UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
(Mark
One)
x
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2009
OR
¨
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For the
transition period from _________ to __________
Commission
file number: 1-33193
ATLAS ENERGY RESOURCES,
LLC
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
75-3218520
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
No.)
|
|
|
Westpointe
Corporate Center One
|
|
1550
Coraopolis Heights Road
|
|
Moon Township, PA
|
15108
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
code)
|
Registrant's
telephone number, including area code:
(412) 262-2830
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes
x
No
¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit
and post such files).
Yes
¨
No
¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting
company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated
filer,” “non-accelerated” filer and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer
x
Accelerated filer
¨
Non-accelerated filer
¨
Smaller
reporting company
¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes
¨
No
x
The
number of common units of the registrant outstanding on July 28, 2009 was
63,381,249.
ATLAS
ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX
TO QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
|
|
Page
|
PART I
|
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1.
|
Financial
Statements (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Income for the Three Months and Six Months Ended June 30,
2009 and 2008
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statement of Changes in Members’ Equity for the Six Months Ended June 30,
2009
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2009 and
2008
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
7
|
|
|
|
Item 2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
31
|
|
|
|
Item 3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
53
|
|
|
|
Item 4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
56
|
|
|
|
PART II
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
57
|
|
|
|
Item 1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
58
|
|
|
|
Item 6.
|
Exhibits
|
60
|
|
|
|
SIGNATURES
|
62
|
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM
1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
ATLAS
ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(in
thousands)
(Unaudited)
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
4,849
|
|
|
$
|
5,655
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
70,317
|
|
|
|
69,411
|
|
Current
portion of derivative receivable from Partnerships
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
3,022
|
|
Current
portion of derivative asset
|
|
|
116,977
|
|
|
|
107,766
|
|
Prepaid
expenses and other
|
|
|
12,089
|
|
|
|
14,714
|
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
204,337
|
|
|
|
200,568
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
1,988,375
|
|
|
|
1,963,891
|
|
Other
assets, net
|
|
|
19,226
|
|
|
|
18,403
|
|
Long-term
derivative asset
|
|
|
54,465
|
|
|
|
69,451
|
|
Intangible
assets, net
|
|
|
3,244
|
|
|
|
3,838
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
35,166
|
|
|
|
35,166
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,304,813
|
|
|
$
|
2,291,317
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND MEMBERS’ EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
$
|
77,144
|
|
|
$
|
74,262
|
|
Accrued
liabilities – interest
|
|
|
19,318
|
|
|
|
19,878
|
|
Accrued
liabilities – other
|
|
|
4,787
|
|
|
|
5,872
|
|
Liabilities
associated with drilling contracts
|
|
|
88,909
|
|
|
|
96,883
|
|
Accrued
well drilling and completion costs
|
|
|
47,430
|
|
|
|
43,946
|
|
Current
portion of derivative payable to Partnerships
|
|
|
32,839
|
|
|
|
34,932
|
|
Current
portion of derivative liability
|
|
|
3,985
|
|
|
|
12,829
|
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
274,412
|
|
|
|
288,602
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
862,289
|
|
|
|
873,655
|
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
6,337
|
|
Long-term
derivative payable to Partnerships
|
|
|
19,965
|
|
|
|
22,581
|
|
Advances
from affiliates
|
|
|
2,735
|
|
|
|
1,712
|
|
Long-term
derivative liability
|
|
|
30,333
|
|
|
|
10,771
|
|
Asset
retirement obligations
|
|
|
50,142
|
|
|
|
48,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and contingencies (Note 8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members’
equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class
B members’ interests
|
|
|
941,649
|
|
|
|
932,804
|
|
Class
A member’s interest
|
|
|
4,606
|
|
|
|
6,257
|
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
|
|
118,506
|
|
|
|
100,275
|
|
|
|
|
1,064,761
|
|
|
|
1,039,336
|
|
Non-controlling
interest
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
Total
members’ equity
|
|
|
1,064,937
|
|
|
|
1,039,523
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,304,813
|
|
|
$
|
2,291,317
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
ATLAS
ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(in
thousands, except per unit data)
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well
construction and completion
|
|
$
|
63,367
|
|
|
$
|
122,341
|
|
|
$
|
175,735
|
|
|
$
|
226,479
|
|
Gas
and oil production
|
|
|
69,979
|
|
|
|
78,957
|
|
|
|
141,922
|
|
|
|
155,183
|
|
Administration
and oversight
|
|
|
2,642
|
|
|
|
5,137
|
|
|
|
6,494
|
|
|
|
10,154
|
|
Well
services
|
|
|
4,806
|
|
|
|
5,266
|
|
|
|
9,899
|
|
|
|
10,064
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
5,388
|
|
|
|
5,855
|
|
|
|
10,112
|
|
|
|
10,265
|
|
Total
revenues
|
|
|
146,182
|
|
|
|
217,556
|
|
|
|
344,162
|
|
|
|
412,145
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
and expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well
construction and completion
|
|
|
53,701
|
|
|
|
106,384
|
|
|
|
149,098
|
|
|
|
196,939
|
|
Gas
and oil production
|
|
|
12,712
|
|
|
|
15,205
|
|
|
|
27,294
|
|
|
|
28,286
|
|
Well
services
|
|
|
2,120
|
|
|
|
2,650
|
|
|
|
4,544
|
|
|
|
5,062
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
6,485
|
|
|
|
5,610
|
|
|
|
10,978
|
|
|
|
9,733
|
|
General
and administrative expense
|
|
|
12,268
|
|
|
|
12,286
|
|
|
|
26,817
|
|
|
|
24,078
|
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
|
|
27,275
|
|
|
|
22,948
|
|
|
|
55,303
|
|
|
|
44,758
|
|
Loss
on asset sale
|
|
|
4,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total
costs and expenses
|
|
|
118,811
|
|
|
|
165,083
|
|
|
|
278,284
|
|
|
|
308,856
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
27,371
|
|
|
|
52,473
|
|
|
|
65,878
|
|
|
|
103,289
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
income (expense)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(15,124
|
)
|
|
|
(14,563
|
)
|
|
|
(28,108
|
)
|
|
|
(27,868
|
)
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
466
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
519
|
|
Total
other expense, net
|
|
|
(15,125
|
)
|
|
|
(14,097
|
)
|
|
|
(28,029
|
)
|
|
|
(27,349
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
|
12,246
|
|
|
|
38,376
|
|
|
|
37,849
|
|
|
|
75,940
|
|
Income
attributable to non-controlling interests
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
Net
income attributable to members’ interests
|
|
$
|
12,231
|
|
|
$
|
38,359
|
|
|
$
|
37,819
|
|
|
$
|
75,902
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocation
of net income attributable to members’ interests:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class
A member’s units
|
|
$
|
245
|
|
|
$
|
2,465
|
|
|
$
|
(7,199
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,419
|
|
Class
B members’ units
|
|
|
11,986
|
|
|
|
35,894
|
|
|
|
45,018
|
|
|
|
71,483
|
|
Net
income attributable to members’ interests
|
|
$
|
12,231
|
|
|
$
|
38,359
|
|
|
$
|
37,819
|
|
|
$
|
75,902
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to
Class B members per unit
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
$
|
0.70
|
|
|
$
|
1.15
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
$
|
0.70
|
|
|
$
|
1.14
|
|
Weighted
average Class B members’ units outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
62,144
|
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
61,427
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
62,819
|
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
61,912
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
ATLAS
ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF MEMBERS’ EQUITY
SIX
MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2009
(in
thousands, except unit data)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Class A Units
|
|
|
Class B Common Units
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Non-controlling
|
|
|
Members’
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
Balance,
January 1, 2009
|
|
|
1,293,486
|
|
|
$
|
6,257
|
|
|
|
63,380,749
|
|
|
$
|
932,804
|
|
|
$
|
100,275
|
|
|
$
|
187
|
|
|
$
|
1,039,523
|
|
Units
issued
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
Distributions
paid on unissued units under incentive plan
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(443
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(443
|
)
|
Distributions
to members
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(2,476
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(38,663
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(41,139
|
)
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,981
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,981
|
|
Reversal
of management incentive distribution
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
8,024
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
8,024
|
|
Distributions
to non-controlling interests
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
Net
income
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(7,199
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
45,018
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
37,849
|
|
Other
comprehensive income
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
18,231
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
18,231
|
|
Balance,
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
1,293,496
|
|
|
$
|
4,606
|
|
|
|
63,381,249
|
|
|
$
|
941,649
|
|
|
$
|
118,506
|
|
|
$
|
176
|
|
|
$
|
1,064,937
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
ATLAS
ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in
thousands)
(Unaudited)
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$
|
37,849
|
|
|
$
|
75,940
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization
of deferred finance costs
|
|
|
1,667
|
|
|
|
1,512
|
