16


 

anticipate being able to obtain our gas supplies from other suppliers at competitive prices. Electrical power is supplied to our New Mexico plants at standard industrial rates by a local utility. For our Albuquerque plant we have an interruptible power supply agreement, which may expose it to some production interruptions during periods of power curtailment. Power for our Gypsum, Colorado facility is generated at the facility by a cogeneration power plant that we own and operate. Currently, the cogeneration power facility supplies power and waste hot gases for drying to the gypsum wallboard plant. We do not sell any power to third parties. Gas costs represented approximately 8% of our production costs in fiscal 2019.

Demand, Sales, and Distribution

The principal sources of demand for gypsum wallboard are (i) residential construction, (ii) repair and remodeling, (iii) non-residential construction, and (iv) other markets such as exports and manufactured housing. Industry shipments of gypsum wallboard were approximately 24.9 billion square feet in calendar 2018, compared to 25.3 billion square feet in calendar 2017. We estimate that residential and repair and remodel construction accounted for more than 85% of calendar 2018 industry sales.

Demand for gypsum wallboard remains highly cyclical and closely follows construction industry cycles, particularly housing construction. Demand for wallboard can be seasonal and is generally highest from Spring through the middle of Autumn.

We sell Gypsum Wallboard to numerous building-materials dealers, gypsum wallboard specialty distributors, lumber yards, home-center chains, and other customers located throughout the United States, with the exception of the Northeast. Gypsum wallboard is sold on a delivered basis, mostly by truck. We generally use third-party common carriers for deliveries. Three customers accounted for approximately 30% of our Gypsum Wallboard segment sales during fiscal 2019.

Although gypsum wallboard is distributed principally in local areas, certain industry producers (including the Company) have the ability to ship gypsum wallboard by rail outside their usual regional distribution areas to regions where demand is strong. We own approximately 100 railcars for transporting gypsum wallboard. Our rail distribution capabilities permit us to service customers in markets on both the east and west coasts, except for the Northeast. Less than 10% of our Wallboard volume sold was delivered via rail.

There are seven manufacturers of gypsum wallboard in the U.S. operating a total of 62 plants, per the Gypsum Association. During 2018, Gebr. Knauf KG (Knauf) reached an agreement to acquire USG, and the transaction closed on April 24, 2019. We estimate that the three largest producers ‒ Knauf, National Gypsum Company, and Koch Industries ‒ account for approximately 60% of gypsum wallboard sales in the U.S.

Total wallboard-rated production capacity in the United States is currently estimated at approximately 40.0 billion square feet per year; however, certain lines have been curtailed and plants closed or idled. It is possible that previously closed plants or lines could be brought back into service.

Environmental Matters

The gypsum wallboard industry is subject to numerous federal, state, and local laws and regulations pertaining to health, safety, and the environment. Some of these laws, such as the federal Clean Air Act and the federal Clean Water Act (and analogous state laws), impose environmental permitting requirements and govern the nature and amount of emissions that may be generated when conducting particular operations. Some laws, such as CERCLA (and analogous state laws), impose obligations to clean up or remediate spills of hazardous materials into the environment. Other laws require us to reclaim

17


 

certain land upon completion of extraction and mining operations in our quarries. None of our gypsum wallboard operations is the subject of any local, state, or federal environmental proceedings. We do not, and have not, used asbestos in any of our gypsum wallboard products.

On April 17, 2015, the EPA published its final rule addressing the storage, reuse, and disposal of coal combustion products, which include fly ash and flue gas desulfurization gypsum (synthetic gypsum). We use synthetic gypsum in wallboard manufactured at our Georgetown, South Carolina plant. The rule, which applies only to electric utilities and independent power producers, establishes standards for the management of coal combustion residuals (CCRs) under Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, (RCRA), which is the Subtitle that regulates non-hazardous wastes. The rule imposes requirements addressing CCR surface impoundments and landfills, including location restrictions, design, and operating specifications; groundwater monitoring requirements; corrective action requirements; recordkeeping and reporting obligations; and closure requirements. Beneficial encapsulated uses of CCRs, including synthetic gypsum, are exempt from regulation. The rule became effective on October 19, 2015. Given the EPA’s decision to continue to allow CCR to be used in synthetic gypsum and to regulate CCR under the non-hazardous waste sections of RCRA, we do not expect the rule to materially affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Similarly, material effects on our business, financial condition, and results of operations are unlikely to result from administrative reconsideration by the EPA of certain aspects of the final CCR rule, because none of these pending actions currently seek to overturn the management of CCR as non-hazardous waste or the regulatory exemption for beneficial encapsulated use of CCR.

As discussed in greater detail in the “Environmental Matters” section for Cement, the EPA in October 2015 strengthened the NAAQS for ozone by lowering the primary and secondary standards from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb. The EPA completed its attainment/nonattainment designations for the revised standards for all areas of the United States in July 2018. Nonattainment designations in or surrounding our areas of operations could have a material impact on our consolidated financial results. EPA is in the process of reviewing the ozone NAAQS, which it is required to do every five years to determine if it is necessary to revise the standards.

Our gypsum wallboard manufacturing process combusts natural gas. It is possible that GHG emissions from our manufacturing could become subject to regulation under the CAA. For a more detailed discussion of this issue, see the “Environmental Matters” section of our Cement business description on pages 8-13.

Although our Gypsum Wallboard operations could be adversely affected by federal, regional, or state climate change initiatives, at this time, it is not possible to accurately estimate how future laws or regulations addressing GHG emissions would impact our business. However, any imposition of raw materials or production limitations, fuel-use or carbon taxes, or emission limitations or reductions could have a significant impact on the gypsum wallboard manufacturing industry and a material adverse effect on the financial results of our operations.

There were $0.2 million of capital expenditures related to compliance with environmental regulations applicable to our Gypsum Wallboard operations during fiscal 2019. We anticipate capital expenditures of approximately $0.3 million related to our Gypsum Wallboard operations during fiscal 2020.

18


 

Recycled Paperboard

Our Recycled Paperboard manufacturing operation, which we refer to as Republic Paperboard Company, is located in Lawton, Oklahoma, and has a technologically advanced paper machine designed primarily for gypsum liner production. The paper’s uniform cross-directional strength and finish characteristics facilitate the efficiencies of new high-speed wallboard manufacturing lines and improve the efficiencies of the slower wallboard manufacturing lines. Although the machine was designed primarily to manufacture gypsum liner products, we are also able to manufacture several alternative products, including containerboard grades and lightweight packaging grades. To maximize manufacturing efficiencies, primarily recycled industrial paperboard grades are produced.

Our paper machine allows the paperboard operation to manufacture high-strength gypsum liner that is approximately 10-15% lighter in basis weight than generally available in the U.S. The low-basis weight product utilizes less recycled fiber to produce paper that, in turn, requires less energy (natural gas) to evaporate moisture from the board during the gypsum wallboard manufacturing process. The low-basis weight paper also reduces the overall finished board weight, providing our Wallboard operations with more competitive transportation costs for both the inbound and outbound segments.

We intend to invest approximately $70.0 million to expand and enhance our papermill, which has been sold out for several years. This project will enable the facility to increase line speeds, which in turn increases output, and to replace high-cost raw materials with a lower-cost, more sustainable alternative. We expect the project to be completed by late spring 2020 and to increase our paper capacity by approximately 70,000 tons.

Raw Materials and Fuel Supplies

The principal raw materials in recycled paperboard are recycled paper fiber (recovered waste paper), water, and specialty paper chemicals. The largest waste paper source used by the operation is old cardboard containers (known as OCC). A blend of high grades (white papers consisting of ink-free papers such as news blank and unprinted papers) is used in the gypsum liner facing paper, white top linerboard, and white bag liner grades.

We believe that an adequate supply of OCC recycled fiber will continue to be available from sources located within a reasonable proximity of the paper mill. Although we have the capability to receive rail shipments, the vast majority of the recycled fiber purchased is delivered via truck. Prices are subject to market fluctuations based on generation of material (supply), demand, and the presence of the export market. Fiber prices in fiscal 2019 declined compared with fiber prices during fiscal 2018, which were higher than historical fiber prices. The current outlook for fiscal 2020 is for waste paper prices, namely OCC, to be lower compared with fiscal 2019. Current gypsum liner customer contracts include price escalators that partially offset and compensate for changes in raw material fiber prices. The chemicals used in the paper making operation, including size, retention aids, biocides, and bacteria controls, are readily available from several manufacturers at competitive prices.