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
|
|
55,303
|
|
|
|
44,758
|
|
Adjustment
to reflect cash impact of derivatives
|
|
|
30,623
|
|
|
|
7,948
|
|
Non-cash
compensation expense
|
|
|
2,981
|
|
|
|
2,659
|
|
Equity
(income) of unconsolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
(174
|
)
|
|
|
(44
|
)
|
Distributions
paid to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
(81
|
)
|
Loss
on assets sales and dispositions
|
|
|
4,242
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable and prepaid expenses
|
|
|
1,808
|
|
|
|
(16,101
|
)
|
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
5,974
|
|
|
|
7,368
|
|
Liabilities
associated with drilling contracts
|
|
|
(7,974
|
)
|
|
|
(81,497
|
)
|
Liabilities
associated with well drilling and completion costs
|
|
|
3,483
|
|
|
|
23,734
|
|
Other
operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
135,741
|
|
|
|
66,194
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
(96,413
|
)
|
|
|
(135,670
|
)
|
Proceeds
from sales of assets
|
|
|
10,158
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
Other
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
(128
|
)
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(86,189
|
)
|
|
|
(135,764
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
under credit facility
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
|
|
140,000
|
|
Repayments
under credit facility
|
|
|
(211,000
|
)
|
|
|
(520,016
|
)
|
Net
proceeds from issuance of debt
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
407,021
|
|
Net
proceeds from Class B members’ units issued
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
107,733
|
|
Distributions
paid to members
|
|
|
(39,452
|
)
|
|
|
(72,876
|
)
|
Advances
from (to) affiliates
|
|
|
1,023
|
|
|
|
(3,075
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(929
|
)
|
|
|
(10,103
|
)
|
Net
cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(50,358
|
)
|
|
|
48,684
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(806
|
)
|
|
|
(20,886
|
)
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
|
|
5,655
|
|
|
|
25,258
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
4,849
|
|
|
$
|
4,372
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
ATLAS
ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June
30, 2009
(Unaudited)
NOTE
1 – BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Atlas
Energy Resources, LLC (the “Company”) is a publicly-traded Delaware limited
liability company (NYSE: ATN) and an independent developer and producer of
natural gas and, to a lesser extent, oil in Northern Michigan's Antrim Shale,
Indiana’s New Albany Shale and the Appalachian Basin. The Company is also a
leading sponsor and manager of tax-advantaged direct investment partnerships, in
which it coinvests to finance the exploitation and development of its acreage
(the “Partnerships”).
At June
30, 2009, the Company had 63,381,249 Class B common units and 1,293,496 Class A
units outstanding. The Class A units are entitled to 2% of all
quarterly cash distributions by the Company without any requirement for future
capital contributions by the holder of such Class A units, even if the Company
issues additional Class B common or other equity securities in the
future. The Company is managed by Atlas Energy Management, Inc. (the
“Managing Member”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Atlas America, Inc. and its
affiliates ( “Atlas America”), a publicly-traded company (NASDAQ:
ATLS). At June 30, 2009, Atlas America owned 29,952,996 of the
Company’s Class B common units and all of the Class A units outstanding,
representing a 48.3% ownership interest in the Company.
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements, which are unaudited except that
the balance sheet at December 31, 2008 is derived from audited financial
statements, are presented in accordance with the requirements of Form 10-Q and
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States for interim
reporting. They do not include all disclosures normally made in
financial statements contained in Form 10-K. In management’s opinion,
all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the Company’s financial
position, results of operations and cash flows for the periods disclosed have
been made. Management has evaluated subsequent events through August
10, 2009, the date the financial statements were issued. These interim
consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited
financial statements and notes thereto presented in the Company’s Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. The statements of
income for the three- and six-month periods ended June 30, 2009 may not
necessarily be indicative of the statements of income for the full year ending
December 31, 2009. Certain amounts in the prior year’s consolidated
financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year
presentation, including $18.8 million of pre-development costs shown as a
component of “Property, plant, and equipment, net” which was previously
combined with “Liabilities associated with drilling contracts” on the
Company’s consolidated balance sheets at December 31, 2008.
Merger
with Atlas America, Inc.
On April
27, 2009, the Company and Atlas America executed a definitive merger agreement,
pursuant to which a newly formed subsidiary of Atlas America will merge with and
into the Company, with the Company surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Atlas America. In the merger, each Class B common unit of the Company
not currently held by Atlas America will be converted into 1.16 shares of Atlas
America common stock, and Atlas America will be renamed “Atlas Energy,
Inc.” The Atlas America board of directors has approved the merger
agreement and has resolved to recommend that the Atlas America stockholders vote
in favor of the transactions contemplated by the merger
agreement. The Company’s board of directors and a special committee
of its directors comprised entirely of independent directors have also approved
the merger agreement and have resolved to recommend that the Company’s
unitholders vote in favor of the merger. Pending consummation of the
merger, the Company has suspended distributions to its Class A and Class B
members’ interests. The transaction will be subject to approval by
holders of a majority of the outstanding Atlas America common stock and a
majority of the Company’s outstanding Class B units and other customary closing
conditions.
NOTE
2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Principles
of Consolidation
The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries. Transactions between the Company and other
Atlas America affiliates and operations have been identified in the consolidated
financial statements as transactions between affiliates (see Note
5).
In
accordance with established practice in the oil and gas industry, the Company
includes in its consolidated financial statements its pro-rata share of assets,
liabilities, income and lease operating and general and administrative costs and
expenses of the investment partnerships in which it has an
interest. Such interests typically range from 15% to 35%. The
Company’s consolidated financial statements do not include proportional
consolidation of the depletion or impairment expenses of the Partnerships.
Rather, the Company calculates these items specific to its own economics as
further explained under the heading “Oil and Gas Properties”
below. All material intercompany transactions have been
eliminated.
Use
of Estimates
Preparation
of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
as of the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts
of revenues and costs and expenses during the reporting period. The Company’s
consolidated financial statements are based on a number of significant
estimates, including revenue and expense accruals, depletion, depreciation and
amortization, fair value of derivative instruments, the probability of
forecasted transactions, and the allocation of purchase price to the fair value
of assets acquired. Actual results could differ from these
estimates.
Net
Income Per Class B Member Unit
Basic net
income per unit for Class B common units is computed by dividing net income
attributable to the Class B members, which is determined after the deduction of
the Class A member’s interests and participating securities, by the weighted
average number of Class B common units outstanding during the
period. The Class A management incentive interests in net income is
calculated on a quarterly basis based upon its 2% ownership interest,
represented by its 1,293,496 Class A units, and its member’s incentive interests
(“MII’s” – see Note 12), with a priority allocation of net income to the Class A
member’s MIIs in accordance with the Company’s limited liability company
agreement, and the remaining net income or loss allocated with respect to the
Class A’s and Class B’s ownership interests.
On April
27, 2009, the Company and Atlas America executed a definitive merger agreement
(see Note 1). Pending consummation of the merger, the Company has
suspended distributions to the Class A and Class B members’
interests. Due to the suspension of distributions and in accordance
with the limited liability company agreement, the Company determined that
previously accrued distributions to MII’s of $8.0 million are no longer payable
to Atlas Energy Management, Inc.
The Company presents net income (loss)
per unit under the Emerging Issue Task Force’s (“EITF”) Issue No. 07-4,
“Application of the Two-Class Method under FASB Statement No. 128, Earnings per
Share, to Master Limited Partnerships” (“EITF No. 07-4”), an update of EITF No.
03-6, “Participating Securities and the Two-Class Method Under FASB Statement
No. 128” (“EITF No. 03-6”). EITF No. 07-4 considers whether the
incentive distributions of a master limited partnership represent a
participating security when considered in the calculation of earnings per unit
under the two-class method. EITF No. 07-4 also considers whether the
Company’s limited liability company agreement contains any contractual
limitations concerning distributions to the MIIs that would impact the amount of
earnings to allocate to the MIIs for each reporting period. If
distributions are contractually limited to the MIIs’ share of currently
designated available cash for distributions as defined under the limited
liability company agreement, undistributed earnings in excess of available
cash should not be allocated to the MIIs. Under the guidance of EITF
07-4, the Company believes that the limited liability agreement contractually
limits cash distributions to available cash and, therefore, undistributed
earnings will not be allocated to the MIIs.