The manufacture of recycled paperboard involves the use of a large volume of water in the production process. We have an agreement with the City of Lawton municipal services for supply of water to our manufacturing facility. Electricity, natural gas, and other utilities are available to us at either contracted rates or standard industrial rates in adequate supplies. These utilities are subject to standard industrial curtailment provisions.

19


 

Paperboard operations are generally large consumers of energy, primarily natural gas and electricity. We expect the cost of energy to remain consistent in fiscal 2020 compared with fiscal 2019. Electricity is supplied to the paper mill by Public Service of Oklahoma (PSO) and the Oklahoma Corporate Commission recently approved a 2% rate increase for the price of electricity. This power company is working to switch its fuel source dependency to natural gas, which could affect our electricity rates in future years. Oklahoma is a regulated state for electricity services, and all rate change requests must be presented to the Oklahoma Corporation Commission for review and approval before implementation. Natural gas costs in fiscal 2019 increased compared with fiscal 2018 but they are expected to decline in fiscal 2020. A significant portion of our natural gas requirements for our paper mill is provided under a gas supply agreement that expires in January 2020.  

Demand, Sales, and Distribution

Our manufactured recycled paperboard products are sold to gypsum wallboard manufacturers and other industrial users. During fiscal 2019, approximately 40% of the recycled paperboard sold by our paper mill was consumed by the Company’s Gypsum Wallboard manufacturing operations. We also have contracts with three other gypsum wallboard manufacturers that represent approximately 55% of our total segment revenue with the remaining volume shipped to other gypsum liner manufacturers. The current contracts with other gypsum wallboard manufacturers expire in four to six years. The loss of any of these contracts or a termination or reduction of their current production of gypsum wallboard, unless replaced by a commercially similar arrangement, could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Environmental Matters

There were no capital expenditures related to compliance with environmental regulations applicable to our Recycled Paperboard operations during fiscal 2019, and none are expected in 2020.

Oil and Gas Proppants

 

The Oil and Gas Proppants sector produces frac sand used in oil and natural gas exploration, and provides transloading and storage for well servicing companies.

Facilities

We currently own two northern white frac sand mines, three frac sand wet processing plants, and four frac sand drying facilities. Our frac sand mines and wet plants are in New Auburn, Wisconsin and Utica, Illinois. Our frac sand drying facilities are currently in New Auburn, Wisconsin; Utica, Illinois; and Corpus Christi, Texas, as outlined in the table below. Sand is processed into various mesh sizes and marketed primarily to oil service companies.


20


 

The following table provides information regarding our frac sand production facilities at March 31, 2019.

 

Wet Plant Location

 

Owned or

Leased Reserves

 

Estimated Annual Wet

Production Capacity

(Thousand Tons) (3)

 

 

Estimated Minimum

Reserves

(Thousand Tons) (1)

 

 

Estimated Minimum

Reserves (Years)

 

 

 

Fiscal 2019

Tons Mined

(Thousand Tons) (2)

 

New Auburn, Wisconsin

 

Owned

 

 

2,800

 

 

 

28,270

 

 

 

12

 

(2)

 

 

1,700

 

 

 

Leased

 

 

 

 

 

 

7,660

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Utica, Illinois

 

Owned

 

 

2,200

 

 

 

139,300

 

 

50+

 

 

 

 

645

 

 

Dry Plant Location

 

Dry Plant Capacity (Thousand Tons)

 

New Auburn, Wisconsin (two lines)

 

 

1,900

 

Corpus Christi, Texas

 

 

1,000

 

Utica, Illinois

 

 

1,600

 

Total

 

 

4,500

 

 

(1)

All sand tons are deemed to be probable under the definition provided by Industry Guide 7.

(2)

We have an option to purchase property that, if purchased, will increase our estimated minimum reserves to approximately 20 years.

(3)

Represents throughput capacity.

During fiscal 2019, we completed the build-out of our Utica, Illinois facility that was started in fiscal 2018. The facility was completed in June 2018, and we began shipping sand out of this facility in July 2018. During fiscal 2018, we recommissioned our Corpus Christi plant which we idled in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2016. This plant operated for the first four months of fiscal 2019 before it was idled, and it remained idled through the end of the fiscal year. The Corpus Christi plant can be supplied with wet sand via barge from our mine in Utica, Illinois, or other outside sources. The cost of maintaining the idled Corpus Christi plant is not significant.

Raw Materials and Fuel Supplies

We mine our frac sand from open pit mines and process the sand in our wet plants. The excavation process includes stripping the overburden overlaying the planned mining area and then removing the sand through blasting or mechanically removing it with the use of mobile equipment. Processing includes washing the sand with water and screening to remove nonsalable material, after which the sand is dried and further screened to its final mesh sizes, which range from 20 mesh to 140 mesh. During the winter months, the cold weather adversely affects our ability to operate our wet processing plants, resulting in these plants being shut down for much of the winter. Generally, our New Auburn, Wisconsin facility is affected more by the weather than our Utica, Illinois facility.

Natural gas is the major fuel used in our dry plants. The cost of natural gas increased throughout fiscal 2019 and is not expected to fluctuate materially in fiscal 2020. Electricity and water are also a major cost component in our manufacturing process. We do not anticipate significant changes in the cost of these utilities in fiscal 2020.

Demand, Sales, and Distribution

Frac sand is currently sold into shale deposit zones across the United States. Demand for oil and gas proppants is driven primarily by rig counts and well‒completion activity.

Drilling and completion activity for oil and gas is very cyclical in nature. Drilling activity is based on many factors, but the primary factor is oil and gas pricing. During the first half of calendar 2018, drilling activity was strong, and demand was steady. Demand declined during the second half of calendar 2018 as oil prices declined. Demand in the Permian Basin was also affected by the shortage of pipeline capacity, which made it difficult to move the oil from the basin to the refineries. Additional pipeline capacity is being

21


 

constructed, and is expected to be completed by the end of calendar 2019. Pricing for northern white sand was adversely affected by the decreased demand and the increased availability and use of in-basin sand, which has a lower cost due to the proximity of the sand to the wellhead.  

A portion of the frac sand we produce is sold under long-term contracts that require our customers to pay a specified price per mesh size for a specified volume of sand each month or quarter, depending on the contract. The terms of our contracts, including pricing, delivery, and mesh distribution, vary by customer. Certain of our long-term customer contracts contain liquidated damages for non-performance by our customers. As the demand has slowed, we have negotiated new contract terms with certain of our customers. The renegotiated contracts reflect the reduced demand for frac sand in the current environment by restructuring the contracts to provide reduced contracted sales volume and prices in the near term, with the contracted minimums being increased in the later years. In addition to the long-term sales contracts, we sell frac sand through our distribution network under short-term pricing and other agreements. The terms of our short-term pricing agreements vary by customer.

We currently have contracts to provide frac sand to four customers, which comprised approximately 85% of our segment revenue for fiscal 2019. These contracts have an average remaining life of approximately two years.

 

The frac sand distribution business offers transload services to oil field service companies.  These services are provided across several basins, through the following primary facilities:

 

Location

 

Owned or

Leased

 

Basin

 

Rail Access

El Reno, Oklahoma

 

Leased

 

Midcon

 

Yes

Fairview, North Dakota

 

Owned

 

Bakken

 

Yes

New Town, North Dakota

 

Leased

 

Bakken

 

Yes

Hannibal, Ohio

 

Leased

 

Marcelus

 

Yes

Lemont Furnace, Pennsylvania

 

Leased

 

Marcelus

 

Yes

Kenedy, Texas

 

Owned

 

Eagle Ford

 

No

Fowlerton, Texas

 

Owned

 

Eagle Ford

 

No

Gonzales, Texas

 

Owned

 

Eagle Ford

 

Yes

Odessa, Texas

 

Owned

 

Permian

 

Yes

Batesville, Arkansas

 

Owned

 

Haynesville

 

Yes

 

Our Hannibal, Ohio distribution terminal is served by barge as well as by rail, and the Kenedy, Texas and Fowlerton, Texas trans-load sites are served by truck from Corpus Christi, Texas. All other distribution locations are served by rail from either our Utica, Illinois or New Auburn, Wisconsin locations. At March 31, 2019, the Kenedy, Texas; Fowlerton, Texas; Gonzales, Texas; Odessa, Texas; and Batesville, Arkansas terminals were idled. The cost of maintaining these idled facilities is not significant.

At March 31, 2019, we had approximately 2,000 rail cars under lease, with an average term of approximately 3 years.

During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2019, continued declining prices and operating results in our Oil and Gas Proppants business indicated there were impairment indicators related to our long-lived assets. We reviewed our long-lived, intangible and other assets and determined that certain assets were impaired, and we recorded a $220.3 million impairment loss at March 31, 2019. See Footnote (A) of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on this impairment.

22


 

Environmental Matters

We and the commercial silica industry are subject to extensive governmental regulation pertaining to matters such as permitting and licensing requirements, plant and wildlife protection, hazardous materials, air and water emissions, and environmental contamination and reclamation. A variety of federal, state, and local agencies implement and enforce these regulations.

Federal Regulation

At the federal level, we may be required to obtain permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands and streams, in connection with our operations. We also may be required to obtain permits under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act from the EPA or the state environmental agencies, to which the EPA has delegated local implementation of the permit program, for discharges of pollutants into waters of the United States, including discharges of wastewater or storm-water runoff associated with construction activities. Failure to obtain these required permits, or to comply with their terms, could subject us to administrative, civil, and criminal penalties as well as injunctive relief.

The federal Clean Air Act and comparable state laws regulate emissions of various air pollutants through air emissions permitting programs and the imposition of other requirements. These regulatory programs may require us to install expensive emissions abatement equipment, modify operational practices, and obtain permits for existing or new operations. Before commencing construction on a new or modified source of air emissions, such laws may require us to reduce emissions at existing facilities. As a result, we may be required to incur increased capital and operating costs to comply with these regulations. We could be subject to administrative, civil, and criminal penalties as well as injunctive relief for noncompliance with air permits or other requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and comparable state laws and regulations.

As part of our operations, we use or store petroleum products and other substances such as diesel fuel, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluid. We are subject to regulatory programs pertaining to the storage, use, transportation, and disposal of these substances. Spills or releases may occur in the course of our operations, and we could incur substantial costs and liabilities as a result of such spills or releases, including claims for damage or injury to property and persons. CERCLA and comparable state laws may impose joint and several liability, without regard to fault or legality of conduct, on classes of persons who are considered to be responsible for the release of hazardous substances into the environment. These persons include the owner or operator of the site where the release occurred, and anyone who disposed of, or arranged for disposal, including offsite disposal, of a hazardous substance generated or released at the site. Under CERCLA, such persons may be subject to liability for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances, for damages to natural resources, and for the costs of certain health studies. In addition, it is not uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by the hazardous substances released into the environment.

In addition, RCRA and comparable state statutes regulate the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, disposal, and cleanup of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. The EPA and state environmental agencies, to which the EPA has delegated portions of the RCRA program for local implementation, administer the RCRA program.

Our operations may also be subject to broad environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires federal agencies to evaluate the environmental impact of all “major federal actions” significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The granting of a federal permit for a major development project, such as a mining operation, may be considered a “major federal

23


 

action” that requires review under NEPA. Therefore, our projects may require review and evaluation under NEPA. As part of this evaluation, the federal agency considers a broad array of environmental impacts, including, among other things, impacts on air quality, water quality, wildlife (including threatened and endangered species), historic and archaeological resources, geology, socioeconomics, and aesthetics. NEPA also requires the consideration of alternatives to the project. The NEPA review process, especially the preparation of a full environmental impact statement, can be time consuming and expensive. The purpose of the NEPA review process is to inform federal agencies’ decision-making on whether federal approval should be granted for a project and to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of a proposed project. Though NEPA requires only that an environmental evaluation be conducted and does not mandate a particular result, a federal agency could decide to deny a permit or impose certain conditions on its approval, based on its environmental review under NEPA, or a third party could challenge the adequacy of a NEPA review in court and thereby delay or block the issuance of a federal permit or approval.

Federal agencies granting permits for our operations also must consider impacts to endangered and threatened species and their habitat under the Endangered Species Act. We also must comply with, and are subject to liability under, the Endangered Species Act, which prohibits and imposes stringent penalties for the harming of endangered or threatened species and their habitat. Federal agencies also must consider a project’s impacts on historic or archaeological resources under the National Historic Preservation Act, and we may be required to conduct archaeological surveys of project sites and to avoid or preserve historical areas or artifacts.

State and Local Regulation

We are also subject to a variety of state and local environmental review and permitting requirements. Some states, including Wisconsin where one of our operations is located, have state laws similar to NEPA; thus, our development of a new site or the expansion of an existing site may be subject to comprehensive state environmental reviews even if the project is not subject to NEPA. In some cases, the state environmental review may be more stringent than the federal review. Our operations may require state-law based permits in addition to federal permits, which obligate state agencies to consider a range of issues, many the same as federal agencies, including, among other things, a project’s impact on wildlife and their habitats, historic and archaeological sites, aesthetics, agricultural operations, and scenic areas. Wisconsin and some other states also have specific permitting and review processes for commercial silica mining operations, and state agencies may impose different or additional monitoring or mitigation requirements than federal agencies. The development of new sites and our existing operations also are subject to a variety of local environmental and regulatory requirements, including land use, zoning, building, and transportation requirements.

Some local communities have expressed concern regarding silica sand mining operations. These concerns have generally included exposure to ambient silica sand dust, truck traffic, water usage, and blasting. In response, certain state and local communities have developed, or are in the process of developing, regulations or zoning restrictions intended to minimize the potential for dust to become airborne, control the flow of truck traffic, significantly curtail the area available for mining activities, require compensation to local residents for potential impacts of mining activities and, in some cases, ban issuance of new permits for mining activities. We are not aware of any proposals for significant increased scrutiny on the part of state or local regulators in the jurisdictions in which we operate, or community concerns with respect to our operations that would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations going forward.

24


 

Existing operations could be more significantly affected by increased regulatory activity. In an effort to minimize these risks, we continue to be engaged with local communities in order to grow and maintain strong relationships with residents and regulators.

There were no capital expenditures related to compliance with environmental regulations applicable to our Oil and Gas Proppants operations during fiscal 2019, and we do not anticipate any such expenditures during fiscal 2020.

Where You Can Find More Information

We publish our annual reports on Form 10-K and Form DEF 14a, Annual Proxy Statement; our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q; and current reports on Form 8-K. These reports along with all amendments to them, are available free of charge through the Investor Relations page of our website, located at www.eaglematerials.com as soon as reasonably practicable after they are filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This reference to our website is intended solely to inform investors where they may obtain additional information; the materials and other information presented on our website are not incorporated in and should not otherwise be considered part of this Report. Additionally, investors may obtain information by contacting our Investor Relations department directly at (214) 432-2000 or by writing to Eagle Materials Inc., Investor Relations, 5960 Berkshire Lane, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75225.

25


 

ITEM 1A. Risk Factors

The foregoing discussion of our business and operations should be read together with the risk factors set forth below. They describe various risks and uncertainties to which we are or may become subject, many of which are outside of our control. These risks and uncertainties, together with other factors described elsewhere in this Report, have affected, or may in the future affect, our business, operations, financial condition and results of operations in a material and adverse manner.

We are affected by the level of demand in the construction industry.

Demand for our construction products and building materials is directly related to the level of activity in the construction industry, which includes residential, commercial and infrastructure construction. While the most recent downturn in residential and commercial construction, which began in calendar 2007, materially affected our business, certain economic fundamentals began improving in calendar 2012, and have continued to improve; however, the rate and sustainability of such improvement remains uncertain. Infrastructure spending continues to be adversely affected by several factors, including the budget constraints currently being experienced by federal, state and local governments. Any decrease in the amount of government funds available for such projects or any decrease in construction activity in general (including any weakness in residential or commercial construction) could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our business is seasonal in nature, and this causes our quarterly results to vary significantly.

A majority of our business is seasonal with peak revenue and profits occurring primarily in the months of April through November when the weather in our markets is more suitable for construction activity. Quarterly results have varied significantly in the past and are likely to vary significantly in the future. Such variations could have a negative impact on the price of our common stock.