On
January 1, 2009, the Company adopted Staff Position No. EITF 03-6-1,
“Determining Whether Instruments Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are
Participating Securities” (“FSP EITF 03-6-1”). FSP EITF 03-6-1
applies to the calculation of earnings per share (“EPS”) described in paragraphs
60 and 61 of FASB Statement No. 128, “Earnings per Share” for share-based
payment awards with rights to dividends or dividend
equivalents. It states that unvested share-based payment awards
that contain nonforfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents (whether
paid or unpaid) are participating securities and shall be included in the
computation of EPS pursuant to the two-class method. The Company’s
phantom unit awards, which consists of Class B units issuable under the terms of
its long-term incentive plan (see Note 11), contain nonforfeitable rights to
distribution equivalents of the Company. The participation rights
result in a non-contingent transfer of value each time the Company declares a
distribution or distribution equivalent during the award’s vesting
period. As such, FSP EITF 03-6-1 provides that the net income
utilized in the calculation of net income per unit must be after the allocation
of income to the phantom units on a pro rata basis. FSP EITF 03-6-1
requires an entity to retroactively adjust all prior period earnings per unit
computations per its guidance.
The
following table is a reconciliation of net income allocated to the Class A
member units and Class B members’ units for purposes of calculating net income
per Class B member unit (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Net
income attributable to members’ interests
|
|
$
|
12,231
|
|
|
$
|
38,359
|
|
|
$
|
37,819
|
|
|
$
|
75,902
|
|
Income
allocable to Class A member’s actual cash incentive distributions
reserved
(1)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,698
|
|
|
|
(8,024
|
)
|
|
|
2,901
|
|
Income
allocable to Class A member’s 2% ownership interest
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
767
|
|
|
|
825
|
|
|
|
1,518
|
|
Net
income attributable to Class A member’s ownership interest
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
2,465
|
|
|
|
(7,199
|
)
|
|
|
4,419
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income attributable to Class B members’ ownership
interests
|
|
|
11,986
|
|
|
|
35,894
|
|
|
|
45,018
|
|
|
|
71,483
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Net
income attributable to participating securities
–
phantom units
(2)
|
|
|
(136
|
)
|
|
|
(326
|
)
|
|
|
(508
|
)
|
|
|
(651
|
)
|
Net
income utilized in the calculation of net income attributable to Class B
members per unit
|
|
$
|
11,850
|
|
|
$
|
35,568
|
|
|
$
|
44,510
|
|
|
$
|
70,832
|
|
(1)
|
The
amount for the six months ended June 30, 2009 consists of an adjustment to
reverse previously recognized estimated income allocable ($0.13 per Class
B members unit) to MIIs as the amounts were determined by the Company
during the six months ended June 30, 2009 to be no longer payable to the
Managing Member (see Note 1).
|
(2)
|
In
accordance with FSP EITF 03-6-1, net income attributable to Class B
members’ ownership interests is allocated to the phantom units on a
pro-rata basis (weighted average phantom units outstanding as a percentage
of the sum of weighted average phantom units and Class B members’ units
outstanding).
|
Diluted
net income attributable to Class B members per unit is calculated by dividing
net income attributable to Class B members, less income allocable to
participating securities, by the sum of the weighted average number of Class B
members’ units outstanding and the dilutive effect of unit option awards, as
calculated by the treasury stock method. Unit options consist of Class
B member units issuable upon payment of an exercise price by the
participant under the terms of the Company’s long-term incentive plan (see Note
11). The following table sets forth the reconciliation of the
Company’s weighted average number of Class B member units used to compute basic
net income attributable to Class B members per unit with those used to compute
diluted net income attributable to Class B members per unit (in
thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Weighted
average number of Class B members’ units – basic
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
62,144
|
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
61,427
|
|
Add: effect
of dilutive unit incentive awards
(1)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
675
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
Weighted
average number of Class B members’ units – diluted
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
62,819
|
|
|
|
63,381
|
|
|
|
61,912
|
|
(1)
|
For
the three months and six months ended June 30, 2009, approximately1.9
million unit options were excluded from the computation of diluted net
income attributable to Class B members per unit because the inclusion of
such unit options would have been
anti-dilutive.
|
Comprehensive
Income
Comprehensive
income includes net income and all other changes in the equity of a business
during a period from transactions and other events and circumstances from
non-owner sources that, under accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States, have not been recognized in the calculation of net
income. These changes, other than net income, are referred to as
“other comprehensive income” and for the Company includes changes in the fair
value of unsettled derivative contracts accounted for as cash flow
hedges. A reconciliation of the Company’s comprehensive income for
the periods indicated is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30
,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$
|
12,246
|
|
|
$
|
38,376
|
|
|
$
|
37,849
|
|
|
$
|
75,940
|
|
Income
attributable to non-controlling interests
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
Net
income attributable to members’ interests
|
|
|
12,231
|
|
|
|
38,359
|
|
|
|
37,819
|
|
|
|
75,902
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
comprehensive income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
holding (loss) gain on hedging contracts
|
|
|
(22,660
|
)
|
|
|
(208,533
|
)
|
|
|
63,281
|
|
|
|
(308,727
|
)
|
Less
reclassification adjustment for (gains) losses realized in net
income
|
|
|
(30,534
|
)
|
|
|
5,010
|
|
|
|
(45,050
|
)
|
|
|
(1,622
|
)
|
Total
other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
(53,194
|
)
|
|
|
(203,523
|
)
|
|
|
18,231
|
|
|
|
(310,349
|
)
|
Comprehensive
income (loss) attributable to members’ interests
|
|
$
|
(40,963
|
)
|
|
$
|
(165,164
|
)
|
|
$
|
56,050
|
|
|
$
|
(234,447
|
)
|
Components
of accumulated other comprehensive income at the dates indicated are as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Unrealized
gain on commodity derivatives
|
|
$
|
123,321
|
|
|
$
|
106,117
|
|
Unrealized
loss on interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
(4,815
|
)
|
|
|
(5,842
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
118,506
|
|
|
$
|
100,275
|
|
Property,
Plant and Equipment
Property,
plant and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation, depletion and amortization
are based on cost less estimated salvage value primarily using the
units-of-production or straight-line method over the assets estimated useful
lives. Maintenance and repairs are expensed as incurred. Major renewals and
improvements that extend the useful lives of property are
capitalized.
The
estimated service lives of property, plant and equipment excluding natural gas
and oil properties are as follows:
Pipelines,
processing and compression facilities
|
|
15-40
years
|
Rights-of-way
– Appalachia
|
|
20-40
years
|
Buildings
and improvements
|
|
10-40
years
|
Furniture
and equipment
|
|
3-7
years
|
Other
|
|
3-10
years
|
Property,
plant and equipment consist of the following at the dates indicated (in
thousands):
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Natural
gas and oil properties:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
properties:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leasehold
interests
|
|
$
|
1,232,197
|
|
|
$
|
1,214,991
|
|
Predevelopment
costs
|
|
|
13,501
|
|
|
|
18,772
|
|
Wells
and related equipment
|
|
|
936,566
|
|
|
|
872,128
|
|
|
|
|
2,182,264
|
|
|
|
2,105,891
|
|
Unproved
properties
|
|
|
43,807
|
|
|
|
43,749
|
|
Support
equipment
|
|
|
9,081
|
|
|
|
9,527
|
|
|
|
|
2,235,152
|
|
|
|
2,159,167
|
|
Pipelines,
processing and compression facilities
|
|
|
23,252
|
|
|
|
22,541
|
|
Rights-of-way
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
149
|
|
Land,
buildings and improvements
|
|
|
6,597
|
|
|
|
6,484
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7,269
|
|
|
|
7,827
|
|
|
|
|
2,272,398
|
|
|
|
2,196,168
|
|
Accumulated
depreciation, depletion and amortization:
|
|
|
(284,023
|
)
|
|
|
(232,277
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
1,988,375
|
|
|
$
|
1,963,891
|
|
Oil
and Gas Properties
The
Company follows the successful efforts method of accounting for oil and gas
producing activities. Acquisition costs of leases and development activities are
capitalized. Exploratory drilling costs are capitalized pending
determination of whether a well is successful. Exploratory wells subsequently
determined to be dry holes are charged to expense. Costs resulting in
exploratory discoveries and all development costs, whether successful or not,
are capitalized. Geological and geophysical costs and delay rentals are
expensed. Oil is converted to gas equivalent basis (“Mcfe”) at the rate one
barrel equals 6 thousand cubic feet (“Mcf”). Depletion is provided on
the units-of-production method.
Depletion
depreciation and amortization expense is determined on a field-by-field basis
using the units-of-production method, with depletion, depreciation and
amortization rates for leasehold acquisition costs based on estimated proved
reserves and depletion, depreciation and amortization rates for well and related
equipment costs based on proved developed reserves associated with each
field. Depletion rates are determined based on reserve quantity
estimates and the capitalized costs of undeveloped and developed producing
properties. Capitalized costs of developed producing properties in
each field are aggregated to include the Company’s costs of property interests
in uncontrolled but proportionately consolidated investment partnerships, wells
drilled solely for the Company’s interest, properties purchased and working
interests with other outside operators.
Upon the
sale or retirement of a complete field of a proved property, the cost is
eliminated from the property accounts, and the resultant gain or loss is
reclassified to income. Upon the sale of an individual well, the proceeds are
credited to accumulated depreciation and depletion. Upon the sale of an entire
interest in an unproved property where the property had been assessed for
impairment individually, a gain or loss is recognized in the statements of
income. If a partial interest in an unproved property is sold, any funds
received are accounted for as a reduction of the cost in the interest
retained.
Impairment
of Oil and Gas Properties and Long-Lived Assets
The
Company’s oil and gas properties and long-lived assets are reviewed for
impairment annually or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that
their carrying amounts may not be recoverable. Long-lived assets are reviewed
for potential impairments at the lowest levels for which there are identifiable
cash flows that are largely independent of other groups of
assets.
The
review of the Company’s oil and gas properties is done on a field-by-field basis
by determining if the historical cost of proved properties less the applicable
accumulated depletion, depreciation and amortization and abandonment is less
than the estimated expected undiscounted future cash flows. The expected future
cash flows are estimated based on the Company’s plans to continue to produce and
develop proved reserves. Expected future cash flow from the sale of production
of reserves is calculated based on estimated future prices. The Company
estimates prices based upon current contracts in place, adjusted for basis
differentials and market related information including published futures prices.
The estimated future level of production is based on assumptions surrounding
future levels of prices and costs, field decline rates, market demand and
supply, and the economic and regulatory climates. If the carrying value exceeds
such cash flows, an impairment loss is recognized for the difference between the
estimated fair market value (as determined by discounted future cash flows), and
the carrying value of the assets.
The
determination of oil and natural gas reserve estimates is a subjective process,
and the accuracy of any reserve estimate depends on the quality of available
data and the application of engineering and geological interpretation and
judgment. Estimates of economically recoverable reserves and future net cash
flows depend on a number of variable factors and assumptions that are difficult
to predict and may vary considerably from actual results. In
particular, the Company’s reserve estimates for its investment in its limited
partnerships are based on its own assumptions rather than its proportionate
share of the limited partnership’s reserves. These assumptions
include the Company’s actual capital contributions, an additional carried
interest (generally 7% to 10%), a disproportionate share of salvage value upon
plugging of the wells and lower operating and administrative costs.
The
Company’s lower operating and administrative costs result from the limited
partners paying to the Company their proportionate share of these expenses plus
a profit margin. These assumptions are used in the calculation of the Company’s
reserve analysis and could result in the Company’s calculation of depletion and
impairment being different than its proportionate share of the limited
partnership calculations for these items. In addition, reserve estimates for
wells with limited or no production history are less reliable than those based
on actual production. Estimated reserves are often subject to future
revisions, which could be substantial, based on the availability of additional
information which could cause the assumptions to be modified. The
Company cannot predict what reserve revisions may be required in future
periods.
The
Company’s method of calculating its reserves may result in reserve quantities
and values which are greater than those which would be calculated by the
investment partnerships which the Company sponsors and owns an interest in but
does not control. The Company’s reserve quantities include reserves in excess of
its proportionate share of reserves in a partnership which the Company may be
unable to recover due to the partnership legal structure. The Company may have
to pay additional consideration in the future as a well or investment
partnership becomes uneconomic under the terms of the partnership agreement in
order for the Company to recover these excess reserves and to acquire any
additional residual interests in the wells held by other partnership investors.
The acquisition of any well interest from the partnership by the Company is
governed under the partnership agreement and must be at fair market value
supported by an appraisal of an independent expert selected by the
Company.
Unproved
properties are reviewed annually for impairment or whenever events or
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. Impairment charges are recorded if conditions indicate the Company
will not explore the acreage prior to expiration of the applicable leases or if
it is determined that the carrying value of the properties is above their fair
value. There were no impairments of oil and gas properties or
unproved properties recorded by the Company for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008.
Goodwill
The
Company has $35.2 million of goodwill as of June 30, 2009 in connection with
several acquisitions of assets. Goodwill and intangibles with
infinite lives must be tested for impairment annually or more frequently if
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the related asset might be
impaired. Under the principles of SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets”, (“SFAS No. 142”), an impairment loss should be recognized if the
carrying value of an entity’s reporting units exceeds its estimated fair
value. Because quoted market prices for the Company’s reporting units
are not available, the Company must apply judgment in determining the estimated
fair value of these reporting units. The Company uses all available
information to make these fair value determinations, including the present
values of expected future cash flows using discount rates commensurate with the
risks involved in the assets. A key component of these fair value
determinations is a reconciliation of the sum of the fair value calculations to
the Company’s market capitalization. The principles of SFAS No. 142
and its interpretations acknowledge that the observed market prices of
individual trades of an entity’s equity securities (and thus its computed market
capitalization) may not be representative of the fair value of the entity as a
whole. Substantial value may arise from the ability to take advantage
of synergies and other benefits that flow from control over another
entity. Consequently, measuring the fair value of a collection of
assets and liabilities that operate together in a controlled entity is different
from measuring the fair value of that entity’s individual equity
securities. In most industries, including the Company’s, an acquiring
entity typically is willing to pay more for equity securities that give it a
controlling interest than an investor would pay for a number of equity
securities representing less than a controlling interest. Therefore,
once the above fair value calculations have been determined, the Company also
considers a control premium to the calculations. This control premium is
judgmental and is based on, among other items, observed acquisitions in the
Company’s industry. The resultant fair values calculated for the reporting
units are then compared to observable metrics on large mergers and acquisitions
in the Company’s industry to determine whether those valuations appear
reasonable in the Company’s judgment. The Company’s evaluation of goodwill
at December 31, 2008, indicated there was no impairment loss and no impairment
indicators arose during the six months ended June 30, 2009. The
Company will continue to evaluate its goodwill at least annually or when
impairment indicators arise, and will reflect the impairment of goodwill, if
any, in its consolidated financial statements in that period.
Capitalized
Interest
The Company capitalizes interest on
borrowed funds related to its share of costs associated with the drilling and
completion of new oil and gas wells and other capital
projects. Interest is capitalized only during the periods that
activities are in progress to bring these assets to their intended
use.
The
weighted average interest rates used to capitalize interest and the amount of
interest capitalized for the following periods were as follows:
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average interest rate
|
|
|
6.9
|
%
|
|
|
4.1
|
%
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
|
|
4.7
|
%
|
Interest
capitalized (in thousands)
|
|
$
|
1,747
|
|
|
$
|
535
|
|
|
$
|
3,724
|
|
|
$
|
1,181
|
|
Revenue
Recognition
Partnership
management.
The Company conducts certain energy activities
through, and a portion of its revenues are attributable to, sponsored investment
partnerships. The Company contracts with the investment partnerships to drill
partnership wells. The contracts require that the investment partnerships pay
the Company the full contract price upon execution. The income from a drilling
contract is recognized as the services are performed using the percentage of
completion method. The contracts are typically completed between 60 and 180
days. On an uncompleted contract, the Company classifies the difference between
the contract payments it has received and the revenue earned as a current
liability titled “Liabilities Associated with Drilling Contracts” on its
consolidated balance sheets. The Company recognizes gathering revenues at the
time the natural gas is delivered, and recognizes well services revenues at the
time the services are performed. The Company is also entitled to receive
administration and oversight fees according to the respective partnership
agreements. The Company recognizes such fees as income when services are
performed.
Gas and oil
production.