We are subject to the risk of unfavorable weather conditions, particularly during peak construction periods, as well as other unexpected operational difficulties.

Unfavorable weather conditions, such as snow, cold weather, hurricanes, tropical storms, and heavy or sustained rainfall, can reduce construction activity and adversely affect demand for construction products. Such weather conditions can also increase our costs, reduce our production, or impede our ability to transport our products in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Similarly, operational difficulties, such as business interruption due to required maintenance, capital improvement projects, or loss of power, can increase our costs and reduce our production. In particular, the occurrence of unfavorable weather conditions and other unexpected operational difficulties during peak construction periods could adversely affect operating earnings and cash flow and could have a disproportionate impact on our results of operations for the full year.

26


 

We and our customers participate in cyclical industries and regional markets, which are subject to industry downturns.

A majority of our revenue is from customers who are in industries and businesses that are cyclical in nature and subject to changes in general economic conditions. For example, many of our customers operate in the construction industry, which is affected by a variety of factors, such as general economic conditions, changes in interest rates, demographic and population shifts, levels of infrastructure spending, and other factors beyond our control. In addition, since our operations are in a variety of geographic markets, our businesses are subject to differing economic conditions in each such geographic market. Economic downturns in the industries to which we sell our products or localized downturns in the regions where we have operations generally have an adverse effect on demand for our products and negatively affect the collectability of our receivables. In general, any downturns in these industries or regions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Many of our products are commodities, which are subject to significant changes in supply and demand and price fluctuations.

Many of the products sold by us are commodities, and competition among manufacturers is based largely on price. Prices are often subject to material changes in response to relatively minor fluctuations in supply and demand, general economic conditions, and other market conditions beyond our control. Increases in the production capacity of industry participants for products such as gypsum wallboard, frac sand, or cement or increases in cement imports tend to create an oversupply of such products leading to an imbalance between supply and demand, which can have a negative impact on product prices. Currently, there continues to be significant excess nameplate capacity in the gypsum wallboard industry in the United States. There can be no assurance that prices for products sold by us will not decline in the future or that such declines will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We are subject to risks and uncertainties related to our strategic portfolio review.

On April 18, 2019, we announced that the Company, with the support of our independent financial and legal advisors, is conducting a strategic review of its portfolio of businesses. The review is ongoing and the Company is carefully considering the full range of options for maximizing value to our shareholders, including a separation of our businesses, potential transactions with third parties and other strategic and financial alternatives. There can be no assurance that the strategic portfolio review will result in any particular action or that a transaction will be consummated, nor can there be any assurance regarding the timing of any action or transaction. We will incur expenses in connection with the strategic portfolio review and our future results may be affected by the pursuit or consummation of any specific transaction or other strategic alternative resulting from the review. While the strategic portfolio review is ongoing, we are exposed to certain risks and uncertainties, including potential risks and uncertainties in retaining and attracting employees during the review process; the diversion of management’s time to the review; and exposure to potential litigation in connection with the review process or any specific transaction or other strategic alternative resulting therefrom, all of which could disrupt and negatively affect our business. Speculation regarding any developments related to the strategic portfolio review and perceived uncertainties related to the future of the Company could cause our stock price to fluctuate significantly. As of the date of this filing, there is no definite timetable for completion of the strategic portfolio, and we can provide no assurance that any transaction or other strategic alternative we may pursue will have a positive impact on our results of operations or financial condition.


27


 

Our business could be negatively affected as a result of a proxy contest.

On May 8, 2019, Sachem Head Capital Management LP, a stockholder of the Company, submitted a notice to us proposing to nominate two individuals to stand for election to our board of directors at our 2019 annual meeting of stockholders, in opposition to the nominees to be proposed by our board of directors. This proxy contest will require the Company to incur significant fees and expenses, and absorb significant time and attention by management and the board of directors. Furthermore, any perceived uncertainties as to our future direction and control could serve as a disruption to our long-term strategic plan, result in the loss of potential business opportunities, and impact our reputation and may make it more difficult to attract and retain qualified personnel and business partners, any of which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. At this time, we cannot predict the outcome, or the impact on the Company, of this proxy contest.

Our Cement business is capital intensive, resulting in significant fixed and semi-fixed costs. Therefore, our earnings are sensitive to changes in volume.

Due to the high levels of fixed capital required to produce cement, our profitability is susceptible to significant changes in volume. We believe that our current cash balance, along with our projected internal cash flows and our available financing resources will provide sufficient cash to support our currently anticipated operating and capital needs. However, if we are unable to generate sufficient cash to purchase and maintain the property and machinery necessary to operate our cement business, we may be required to reduce or delay planned capital expenditures or incur additional debt. In addition, given the level of fixed and semi-fixed costs within our Cement business and at our cement production facilities, decreases in volume could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.

Our Oil and Gas Proppants business and financial performance depends on the level of activity in the oil and natural gas industries.

Our operations that produce frac sand are materially dependent on the levels of activity in oil and natural gas exploration, development, and production. More specifically, the demand for the frac sand we produce is closely related to the number of oil and natural gas wells completed in geological formations where sand-based proppants are used in fracture treatments. These activity levels are affected by both short- and long-term trends in oil and natural gas prices. In recent years, oil and natural gas prices and, therefore, the level of exploration, development, and production activity, have experienced significant fluctuations. Worldwide economic, political and military events, including war, terrorist activity, events in the Middle East, and initiatives by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, have contributed, and are likely to continue to contribute, to price volatility. Additionally, warmer than normal winters in North America and other weather patterns may adversely affect the short-term demand for natural gas and, therefore, demand for our products. Reduction in demand for natural gas to generate electricity could also adversely affect the demand for frac sand. A prolonged reduction in oil and natural gas prices would generally depress the level of oil and natural gas exploration, development, production and well completion activity, and would result in a corresponding decline in the demand for the frac sand we produce. In addition, any future decreases in the rate at which oil and natural gas reserves are discovered or developed, whether due to increased governmental regulation, limitations on exploration and drilling activity or other factors, could have material adverse effect on our Oil and Gas Proppants business, even in a stronger oil and natural gas price environment.

28


 

Any material nonpayment or nonperformance by any of our key customers could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Any material nonpayment or nonperformance by any of our key customers could have a material adverse effect on our revenue and cash flows, in particular with respect to our Oil and Gas Proppants business. Our contracts with our customers provide for different potential remedies to us in the event a customer fails to purchase the minimum contracted amount of product in a given period. If we were to pursue legal remedies in the event that a customer failed to purchase the minimum contracted amount of product under a fixed-volume contract or failed to satisfy the take-or-pay commitment under a take-or-pay contract, we may receive significantly less in a judgment or settlement of any claimed breach than we would have received had the customer fully performed under the contract. In the event of any customer’s breach, we may also choose to renegotiate any disputed contract on less favorable terms (including with respect to price and volume) for us to preserve the relationship with that customer.

Volatility and disruption of financial markets could affect access to credit.

Difficult economic conditions can cause a contraction in the availability, and increase the cost, of credit in the marketplace. A number of our customers or suppliers have been and may continue to be adversely affected by unsettled conditions in capital and credit markets, which in some cases have made it more difficult or costly for them to finance their business operations. These unsettled conditions have the potential to reduce the sources of liquidity for the Company and our customers.

Our and our customers’ operations are subject to extensive governmental regulation, including environmental laws, which can be costly and burdensome.

Our operations and those of our customers are subject to and affected by federal, state, and local laws and regulations with respect to such matters as land usage, street and highway usage, noise level, and health and safety and environmental matters. In many instances, various certificates, permits, or licenses are required in order for us or our customers to conduct business or carry out construction and related operations. Although we believe that we are in compliance in all material respects with applicable regulatory requirements, there can be no assurance that we will not incur material costs or liabilities in connection with regulatory requirements or that demand for our products will not be adversely affected by regulatory issues affecting our customers. In addition, future developments, such as the discovery of new facts or conditions, the enactment or adoption of new or stricter laws or regulations, or stricter interpretations of existing laws or regulations, may impose new liabilities on us, require additional investment by us, or prevent us from opening, expanding, or modifying plants or facilities, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

For example, greenhouse gases (GHGs) currently are regulated as pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act and subject to reporting and permitting requirements. Future consequences of GHG permitting requirements and potential emission reduction measures for our operations may be significant because (1) the cement manufacturing process requires the combustion of large amounts of fuel; (2) in our cement manufacturing process, the production of carbon dioxide is a byproduct of the calcination process, whereby carbon dioxide is removed from calcium carbonate to produce calcium oxide; and (3) our gypsum wallboard manufacturing process combusts a significant amount of fossil fuel, especially natural gas. In addition, the EPA has proposed to regulate GHG emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired power plants as a result of the EPA’s promulgation of new source performance standards for the same sources. In the future, the EPA is expected to propose new source performance standards for GHG emissions from cement manufacturing, which similarly will trigger a requirement for the EPA to promulgate

29


 

regulations relating to GHG emissions from existing cement manufacturing facilities. The timing of such regulation is uncertain.

The EPA finalized National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, or NESHAP, for portland cement plants (PC NESHAP). The PC NESHAP required a significant reduction in emissions of certain hazardous air pollutants from portland cement kilns, including mercury, total hydrocarbons, particulate matter (as a surrogate for metal pollutants), and acid gases from cement kilns of all sizes. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to review and revise these standards within eight years based on any residual risk posed by emissions from cement plants, as well as periodically review and revise these standards to account for developments in practices, process or control technologies. EPA determined on July 25, 2018, that no revisions to the PC NESHAP are necessary to address residual risk or technological developments. This determination has been challenged by environmental groups in Downwinders at Risk v. EPA, No. 18-1260 (D.C. Cir.). The litigation in the D.C. Circuit is being held in abeyance while EPA considers the environmental groups’ administrative petition for reconsideration of the determination. In the future, the EPA may propose to further strengthen the emission limitations applicable under the PC NESHAP to reflect future technological developments. It is not possible at this time to predict whether or when such a rule making may be undertaken or whether it would have a material effect on the Company’s operations.

On March 21, 2011, the EPA issued a final rule revising the Standards of Performance for New Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources for Commercial/Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators (the CISWI Rule) per Section 129 of the Clean Air Act, which created emission standards for four subcategories of industrial facilities, one of which is “Waste Burning Kilns.” The EPA simultaneously stayed the CISWI Rule for further reconsideration. On February 7, 2013, the EPA finalized revisions to the CISWI Rule. For those cement kilns that utilize non-hazardous secondary materials (NHSM) as defined in the rule first finalized on March 21, 2011 (and slightly revised on February 7, 2013), the CISWI Rule requires significant reductions in emissions of certain pollutants from applicable cement kilns. The CISWI Rule sets forth emission standards for mercury, carbon monoxide, acid gases, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, certain metals (lead and cadmium), particulate matter, and more stringent standards than the PC NESHAP for dioxin/furans. The CISWI Rule required existing CISWI units (i.e., those that began construction before June 4, 2010) to be in compliance with emission limits in their state-submitted plans by the earlier of February 7, 2018 or three years after the effective date of state plan approval by the EPA. The Rule requires new CISWI units (i.e., those that began construction on or after June 4, 2010, or commenced reconstruction or modification after August 7, 2013) to be in compliance with the emission standards for new sources by the later of August 7, 2013, or the date of startup of the source. On January 11, 2017, the EPA published a proposed federal plan that would implement the emission limits for existing CISWI units in states that have not submitted and received approval for a state plan; however, the Agency has yet to finalize the proposed federal plan. On June 23, 2016, the EPA published a final rule reconsidering four provisions of the February 7, 2013 CISWI Rule, including relaxing the particulate matter standard for solid waste-burning kilns and eliminating the affirmative defense to penalties for non-compliance during well-documented malfunction events.

On April 17, 2015, the EPA published its final rule addressing the storage, reuse, and disposal of coal combustion products, which include fly ash and flue gas desulfurization gypsum (synthetic gypsum). We use synthetic gypsum in wallboard manufactured at our Georgetown, South Carolina plant. The rule, which applies only to electric utilities and independent power producers, establishes standards for the management of coal combustion residuals (CCRs) under Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which is the Subtitle that regulates non-hazardous wastes. The rule imposes requirements addressing CCR surface impoundments and landfills, including location restrictions, design and operating specifications, groundwater monitoring requirements, corrective action requirements,

30


 

recordkeeping and reporting obligations, and closure requirements. Beneficial encapsulated uses of CCRs, including synthetic gypsum, are exempt from regulation. The rule became effective on October 19, 2015, with many of the requirements phased in months or years after the effective date. Given the EPA’s decision to continue to allow CCR to be used in synthetic gypsum and to regulate CCR under the non-hazardous waste sections of RCRA, we do not expect the rule to materially affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Similarly, material effects for our business, financial condition and results of operations are unlikely to result from administrative reconsideration by the EPA of certain aspects of the final CCR rule, because none of these pending actions currently seek to overturn the management of CCR as non-hazardous waste or the regulatory exemption for beneficial encapsulated use of CCR.

On October 1, 2015, the EPA lowered the primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) ozone standards from the prior 8-hour standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb. An “area” (typically on the county level) will meet the ozone standards if the fourth-highest maximum daily 8-hour ozone concentration per year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than 70 ppb. The EPA completed its area designations for all areas in the United States in July 2018. Areas with ozone levels above the standards were designated as “nonattainment” (with classifications ranging from marginal to extreme nonattainment), areas with ozone levels at or below the standards were designated as “attainment/unclassifiable,” and areas with insufficient data for EPA to make an attainment determination were designated as “unclassifiable.” In states with major emitting sources located in or near nonattainment areas, states are required to impose new and costly regulatory requirements. For areas that were determined to be in nonattainment, states are required to develop plans to bring the areas into attainment by as early as 2020 (depending on when the nonattainment designation was made and what the nonattainment classification is, e.g., marginal, moderate, severe, or extreme). Out of the 16 states where we have operations, 10 states contain at least one area that was designated as being in nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS (California, Colorado, Illinois, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin). We may be required to meet new control requirements requiring significant capital expenditures for compliance.

Our cement plant located in Fernley, Nevada is subject to certain obligations under a consent decree with the United States requiring the establishment of facility-specific emissions limitations for certain air pollutants. Limitations that significantly restrict emissions levels beyond current operating levels may require additional investments by us or place limitations on operations, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Our cement plant in Tulsa, Oklahoma is subject to a NESHAP for hazardous waste combustors (the HWC NESHAP), which imposes emission limitations and operating limits on cement kilns that are fueled by hazardous wastes. Compliance with the HWC NESHAP could impose additional liabilities on us or require additional investment by us, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. In addition, new developments, such as new laws or regulations, may impose new liabilities on us, require additional investment by us, or prevent us from operating or expanding plants or facilities, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. For example, while the HWC NESHAP has not been updated since 2008, 73 Fed. Reg. 64068 (Oct. 28, 2008), future revisions to the HWC NESHAP regulations would apply to both of the cement kilns used at the cement plant in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Such revision could require new control requirements and significant capital expenditure for compliance.

31


 

Climate change and climate change legislation or regulations may adversely affect our business.

A number of governmental bodies have finalized, proposed, or are contemplating legislative and regulatory changes in response to the potential effects of climate change. Such legislation or regulation has and potentially could include provisions for a “cap and trade” system of allowances and credits or a carbon tax, among other provisions. Any future laws or regulations addressing GHG emissions would likely have a negative impact on our business or results of operations, whether through the imposition of raw material or production limitations, fuel-use, or carbon taxes emission limitations or reductions, or otherwise.

Other potential effects of climate change include physical effects such as disruption in production and product distribution as a result of major storm events and shifts in regional weather patterns and intensities. Production and shipment levels for our businesses correlate with general construction activity, most of which occurs outdoors and, as a result, is affected by erratic weather patterns, seasonal changes, and other unusual or unexpected weather-related conditions, which can significantly affect our businesses. There is also a potential for climate change legislation and regulation to adversely affect the cost of purchased energy and electricity.

The effects of climate change on our operations are highly uncertain and difficult to estimate. However, because a chemical reaction inherent to the manufacture of portland cement releases carbon dioxide, a GHG, cement kiln operations may be disproportionately affected by future regulation of GHGs. Climate change and legislation and regulation concerning GHGs could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.