The Company generally sells natural gas and crude
oil at prevailing market prices. Revenue is recognized when produced
quantities are delivered to a custody transfer point, persuasive evidence of a
sales arrangement exists, the rights and responsibility of ownership pass to the
purchaser upon delivery, collection of revenue from the sale are reasonably
assured and the sales price is fixed or determinable. Revenues from
the production of natural gas and crude oil in which the Company has an interest
with other producers are recognized on the basis of the Company’s percentage
ownership of working interest or overriding royalty. Generally, the Company’s
sales contracts are based on pricing provisions that are tied to a market index,
with certain adjustments based on proximity to gathering and transmission lines
and the quality of its natural gas.
Because
there are timing differences between the delivery of natural gas and oil and its
receipt of a delivery statement, the Company has unbilled revenues. These
revenues are accrued based upon volumetric data from the Company’s records and
estimates of the related transportation and compression fees which are, in turn,
based upon applicable product prices. The Company had unbilled trade receivables
at June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 of $26.8 million and $43.7 million,
respectively, which are included in accounts receivable on its consolidated
balance sheets.
Recently
Adopted Accounting Standards
In June
2009, the FASB issued Statement No. 165, “Subsequent Events” (“SFAS No.
165”). SFAS No. 165 establishes general standards of accounting for
and disclosure of events that occur after the balance sheet date but before
financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. SFAS
No. 165 requires management of a reporting entity to evaluate events or
transactions that may occur after the balance sheet date for potential
recognition or disclosure in the financial statements and provides guidance for
disclosures that an entity should make about those events. SFAS No.
165 is effective for interim or annual financial periods ending after June 15,
2009 and shall be applied prospectively. The Company adopted the
requirements of SFAS No. 165 on April 1, 2009 and its adoption did not have
a material impact to its financial position and results of
operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 157-4, “Determining Fair Value When the
Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly
Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly” (“FSP FAS
157-4”). FSP FAS 157-4 applies to all fair value measurements and
provides additional clarification on estimating fair value when the market
activity for an asset has declined significantly. FSP FAS 157-4 also
requires an entity to disclose a change in valuation technique and related
inputs to the valuation calculation and to quantify its effects, if
practicable. FSP FAS 157-4 is effective for interim and annual
periods ending after June 15, 2009, with early adoption permitted for periods
ending after March 15, 2009. The Company adopted the requirements of
FSP FAS 157-4 on April 1, 2009 and its adoption did not have a material impact
on the Company’s financial position and results of operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 115-2 and 124-2, “Recognition and
Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments” (“FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS
124-2”). FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 change existing guidance for
determining whether an impairment is other than temporary for debt
securities. FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 replaces the existing
requirement that an entity’s management assess it has both the intent and
ability to hold an impaired security until recovery with a requirement that
management assess that it does not have the intent to sell the security and that
it is more likely than not that it will not have to sell the security before
recovery of its cost basis. FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 also require
that an entity recognize noncredit losses on held-to-maturity debt securities in
other comprehensive income and amortize that amount over the remaining life of
the security and for the entity to present the total other-than-temporary
impairment in the statement of operations with an offset for the amount
recognized in other comprehensive income. FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2
are effective for interim and annual periods ending after June 15, 2009, with
early adoption permitted for periods ending after March 15, 2009. The
Company adopted the requirements of FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 on April 1, 2009
and its adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial
position and results of operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 107-1 and APB 28-1, “Interim Disclosures
about Fair Value of Financial Instruments” (“FSP FAS 107-1 and APB
28-1”). FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1 require an entity to provide
disclosures about fair value of financial instruments in interim financial
information. In addition, an entity shall disclose in the body or in
the accompanying notes of its summarized financial information for interim
reporting periods and in its financial statements for annual reporting periods
the fair value of all financial instruments for which it is practicable to
estimate that value, whether recognized or not recognized in the statement of
financial position. FSP FAS 107-1 APB 28-1 is effective for interim
periods ending after June 15, 2009, with early adoption permitted for periods
ending after March 15, 2009. The Company adopted the requirements of
FSP FAS 107-1 APB 28-1 on April 1, 2009 and its adoption did not have a material
impact on the Company’s financial position and results of
operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 141(R)-1, “Accounting for Assets Acquired
and Liabilities Assumed in a Business Combination That Arise from Contingencies”
(“FSP 141(R)-1”). FSP 141(R)-1 requires that assets acquired and
liabilities assumed in a business combination that arise from contingencies be
recognized at fair value if fair value can be reasonably
estimated. If fair value of such an asset or liability cannot be
reasonably estimated, the asset or liability would generally be recognized in
accordance with FASB Statement No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies” and FASB
Interpretation No. 14, “Reasonable Estimation of the Amount of a
Loss”. FSP 141(R)-1 also eliminates the requirement to disclose an
estimate of the range of outcomes of recognized contingencies at the acquisition
date. FSP FAS 141(R)-1 is effective for business combinations for
which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008 (January 1, 2009 for
the Company). The Company adopted the requirements of FSP 141(R)-1 on
January 1, 2009 and its adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s
financial position and results of operations.
In March
2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities - an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133” (“SFAS No.
161”). SFAS No. 161 amends the requirements of SFAS No. 133,
“Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS No. 133”),
to require enhanced disclosure about how and why an entity uses derivative
instruments, how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted
for under SFAS No. 133 and its related interpretations, and how derivative
instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position,
financial performance and cash flows. The Company adopted the
requirements of SFAS No. 161 on January 1, 2009 and it did not have a material
impact on its financial position or results of operations (see Note
6).
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, “Non-controlling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements-an amendment of ARB No. 51” (“SFAS No. 160”).
SFAS No. 160 amends ARB No. 51 to establish accounting and reporting standards
for the non-controlling interest (minority interest) in a subsidiary and for the
deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It clarifies that a non-controlling interest in
a subsidiary is an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be
reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. SFAS No.
160 also requires consolidated net income to be reported and disclosed on the
face of the consolidated statement of operations at amounts that include the
amounts attributable to both the parent and the non-controlling interest.
Additionally, SFAS No. 160 establishes a single method of accounting for changes
in a parent’s ownership interest in a subsidiary that does not result in
deconsolidation and that the parent recognize a gain or loss in net income when
a subsidiary is deconsolidated. The Company adopted the requirements
of SFAS No. 160 on January 1, 2009 and adjusted its presentation of its
financial position and results of operations. Prior period financial position
and results of operations have been adjusted retrospectively to conform to the
provisions of SFAS No. 160.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No 141(R), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS
No. 141(R)”). SFAS No. 141(R) replaces SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations”
(“SFAS No. 141”), however retains the fundamental requirements that the
acquisition method of accounting be used for all business combinations and for
an acquirer to be identified for each business combination. SFAS No.
141(R) requires an acquirer to recognize the assets acquired, liabilities
assumed, and any non-controlling interest in the acquiree at the acquisition
date, at their fair values as of that date, with specified limited
exceptions. Changes subsequent to that date are to be recognized in
earnings, not goodwill. Additionally, SFAS No. 141 (R) requires costs
incurred in connection with an acquisition be expensed as
incurred. Restructuring costs, if any, are to be recognized
separately from the acquisition. The acquirer in a business combination achieved
in stages must also recognize the identifiable assets and liabilities, as well
as the non-controlling interests in the acquiree, at the full amounts of their
fair values. The Company adopted the requirements of SFAS No. 141(R) on January
1, 2009 and it did not have a material impact on its financial position and
results of operations.
Recently
Issued Accounting Standards
In June
2009, the FASB issued Statement No. 168, “The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles – A
Replacement of FASB Statement No. 162” (“SFAS No. 168”). SFAS No. 168
establishes the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“Codification”) as the
single source of authoritative U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. The
Codification supersedes all existing non-Securities and Exchange Commission
accounting and reporting standards. Following SFAS No. 168, the FASB
will not issue new standards in the form of Statements, FASB Staff Positions, or
Emerging Issues Task Force Abstracts. Instead, the FASB will issue
Accounting Standards Updates, which will serve only to update the
Codification. SFAS No. 168 is effective for financial statements
issued for interim and annual periods ending after September 15,
2009. The Company will apply the requirements of SFAS No. 168 to its
financial statements and will update its disclosure references to the new FASB
Codification for the interim period ending September 30, 2009 and does not
expect it to have a material impact to its financial position or results of
operations.
In June
2009, the FASB issued Statement No. 167, “Amendments to FASB Interpretation No.