Silica-related legislation, health issues and litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business, reputation or results of operations.

The inhalation of respirable crystalline silica is associated with the lung disease silicosis. There is evidence of an association between crystalline silica exposure or silicosis and lung cancer and a possible association with other diseases, including immune system disorders such as scleroderma. These health risks have been, and may continue to be, a significant issue confronting the frac sand industry and related transloading operations. Concerns over silicosis and other potential adverse health effects, as well as concerns regarding potential liability from the use or handling of frac sand, may have the effect of discouraging our customers’ use of our frac sand. The actual or perceived health risks of mining, processing, and handling frac sand could materially and adversely affect frac sand producers and those who transload frac sand, including us, through reduced use of frac sand, the threat of product liability or employee lawsuits, increased scrutiny by federal, state and local regulatory authorities of us and our customers. We are currently subject to laws and regulations relating to human exposure to crystalline silica. Several federal and state regulatory authorities, including MSHA and OSHA, may continue to propose and implement changes in their regulations regarding workplace exposure to crystalline silica, such as permissible exposure limits and required controls and personal protective equipment. We may not be able to comply with any new laws and regulations that are adopted and required modifications or cessation of operations at our affected operations could have a material adverse effect on those businesses. 

We may incur significant costs in connection with pending and future litigation.

We are, or may become, party to various lawsuits, claims, investigations, and proceedings, including but not limited to personal injury, environmental, antitrust, tax, asbestos, property entitlements and land use, intellectual property, commercial, contract, product liability, health and safety, and employment matters. The outcome of pending or future lawsuits, claims, investigations, or proceedings is often difficult to

32


 

predict and could be adverse and material in amount. Development in these proceedings can lead to changes in management’s estimates of liabilities associated with these proceedings including the judge’s rulings or judgments, settlements, or changes in applicable law. A future adverse ruling, settlement, or unfavorable development could result in charges that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows in a particular period. In addition, the defense of these lawsuits, claims, investigations, and proceedings may divert our management’s attention, and we may incur significant costs in defending these matters. See Part II Item 1. Legal Proceedings of this report.

Our results of operations are subject to significant changes in the cost and availability of fuel, energy and other raw materials.

Major cost components in each of our businesses are the costs of fuel, energy, and raw materials. Significant increases in the costs of fuel, energy, or raw materials, or substantial decreases in their availability could materially and adversely affect our sales and operating profits. Prices for fuel, energy, or raw materials used in connection with our businesses could change significantly in a short period of time for reasons outside our control. Prices for fuel and electrical power, which are significant components of the costs associated with our Gypsum Wallboard and Cement businesses, have fluctuated significantly in recent years and may increase in the future. In the event of large or rapid increases in prices, we may not be able to pass the increases through to our customers in full, which would reduce our operating margin.

Changes in the cost or availability of raw materials supplied by third parties may adversely affect our operating and financial performance.

We generally maintain our own reserves of limestone, gypsum, aggregates, and other materials that we use to manufacture our products. However, we obtain certain raw materials used to manufacture our products, such as synthetic gypsum and slag granules, from third parties who produce such materials as by-products of industrial processes. While we try to secure our needed supply of such materials through long-term contracts, those contracts may not be sufficient to meet our needs, or we may be unable to renew or replace existing contracts when they expire or are terminated in the future. Should our existing suppliers cease operations or reduce or eliminate production of these by-products, our costs to procure these materials may increase significantly, or we may be obliged to procure alternatives to replace these materials, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any such development may adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

We may become subject to significant cleanup, remediation, and other liabilities under applicable environmental laws.

Our operations are subject to state, federal, and local environmental laws and regulations, which impose liability for cleanup or remediation of environmental pollution and hazardous waste arising from past acts. These laws and regulations also require pollution control and prevention, site restoration and operating permits, and/or approvals to conduct certain of our operations or expand or modify our facilities. Certain of our operations may from time to time involve the use of substances that are classified as toxic or hazardous substances within the meaning of these laws and regulations. We are unable to estimate accurately the impact on our business or results of operations of any such law or regulation at this time. Risk of environmental liability (including the incurrence of fines, penalties, other sanctions, or litigation liability) is inherent in the operation of our businesses. As a result, it is possible that environmental liabilities and compliance with environmental regulations could have a material adverse effect on our operations in the future.

33


 

Significant changes in the cost and availability of transportation could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Some of the raw materials used in our manufacturing processes, such as coal or coke, are transported to our facilities by truck or rail. In addition, transportation logistics play an important part in allowing us to supply products to our customers, whether by truck, rail, or barge. For example, we deliver gypsum wallboard to many areas of the United States, and the transportation costs associated with the delivery of our wallboard products represent a significant portion of the variable cost of our Gypsum Wallboard segment. Significant increases in the cost of fuel or energy can result in material increases in the cost of transportation, which could materially and adversely affect our operating profits. In addition, reductions in the availability of certain modes of transportation, such as rail or trucking, could limit our ability to deliver product and therefore materially and adversely affect our operating profits.

Our debt agreements contain restrictive covenants and require us to meet certain financial ratios and tests, which limit our flexibility and could give rise to a default if we are unable to remain in compliance.

Our Credit Facility, Senior Unsecured Notes, and Series 2007A Senior Unsecured Notes contain, among other things, covenants that limit our ability to finance future operations or capital needs or to engage in other business activities, including but not limited to our ability to:

incur additional indebtedness;

sell assets or make other fundamental changes;

engage in mergers and acquisitions;

pay dividends and make other restricted payments;

make investments, loans, advances or guarantees;

encumber our assets or those of our restricted subsidiaries;

enter into transactions with our affiliates.

In addition, these agreements require us to meet and maintain certain financial ratios and tests, which may require that we take action to reduce our debt or to act in a manner contrary to our business objectives. Events beyond our control, including the changes in general business and economic conditions, may impair our ability to comply with these covenants or meet those financial ratios and tests. A breach of any of these covenants or failure to maintain the required ratios and meet the required tests may result in an event of default under these agreements. This may allow the lenders under these agreements to declare all amounts outstanding to be immediately due and payable, terminate any commitments to extend further credit to us, and pursue other remedies available to them under the applicable agreements. If this occurs, our indebtedness may be accelerated, and we may not be able to refinance the accelerated indebtedness on favorable terms, or at all, or repay the accelerated indebtedness. In general, the occurrence of any event of default under these agreements could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

34


 

We have incurred substantial indebtedness, which could adversely affect our business, limit our ability to plan for or respond to changes in our business, and reduce our profitability.

Our future ability to satisfy our debt obligations is subject, to some extent, to financial, market, competitive, legislative, regulatory, and other factors that are beyond our control. Our substantial debt obligations could have negative consequences to our business, and, in particular, could impede, restrict, or delay the implementation of our business strategy or prevent us from entering into transactions that would otherwise benefit our business. For example:

we may be required to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flows from operations to payments on our indebtedness, thereby reducing the availability of our cash flow for other purposes, including business development efforts, capital expenditures, or strategic acquisitions;

we may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow to meet our substantial debt service obligations or to fund our other liquidity needs. If this occurs, we may have to take actions such as selling assets, selling equity, or reducing or delaying capital expenditures, strategic acquisitions, investments and joint ventures, or restructuring our debt;

as a result of the amount of our outstanding indebtedness and the restrictive covenants to which we are subject, if we determine that we require additional financing to fund future working capital, capital investments, or other business activities, we may not be able to obtain such financing on commercially reasonable terms, or at all; and

our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and industry may be limited, thereby placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared with our competitors that have less indebtedness.

Our production facilities may experience unexpected equipment failures, catastrophic events, and scheduled maintenance.

Interruptions in our production capabilities may cause our productivity and results of operations to decline significantly during the affected period. Our manufacturing processes are dependent upon critical pieces of equipment. Such equipment may, on occasion, be out of service as a result of unanticipated events such as fires, explosions, violent weather conditions, or unexpected operational difficulties. We also have periodically scheduled shut-downs to perform maintenance on our facilities. Any significant interruption in production capability may require us to make significant capital expenditures to remedy problems or damage as well as cause us to lose revenue and profits due to lost production time, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Increases in interest rates and inflation could adversely affect our business and demand for our products, which would have a negative effect on our results of operations.