46(R)” (“SFAS No. 167”). SFAS No. 167 is a revision to FASB
Interpretation No. 46(R), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” and
changes how a reporting entity determines when an entity that is insufficiently
capitalized or is not controlled through voting (or similar rights) should be
consolidated. SFAS No. 167 requires a reporting entity to provide
additional disclosures about its involvement with variable interest entities and
any significant changes in risk exposure due to that involvement. A
reporting entity will be required to disclose how its involvement with a
variable interest entity affects the reporting entity’s financial
statements. SFAS No. 167 is effective at the start of a reporting
entity’s first fiscal year beginning after November 15, 2009 (January 1, 2010
for the Company). The Company will apply the requirements of SFAS No.
167 upon its adoption on January 1, 2010 and does not expect it to have a
material impact to its financial position or results of operations or related
disclosures.
Modernization
of Oil and Gas Reporting
In
December 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) announced that it
had approved revisions to its oil and gas reporting disclosures by adopting
amendments to Rule 4-10 of Regulation S-X and Items 201, 801, and 802 of
Regulation S-K. These new disclosure requirements are referred to as
“Modernization of Oil and Gas Reporting” and include provisions
that:
|
·
|
Introduce
a new definition of oil and gas producing activities. This new definition
allows companies to include in their reserve base volumes from
unconventional resources. Such unconventional resources include bitumen
extracted from oil sands and oil and gas extracted from coal beds and
shale formations.
|
|
·
|
Report
oil and gas reserves using an unweighted average price using the prior
12-month period, based on the closing prices on the first day of each
month, rather than year-end pricing. This should maximize the
comparability of reserve estimates among companies and mitigate the
distortion of the estimates that arises when using a single pricing
date.
|
|
·
|
Permit
companies to disclose their probable and possible reserves on a voluntary
basis. Current rules limit disclosure to only proved
reserves.
|
|
·
|
Update
and revise reserve definitions to reflect changes in the oil and gas
industry and new technologies. New updated definitions include
“by geographic area” and “reasonable
certainty”.
|
|
·
|
Permit
the use of new technologies to determine proved reserves if those
technologies have been demonstrated empirically to lead to reliable
conclusions about reserves volumes.
|
|
·
|
Require
additional disclosures regarding the qualifications of the chief technical
person who oversees the company’s overall reserve estimation process.
Additionally, disclosures are required related to internal controls over
reserve estimation, as well as a report addressing the independence and
qualifications of a company’s reserves preparer or auditor
based on Society of Petroleum Engineers
criteria.
|
The
Company will begin complying with the disclosure requirements in its annual
report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009. The new rules
may not be applied to disclosures in quarterly reports prior to the first annual
report in which the revised disclosures are required. The Company is currently
in the process of evaluating the new requirements.
NOTE
3 – OTHER ASSETS AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Other
Assets
The
following is a summary of other assets at the dates indicated (in
thousands):
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Deferred
finance costs, net of accumulated amortization of $7,198 and $5,531 at
June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively
|
|
$
|
13,424
|
|
|
$
|
15,018
|
|
Long-term
derivative receivable from
Partnerships
|
|
|
5,028
|
|
|
|
2,719
|
|
Other
|
|
|
774
|
|
|
|
666
|
|
|
|
$
|
19,226
|
|
|
$
|
18,403
|
|
Deferred
finance costs related to the Company’s credit facility and senior unsecured
notes (see Note 9) are recorded at cost and amortized over their respective
lives (5 to 10 years). Long-term derivative receivable from
Partnerships represents the portion of the long-term unrealized derivative
liability on contracts that have been allocated to them based on their share of
total estimated production volumes.
Intangible
Assets
Included
in intangible assets are partnership management, non-compete agreements and
operating contracts acquired through previous acquisitions which were recorded
at fair value on their acquisition dates. The Company amortizes these
contracts on the declining balance and straight-line methods, over their
respective estimated lives, ranging from two to thirteen
years. Amortization expense for these contracts was $0.3 million for
both of the three-month periods ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, and $0.6 million
for both of the six-month periods ended June 30, 2009 and 2008. The
aggregate estimated annual amortization expense the remainder of 2009, and for
each of the next five calendar years is as follows: 2009—$0.4
million; 2010-2011—$0.7 million; 2012-2013—$0.2 million; and 2014—$0.1
million.
The
following is a summary of intangible assets at the dates indicated (in
thousands):
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Management
and operating contracts
|
|
$
|
14,343
|
|
|
$
|
14,343
|
|
Non-compete
agreement
|
|
|
890
|
|
|
|
890
|
|
Total
costs
|
|
|
15,233
|
|
|
|
15,233
|
|
Accumulated
amortization
|
|
|
(11,989
|
)
|
|
|
(11,395
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
3,244
|
|
|
$
|
3,838
|
|
NOTE
4—ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS
The
Company follows SFAS No. 143 and FIN 47 “Accounting for Conditional Asset
Retirement Obligations,” which require the Company to recognize an estimated
liability for the plugging and abandonment of its oil and gas wells and related
facilities. Under SFAS No. 143, the Company must currently recognize a liability
for future asset retirement obligations if a reasonable estimate of the fair
value of that liability can be made. The associated asset retirement costs are
capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the long-lived asset. SFAS No. 143
requires the Company to consider estimated salvage value in the calculation of
depreciation, depletion and amortization.
The
estimated liability is based on historical experience in plugging and abandoning
wells, estimated remaining lives of those wells based on reserve estimates,
external estimates as to the cost to plug and abandon the wells in the future,
and federal and state regulatory requirements. The liability is discounted using
an assumed credit-
adjusted risk-free
interest rate. Revisions to the liability could occur due to changes in
estimates of plugging and abandonment costs or remaining lives of the wells, or
if federal or state regulators enact new plugging and abandonment
requirements.
The
Company has no assets legally restricted for purposes of settling asset
retirement obligations. Except for the item previously referenced, the Company
has determined that there are no other material retirement obligations
associated with tangible long-lived assets.
A
reconciliation of the Company’s liability for well plugging and abandonment
costs for the periods indicated is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Asset
retirement obligations, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
49,262
|
|
|
$
|
43,801
|
|
|
$
|
48,136
|
|
|
$
|
42,358
|
|
Liabilities
incurred
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
858
|
|
|
|
596
|
|
|
|
1,640
|
|
Liabilities
settled
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(85
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Accretion
expense
|
|
|
737
|
|
|
|
675
|
|
|
|
1,495
|
|
|
|
1,338
|
|
Asset
retirement obligations, end of period
|
|
$
|
50,142
|
|
|
$
|
45,334
|
|
|
$
|
50,142
|
|
|
$
|
45,334
|
|
The
accretion expense is included in depreciation, depletion and amortization in the
Company’s consolidated statements of income.
NOTE
5—CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
In the
ordinary course of its business operations, the Company has ongoing
relationships with several related entities:
Relationship with Atlas
America
.
Atlas America provides
centralized corporate functions on behalf of the Company, including legal,
accounting, treasury, insurance administration and claims processing, risk
management, health, safety and environmental, information technology, human
resources, credit, payroll, internal audit, taxes and
engineering. These costs are reflected in general and administrative
expense in the Company’s consolidated statements of income. The employees
supporting these Company operations are employees of Atlas
America. The compensation costs of these employees, and rent for the
offices out of which they operate, are allocated to the Company based on
estimates of the time spent by such employees in performing services for the
Company. This allocation of costs may fluctuate from period to period
based upon the level of activity by the Company of any acquisitions, equity or
debt offerings, or other non-recurring transactions, which requires additional
management time. Management believes the method used to allocate
these expenses is reasonable.
The
Company participates in Atlas America’s cash management program. Any transaction
performed by Atlas America on behalf of the Company is not due on demand and has
been recorded as a long-term liability in advances from affiliates on the
Company’s consolidated balance sheets.
Relationship with Company
-
Sponsored Investment
Partnerships.
The Company conducts certain activities through,
and a substantial portion of its revenues are attributable to, the Partnerships.
The Company serves as managing general partner of the Partnerships and assumes
customary rights and obligations for the Partnerships. As a general partner, the
Company is liable for Partnership liabilities and can be liable to limited
partners if it breaches its responsibilities with respect to the operations of
the Partnerships. The Company is entitled to receive management fees,
reimbursement for administrative costs incurred, and to share in the
Partnerships’ revenue, and costs and expenses according to the respective
Partnership agreements.
Relationship with Laurel Mountain and
Atlas Pipeline Partners, L.P.
On June 1, 2009, the Company
completed the sale of two natural gas processing plants and associated pipelines
located in southwestern Pennsylvania for cash of $10.0 million to Laurel
Mountain Midstream, LLC (“Laurel Mountain”), a newly-formed joint venture
between the Company’s affiliate, Atlas Pipeline Partners, L.P. (NYSE: APL)
(“Atlas Pipeline”), and The Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE: WMB).