Our business is significantly affected by the movement of interest rates. Interest rates have a direct impact on the level of residential, commercial, and infrastructure construction activity by impacting the cost of borrowed funds to builders. Higher interest rates could result in decreased demand for our products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. In addition, increases in interest rates could result in higher interest expense related to borrowings under our Credit Facility. Inflation can result in higher interest rates. With inflation, the costs of capital increase, and the purchasing power of our cash resources can decline. Current or future efforts by the government to stimulate the economy may increase the risk of significant inflation, which could have a direct and indirect adverse impact on our business and results of operations.

35


 

Any new business opportunities we may elect to pursue will be subject to the risks typically associated with the early stages of business development or product line expansion.

We are continuing to pursue opportunities which are natural extensions of our existing core businesses and which allow us to leverage our core competencies, existing infrastructure, and customer relationships. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations – Executive Summary.” Our likelihood of success in pursuing and realizing these opportunities must be considered in light of the expenses, difficulties, and delays frequently encountered in connection with the early phases of business development or product line expansion, including the difficulties involved in obtaining permits; planning and constructing new facilities; transporting and storing products; establishing, maintaining, or expanding customer relationships; as well as navigating the regulatory environment in which we operate. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in the pursuit and realization of these opportunities.

We may be adversely affected by decreases or shifts in demand for frac sand or the development of either effective alternative proppants or new processes to replace hydraulic fracturing.

Frac sand is a proppant used in the completion and re-completion of oil and natural gas wells through hydraulic fracturing. Frac sand is the most commonly used proppant and is less expensive than ceramic proppant, which is also used in hydraulic fracturing to stimulate and maintain oil and natural gas production. A significant shift in demand from frac sand to other proppants, such as ceramic proppants, or a shift in demand from higher-margin frac sand to lower-margin frac sand, could have a material adverse effect on our Oil and Gas Proppants business. The development and use of new technology for effective alternative proppants, or new technologies allowing for improved placement of proppants at reduced volumes, or the development of new processes to replace hydraulic fracturing altogether could also cause a decline in demand for the frac sand we produce and could have a material adverse effect on our Oil and Gas Proppants business. Similarly, the continued presence of lower cost in-basin frac sand in the Permian and Eagle Ford basins, could continue to adversely affect our Oil and Gas Proppants business.

Our operations are dependent on our rights and ability to mine our properties and on our having renewed or received the required permits and approvals from governmental authorities and other third parties.

We hold numerous governmental, environmental, mining, and other permits, water rights, and approvals authorizing operations at many of our facilities. A decision by a governmental agency or other third parties to deny or delay issuing a new or renewed permit or approval, or to revoke or substantially modify an existing permit or approval, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue operations at the affected facility. Expansion of our existing operations is also predicated on securing the necessary environmental or other permits, water rights, or approvals, which we may not receive in a timely manner or at all.

Title to, and the area of, mineral properties and water rights may also be disputed. Mineral properties sometimes contain claims or transfer histories that examiners cannot verify. A successful claim that we do not have title to one or more of our properties or lack appropriate water rights could cause us to lose any rights to explore, develop, and extract any minerals on that property, without compensation for our prior expenditures relating to such property. Our business may suffer a material adverse effect in the event one or more of our properties are determined to have title deficiencies.

36


 

In some instances, we have received access rights or easements from third parties, which allow for a more efficient operation than would exist without the access or easement. A third party could take action to suspend the access or easement, and any such action could be materially adverse to our results of operations or financial conditions.

A cyber-attack or data security breach affecting our information technology systems may negatively affect our businesses, financial condition, and operating results.

We use information technology systems to collect, store, and transmit the data needed to operate our businesses, including our confidential and proprietary information. Although we have implemented industry-standard security safeguards and policies to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure of such information, we cannot prevent all cyber-attacks or data security breaches. If such an attack or breach occurs, our businesses could be negatively affected, and we could incur additional costs in remediating the attack or breach and suffer reputational harm due to the theft or disclosure of our confidential information.

We may pursue acquisitions, joint ventures and other transactions that are intended to complement or expand our businesses. We may not be able to complete proposed transactions, and even if completed, the transactions may involve a number of risks that may result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results, and cash flows.

As business conditions warrant and our financial resources permit, we may pursue opportunities to acquire businesses or technologies and to form joint ventures that we believe could complement, enhance, or expand our current businesses or product lines or that might otherwise offer us growth opportunities. We may have difficulty identifying appropriate opportunities, or if we do identify opportunities, we may not be successful in completing transactions for a number of reasons. Any transactions that we are able to identify and complete may involve one or more of a number of risks, including:

the diversion of management’s attention from our existing businesses to integrate the operations and personnel of the acquired business or joint venture;

possible adverse effects on our operating results during the integration process;

failure of the acquired business or joint venture to achieve expected operational, profitability, and investment return objectives;

the incurrence of significant charges, such as impairment of goodwill or intangible assets, asset devaluation, or restructuring charges;

the assumption of unanticipated liabilities and costs for which indemnification is unavailable or inadequate;

unforeseen difficulties encountered in operating in new geographic areas; and

the inability to achieve other intended objectives of the transaction.

In addition, we may not be able to successfully or profitably integrate, operate, maintain, and manage our newly acquired operations or their employees. We may not be able to maintain uniform standards, controls, procedures, and policies, which may lead to operational inefficiencies. In addition, future acquisitions may result in dilutive issuances of equity securities or the incurrence of additional indebtedness.

37


 

Our bylaws include a forum selection clause, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us.

Our bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any internal corporate claims within the meaning of the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL), (ii) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (iii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers, or employees to us or to our stockholders, or (iv) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the DGCL, will be a state or federal court located within the State of Delaware in all cases subject to the court’s having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our capital stock is deemed to have notice of and consented to the foregoing provisions. This forum selection provision in our bylaws may limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us. It is also possible that, notwithstanding the forum selection clause included in our bylaws, a court could rule that such a provision is inapplicable or unenforceable.

This report includes various forward-looking statements, which are not facts or guarantees of future performance and which are subject to significant risks and uncertainties.

This report and other materials we have filed or will file with the SEC, as well as information included in oral statements or other written statements made or to be made by us contain or may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Exchange Act of 1934, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You can identify these statements by the fact that they do not relate to matters of a strictly factual or historical nature and generally discuss or relate to forecasts, estimates, or other expectations regarding future events. Generally, the words “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “project,” “may,” “can,” “could,” “might,” “will,” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements, including statements related to expected operating and performing results, planned transactions, plans, and objectives of management, future developments, or conditions in the industries in which we participate, including future prices for our products, audits, and legal proceedings to which we are a party, and other trends, developments, and uncertainties that may affect our business in the future.

Forward-looking statements are not historical facts or guarantees of future performance but instead represent only our beliefs at the time the statements were made regarding future events, which are subject to significant risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are outside of our control. Any or all of the forward-looking statements made by us may turn out to be materially inaccurate. This can occur as a result of incorrect assumptions, changes in facts and circumstances, or the effects of known risks and uncertainties. Many of the risks and uncertainties mentioned in this report or other reports filed by us with the SEC, including those discussed in the risk factor section of this report, will be important in determining whether these forward-looking statements prove to be accurate. Consequently, neither our stockholders nor any other person should place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements and should recognize that actual results may differ materially from those that may be anticipated by us.

All forward-looking statements made in this report are made as of the date hereof, and the risk that actual results will differ materially from expectations expressed in this report will increase with the passage of time. We undertake no obligation, and disclaim any duty, to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, changes in our expectations, or otherwise.

38


 

ITEM 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

There are no unresolved Staff comments.

ITEM 2. Properties

Our operating facilities span the U.S. They include cement plants, quarries, and related facilities; aggregate plants and quarries; gypsum wallboard plants; a recycled paperboard mill; frac sand mines and processing plants; as well as distribution terminals and our headquarters in Dallas. Other than our leased cement plant located in Sugar Creek, Missouri, none of our facilities are pledged as security for any debts. Please see the Industry Segment Information section on pages 3-25 for more information about the location of our facilities.