(“Williams”). Upon contribution of its Appalachia Basin natural gas
gathering system to Laurel Mountain, Atlas Pipeline received $87.8 million in
cash, a preferred equity right to proceeds under a $25.5 million note issued to
Laurel Mountain by Williams and a 49.0% ownership interest in Laurel
Mountain. Atlas Pipeline is a subsidiary of the Company’s indirect
parent company, Atlas America. Laurel Mountain owns and operates all
of Atlas Pipeline’s previously owned northern Appalachian assets, excluding its
northern Tennessee operations, of which the Company will be the largest
customer. The Company recorded a loss on the sale the two natural gas
processing plants and associated pipelines of $4.3 million, which is recorded as
“Loss on asset sale” on its consolidated statements of income for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2009. The Company used the net proceeds
from the sale to repay outstanding borrowings under its revolving credit
facility.
Upon completion of the transaction with
Laurel Mountain, the Company entered into new gas gathering agreements with
Laurel Mountain which superseded the existing master natural gas gathering
agreement and omnibus agreement between the Company and Atlas
Pipeline. Under the new gas gathering agreement, the Company is
obligated to pay Laurel Mountain all of the gathering fees it collects from the
partnerships, which generally ranges from $0.35 per Mcf to the amount of the
competitive gathering fee (which is currently defined as 13% of the gross sales
price received for the partnerships gas) plus any excess amount of the gathering
fees collected up to an amount equal to approximately 16% of the natural gas
sales price. The new gathering agreement contains additional
provisions which define certain obligations and options of each party to build
and connect newly drilled wells to any Laurel Mountain gathering
system. Unlike the terminated agreements, Atlas America will not
assume or guarantee the Company’s obligation to pay gathering fees to Laurel
Mountain.
NOTE
6—DERIVATIVE AND FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The
Company is exposed to certain risks relating to its ongoing business
operations. These risks are managed by using derivative instruments
related to commodity price risk and interest rate risk. Forward
contracts on natural gas and oil are entered into to manage the price risk
associated with forecasted sales of natural gas and crude
oil. Interest rate swaps are entered into to manage interest rate
risk associated with the Company’s variable rate borrowings. In
accordance with SFAS No. 133, the Company designates these derivatives as cash
flow hedges and the derivative instruments have been recorded as either assets
or liabilities at fair value in the consolidated balance sheet. The
effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative is reported as a
component of other comprehensive income and reclassified to earnings in the same
period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings. The
following table summarizes the fair value of derivative instruments as of June
30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, as well as the gain or loss recognized for the
six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008. There were no gains or
losses recognized in income for ineffective derivative instruments for the six
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008.
Fair
Value of Derivative Instruments:
|
|
Asset Derivatives
|
|
Liability Derivatives
|
|
Derivatives in
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
SFAS 133 Cash Flow
|
|
Balance Sheet
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Balance Sheet
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Hedging Relationships
|
|
Location
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Location
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
contracts:
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
116,977
|
|
|
$
|
107,766
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
$
|
(383
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,348
|
)
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
54,465
|
|
|
|
69,451
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
(29,120
|
)
|
|
|
(8,410
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
171,442
|
|
|
|
177,217
|
|
|
|
|
(29,503
|
)
|
|
|
(17,758
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate contracts:
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
(3,602
|
)
|
|
|
(3,481
|
)
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
(1,213
|
)
|
|
|
(2,361
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
(4,815
|
)
|
|
|
(5,842
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
derivatives under SFAS No. 133
|
|
$
|
171,442
|
|
|
$
|
177,217
|
|
|
|
$
|
(34,318
|
)
|
|
$
|
(23,600
|
)
|
Effects
of Derivative Instruments on Consolidated Statements of Income for the three
months and six months ended is as follows:
|
|
Gain/(Loss)
|
|
Location of
|
|
Gain/(Loss)
|
|
|
|
Recognized in OCI on Derivative
|
|
Gain/(Loss)
|
|
Reclassified from OCI into Income
|
|
|
|
(Effective Portion)
|
|
Reclassified from
|
|
(Effective Portion)
|
|
Derivatives in
|
|
For the Three Months Ended
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
For the Three Months Ended
|
|
SFAS 133 Cash Flow
|
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
|
OCI into Income
|
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
|
Hedging Relationships
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
(Effective Portion)
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
contracts
|
|
$
|
(22,528
|
)
|
|
$
|
(212,364
|
)
|
Gas and oil production
|
|
$
|
31,564
|
|
|
$
|
(4,896
|
)
|
Interest
rate contracts
|
|
|
(132
|
)
|
|
|
3,831
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(1,030
|
)
|
|
|
(114
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(22,660
|
)
|
|
$
|
(208,533
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
30,534
|
|
|
$
|
(5,010
|
)
|
|
|
Gain/(Loss)
|
|
Location
of
|
|
Gain/(Loss)
|
|
|
|
Recognized
in OCI on Derivative
|
|
Gain/(Loss)
|
|
Reclassified
from OCI into Income
|
|
|
|
(Effective
Portion)
|
|
Reclassified
from
|
|
(Effective
Portion)
|
|
Derivatives
in
|
|
For
the Six Months Ended
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
For
the Six Months Ended
|
|
SFAS
133 Cash Flow
|
|
June
30,
|
|
June
30,
|
|
OCI
into Income
|
|
June
30,
|
|
June
30,
|
|
Hedging
Relationships
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
(Effective
Portion)
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
contracts
|
|
$
|
64,286
|
|
|
$
|
(310,522
|
)
|
Gas
and oil production
|
|
$
|
47,082
|
|
|
$
|
1,645
|
|
Interest
rate contracts
|
|
|
(1,005
|
)
|
|
|
1,795
|
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(2,032
|
)
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
63,281
|
|
|
$
|
(308,727
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
45,050
|
|
|
$
|
1,622
|
|
Commodity
Risk Hedging Program
From time
to time, the Company enters into natural gas and crude oil future option
contracts and collar contracts to achieve more predictable cash flows by hedging
its exposure to changes in natural gas prices and oil prices. At any point in
time, such contracts may include regulated New York Mercantile Exchange
(“NYMEX”) futures and options contracts and non-regulated over-the-counter
futures contracts with qualified counterparties. NYMEX contracts are generally
settled with offsetting positions, but may be settled by the delivery of natural
gas. Crude oil contracts are based on a West Texas Intermediate (“WTI”) index.
These contracts have qualified and been designated as cash flow hedges and
recorded at their fair values.
In May
2009, the Company received approximately $28.5 million in proceeds from the
early termination of natural gas and oil derivative positions for production
periods from 2011 through 2013. In conjunction with the early
termination of these derivatives, the Company entered into new derivative
positions at prevailing prices at the time of the transaction. The
net proceeds from the early termination of these derivatives were used to reduce
indebtedness under the Company’s credit facility (see Note 9). The
gain recognized upon the early termination of these derivative positions will
continue to be reported in accumulated other comprehensive income, and will be
reclassified into the Company’s consolidated statements of income in the same
periods in which the hedged production revenues would have been recognized in
earnings.
The
Company has a $123.3 million net unrealized gain related to financial
derivatives on its gas and oil production which is shown as a component of
accumulated other comprehensive income at June 30, 2009, compared to a net
unrealized gain of $106.1 million at December 31, 2008. If the fair
values of the instruments remain at current market values, the Company will
reclassify $83.0 million of unrealized gains to its consolidated statements of
income over the next twelve-month period as these contracts settle and $40.3
million of unrealized gains will be reclassified in later periods.