The following map shows the locations of our operating facilities, by type of facility:

 

 


39


 

ITEM 3. Legal Proceedings

Domestic Wallboard Antitrust Litigation

Since late December 2012, several purported class action lawsuits were filed in various federal district courts, against the Company’s subsidiary, American Gypsum Company LLC (American Gypsum) and other wallboard manufacturers, alleging that the defendant wallboard manufacturers conspired to fix the price for drywall sold in the United States in violation of federal antitrust laws and, in some cases related provisions of state law. The Company and American Gypsum denied all allegations that they conspired to increase the price of drywall and asserted affirmative defenses to the plaintiffs’ claims.

On December 29, 2017, American Gypsum and the Company, entered into a settlement agreement (the Direct Purchaser Settlement Agreement) with counsel representing the direct purchaser class to settle all claims made against the Company, American Gypsum, and other manufacturers in the direct purchaser class action. The Direct Purchaser Settlement Agreement, in which the Company and American Gypsum deny all wrongdoing, also includes releases by the participating class members of the Company and American Gypsum as well as their subsidiaries, affiliates, and other related parties, for the time period from January 1, 2012, through the date of execution of the Direct Purchaser Settlement Agreement. On January 5, 2018, American Gypsum entered into a settlement agreement (the Indirect Purchaser Settlement Agreement) with counsel representing the indirect purchaser class to settle all claims against American Gypsum and the other manufacturers in the indirect purchaser class action. Under the Direct and Indirect Purchaser Settlement Agreements, the Company and American Gypsum agreed to pay a total of approximately $39.1 million in cash to settle the claims against them. These claims were accrued during March 2018, and we deposited approximately $38.8 million into a qualified settlement fund. The amount accrued under the Direct Purchaser Settlement Agreement was paid in July 2018 after approval by the District Court.

In March 2015, a group of homebuilders filed a complaint against the defendants, including American Gypsum, based upon the same conduct alleged in the consolidated class action complaints. Effective May 8, 2018, American Gypsum and the homebuilder plaintiffs entered into a settlement agreement (the Homebuilder Settlement Agreement) to settle all claims made against American Gypsum. The Homebuilder Settlement Agreement, in which American Gypsum denies all wrongdoing, includes releases by the homebuilder plaintiffs of American Gypsum as well as its subsidiaries, affiliates, and other related parties, for the time period prior to and including the date of execution of the Homebuilder Settlement Agreement. Under the Homebuilder Settlement Agreement, American Gypsum agreed to pay a total of $6.0 million in cash to settle the claims against it. At March 31, 2018, we accrued the total amount of this settlement, and this amount was paid in May 2018.

In June 2015, American Gypsum and an employee received grand jury subpoenas from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina seeking information regarding an investigation of the gypsum drywall industry by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. We believe the investigation, although a separate proceeding, was related to the same subject matter at issue in the litigation described above. On August 24, 2018, the Antitrust Division notified us that the investigation had been closed.

ITEM 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Information concerning mine safety violations or other regulatory matters required by Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Item 104 of Regulation S-K is included in Exhibit 95 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


40


 

PART II

ITEM 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Stock Prices and Dividends

As of May 18, 2019, there were approximately 1,300 holders of record of our Common Stock which trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol EXP.

SHARE REPURCHASES

Purchases of the Company’s common stock during the quarter ended March 31, 2019 were as follows:

 

Period

 

Total Number of

Shares Purchased

 

 

Average Price Paid

Per Share

 

 

Total Number of

Shares Purchased

as Part of Publicly

Announced Plans

or Programs

 

 

Maximum Number

of Shares that May

Yet be Purchased

Under the Plans

or Programs

 

January 1 through January 31, 2019

 

 

415,000

 

 

$

65.50

 

 

 

415,000

 

 

 

 

 

February 1 through February 28, 2019

 

 

315,600

 

 

 

74.56

 

 

 

315,600

 

 

 

 

 

March 1 through March 31, 2019

 

 

389,970

 

 

 

75.60

 

 

 

389,970

 

 

 

 

 

Quarter 4 Totals

 

 

1,120,570

 

 

$

71.57

 

 

 

1,120,570

 

 

 

10,879,758

 

 

On April 18, 2019, the Board of Directors authorized us to repurchase an additional 10,000,000 shares, which have been included in the table above. Including the authorization on August 10, 2015, our Board of Directors has approved the repurchase in the open market of a cumulative total of 48,393,305 shares of our Common Stock since we became publicly held in April 1994. We have repurchased approximately 37.5 million shares from April 1994 through March 31, 2019.

Subsequent to March 31, 2019, we repurchased an additional 1,031,110 shares through May 21, 2019, at an average price per share of $88.79. After these repurchases, and the additional authorization discussed above, we have authorization to repurchase an additional 9,848,648 shares.

Share repurchases may be made from time to time in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. The timing and amount of any repurchases of shares will be determined by the Company’s management, based on its evaluation of market and economic conditions and other factors. In some cases, repurchases may be made pursuant to plans, programs, or directions established occasionally by the Company’s management, including plans to comply with the safe harbor provided by Rule 10b5-1.

The Equity Compensation Plan information set forth in Part III, Item 12 of this Form 10-K is hereby incorporated by reference into this Part II, Item 5.


41


 

PERFORMANCE GRAPH

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 the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference into such filing.

The graph below compares the cumulative 5-year total return to holders of Eagle Materials Inc. common stock with the cumulative total returns of the Russell 1000 index and the Dow Jones US Building Materials & Fixtures index. The graph assumes that the value of the investment (including the reinvestment of dividends) in the Company’s common stock and in each of the indices was $100 on March 31, 2014, and tracks it through March 31, 2019.

 

 

 

3/14

 

 

3/15

 

 

3/16

 

 

3/17

 

 

3/18

 

 

3/19

 

Eagle Materials Inc.

 

 

100.00

 

 

 

94.67

 

 

 

79.88

 

 

 

111.23

 

 

 

118.46

 

 

 

97.37

 

Russell 1000

 

 

100.00

 

 

 

112.73

 

 

 

113.30

 

 

 

133.05

 

 

 

151.64

 

 

 

165.75

 

Dow Jones US Building Materials & Fixtures

 

 

100.00

 

 

 

114.85

 

 

 

128.24

 

 

 

147.70

 

 

 

156.17

 

 

 

153.88

 

 

The stock price performance included in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance.


42


 

ITEM 6. Selected Financial Data

Summary of Selected Financial Data (1)

 

 

 

For the Fiscal Years Ended March 31,

 

 

2019

 

 

 

2018

 

 

 

2017

 

 

 

2016

 

 

 

2015

 

 

 

 

(amounts in thousands, except per share data)

 

 

Revenue

 

$

1,393,241

 

 

 

$

1,386,520

 

(3)

 

$

1,211,220

 

(4)

 

$

1,143,492

 

(5)

 

$

1,066,368

 

(6)

Earnings Before Income Taxes

 

 

79,735

 

(2)

 

 

271,962

 

(3)

 

 

294,519

 

(4)

 

 

219,252

 

(5)

 

 

252,927

 

(6)

Net Earnings

 

 

68,860

 

(2)

 

 

256,632

 

(3)

 

 

198,219

 

(4)

 

 

152,592

 

(5)

 

 

186,853

 

(6)

Diluted Earnings Per Share

 

 

1.47

 

(2)

 

 

5.28

 

(3)

 

 

4.10

 

(4)

 

 

3.05

 

(5)

 

 

3.71

 

(6)

Cash Dividends Per Share

 

 

0.40

 

 

 

 

0.40

 

 

 

 

0.40

 

 

 

 

0.40

 

 

 

 

0.40

 

 

Total Assets

 

 

2,169,163

 

 

 

 

2,368,003

 

 

 

 

2,247,124

 

 

 

 

1,883,635

 

 

 

 

1,880,326

 

 

Total Debt

 

 

691,592

 

 

 

 

620,922

 

 

 

 

686,467

 

 

 

 

507,714

 

 

 

 

512,759

 

 

Stockholders’ Equity

 

 

1,209,487

 

 

 

 

1,417,690

 

 

 

 

1,203,450

 

 

 

 

1,040,531

 

 

 

 

1,010,593

 

 

Book Value Per Share At Year End

 

$

26.81

 

 

 

$

29.36

 

 

 

$

24.84

 

 

 

$

21.44

 

 

 

$

20.11

 

 

Average Dilutive Shares Outstanding

 

 

46,932

 

 

 

 

48,646

 

 

 

 

48,361