As of
June 30, 2009, the Company had the following natural gas and oil volumes
hedged:
Natural
Gas Fixed Price Swaps
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Fixed Price
|
|
|
Asset/(Liability)
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(MMBtu)
|
|
|
(per
MMBtu)
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,790,000
|
|
|
$
|
8.044
|
|
|
$
|
79,987
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,880,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.708
|
|
|
|
52,270
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,720,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.040
|
|
|
|
2,973
|
|
2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,680,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.223
|
|
|
|
1,131
|
|
2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,620,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.126
|
|
|
|
(1,631
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
134,730
|
|
Natural
Gas Costless Collars
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Option Type
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Floor and Cap
|
|
|
Asset/(Liability)
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(MMBtu)
|
|
|
(per MMBtu)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2009
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
$
|
11.000
|
|
|
$
|
795
|
|
2009
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.350
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2010
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
3,360,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.839
|
|
|
|
6,584
|
|
2010
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
3,360,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.007
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2011
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
9,540,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.523
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
2011
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
9,540,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.666
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2012
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
4,020,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.514
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2012
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
4,020,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.718
|
|
|
|
(978
|
)
|
2013
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
5,340,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.516
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2013
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
5,340,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.811
|
|
|
|
(1,737
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,809
|
|
Crude
Oil Fixed Price Swaps
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Fixed Price
|
|
|
Asset/(Liability)
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Bbl)
|
|
|
(per Bbl)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,700
|
|
|
$
|
99.497
|
|
|
$
|
896
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,900
|
|
|
$
|
97.400
|
|
|
|
1,079
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,600
|
|
|
$
|
77.460
|
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,500
|
|
|
$
|
76.855
|
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
77.360
|
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,805
|
|
Crude
Oil Costless Collars
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Option Type
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Floor and Cap
|
|
|
Asset/(Liability)
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Bbl)
|
|
|
(per Bbl)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2009
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
19,500
|
|
|
$
|
85.000
|
|
|
$
|
289
|
|
2009
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
19,500
|
|
|
$
|
116.884
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2010
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
31,000
|
|
|
$
|
85.000
|
|
|
|
448
|
|
2010
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
31,000
|
|
|
$
|
112.918
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2011
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
$
|
67.223
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2011
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
$
|
89.436
|
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
2012
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
21,500
|
|
|
$
|
65.506
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2012
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
21,500
|
|
|
$
|
91.448
|
|
|
|
(73
|
)
|
2013
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
$
|
65.358
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2013
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
$
|
93.442
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
595
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Net Asset
|
|
|
$
|
141,939
|
|
(1) Fair value based on forward NYMEX natural gas prices, as
applicable.
(2)
Fair
value based on forward WTI crude oil prices, as applicable.
The
Company’s commodity price risk management includes estimated future natural gas
and crude oil production of the Partnerships. Therefore, a portion of
any unrealized derivative gain or loss is allocable to the limited partners of
the Partnerships based on their share of estimated gas and oil production
related to the derivatives not yet settled. At June 30, 2009 and
December 31, 2008, net unrealized derivative liabilities of $47.7 million and
$51.8 million, respectively, are payable to the limited partners in the
Partnerships and are included in the consolidated balance sheets as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Current
portion of derivative receivable from Partnerships
|
|
$
|
105
|
|
|
$
|
3,022
|
|
Other
assets –
long-term
|
|
|
5,028
|
|
|
|
2,719
|
|
Current
portion of derivative payable to Partnerships
|
|
|
(32,839
|
)
|
|
|
(34,932
|
)
|
Long-term
derivative payable to
Partnerships
|
|
|
(19,965
|
)
|
|
|
(22,581
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
(47,671
|
)
|
|
$
|
(51,772
|
)
|
Interest
Rate Risk Hedging Program
At June
30, 2009, the Company had $456.0 million of borrowings under its revolving
credit facility (see Note 9). At June 30, 2009, the Company had interest rate
derivative contracts having an aggregate notional principal amount of $150.0
million through January 2011, which were designated as cash flow
hedges. Under the terms of the contract, the Company will pay an
interest rate of 3.11%, plus the applicable margin as defined under the terms of
its revolving credit facility, and will receive LIBOR, plus the applicable
margin, on the notional principal amounts. This derivative
effectively converts $150.0 million of the Company’s floating rate debt under
the revolving credit facility to fixed-rate debt. The Company has
accounted for the interest rate derivative contracts as effective hedge
instruments under SFAS No. 133.
At June
30, 2009, the Company’s interest rate derivatives were as follows:
Interest
Fixed Rate Swap
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
Period Ended
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Term
|
|
Amount
|
|
Option Type
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(Liability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
January 2008 – January 2011
|
|
$
|
150,000,000
|
|
Pay 3.11% - Receive
LIBOR
|
|
2009
|
|
$
|
(1,932
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
(2,757
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
(126
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Net Liability
|
|
$
|
(4,815
|
)
|
NOTE
7 – FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The
Company applies the provisions of SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”, to
its financial instruments. SFAS No. 157 establishes a fair value
hierarchy which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and
minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair
value. SFAS No. 157 hierarchy defines three levels of inputs that may
be used to measure fair value:
Level 1–
Quoted prices in
active markets for identical assets and liabilities that the reporting entity
has the ability to access at the measurement date.
Level 2 –
Inputs other than
quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset and
liability or can be corroborated with observable market data for substantially
the entire contractual term of the asset or liability.
Level 3 –
Unobservable inputs
that reflect the entity’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market
participants would use in the pricing of the asset or liability and are
consequently not based on market activity, but rather through particular
valuation techniques.
Assets
and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
The Company has certain assets and
liabilities that are reported at fair value on a recurring basis in its
consolidated balance sheets. The following methods and assumptions were
used to estimate fair values
.
Derivative Instruments.
All of the Company’s
derivative contracts are defined as Level 2. The Company’s natural gas and crude
oil derivative contracts are valued based on prices quoted on the NYMEX or WTI
and adjusted by the respective counterparty using various assumptions including
quoted forward prices, time value, volatility factors, and contractual prices
for the underlying instruments. The Company’s interest rate derivative contracts
are valued using a LIBOR rate-based forward price curve
model. Information for assets and liabilities measured at fair value
on a recurring basis at June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 is as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
Level
2
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Level
2
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Commodity-based
derivatives
|
|
$
|
141,939
|
|
|
$
|
141,939
|
|
|
$
|
159,459
|
|
|
$
|
159,459
|
|
Interest
rate swap-based derivatives
|
|
|
(4,815
|
)
|
|
|
(4,815
|
)
|
|
|
(5,842
|
)
|
|
|
(5,842
|
)
|
Total
|
|
$
|
137,124
|
|
|
$
|
137,124
|
|
|
$
|
153,617
|
|
|
$
|
153,617
|
|
Assets
and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis
The
Company has certain assets and liabilities that are reported at fair value on a
nonrecurring basis in its consolidated balance sheets. The following
methods and assumptions were used to estimate fair values.
Asset Retirement Obligations.
The Company estimates the fair value of asset retirement obligations
based on discounted cash flow projections using numerous estimates, assumptions
and judgments regarding such factors at the date of establishment of an asset
retirement obligation such as: amounts and timing of settlements; the
credit-adjusted risk-free rate of the Company; and estimated inflation rates
(see Note 4).
Oil and Gas Property
Impairments
.
In
accordance with SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” the Company reviews its proved oil and gas
properties for impairment when events and circumstances indicate a possible
decline in the recoverability of the carrying value of such properties (see Note
2). The Company’s evaluation indicated there was no impairment of its
oil and gas properties for the three- and six-month periods ended June 30, 2009
and 2008.
Information
for assets that are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis for the
three- and six-month periods ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 are as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset
retirement obligations
|
|
$
|
166
|
|
|
$
|
166
|
|
|
$
|
596
|
|
|
$
|
596
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
166
|
|
|
$
|
166
|
|
|
$
|
596
|
|
|
$
|
596
|
|
NOTE
8—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
General
Commitments
The
Company is the managing general partner of the Partnerships, and has agreed to
indemnify each investor partner from any liability that exceeds such partner’s
share of Partnership assets. Subject to certain conditions, investor partners in
certain Partnerships have the right to present their interests for purchase by
the Company, as managing general partner. The Company is not obligated to
purchase more than 5% to 10% of the units in any calendar year. Based on past
experience, the management of the Company believes that any liability incurred
would not be material. The Company may be required to subordinate a
part of its net partnership revenues from the Partnerships to the receipt of
cash distributions to the investor partners from the investment partnerships
equal to at least 10% of their subscriptions determined on a cumulative basis,
in accordance with the terms of the partnership agreements. For the
three- and six-month periods ended June 30, 2009, $699,100 and $871,500,
respectively, of the Company’s net revenues were subordinated, which reduced its
cash distributions received from the investment partnerships for the respective
periods. No subordination of the Company’s net revenues was required
for the three- and six-month periods ended June 30, 2008 with regard to the
Partnerships.
Atlas
America is party to employment agreements with certain executives that provide
compensation, severance and certain other benefits. Some of these obligations
may be allocable to the Company (see Note 5).
As of
June 30, 2009, the Company is a guarantor of 50% ($8.7 million) of Crown
Drilling of Pennsylvania, LLC’s $17.4 million credit arrangement.
Legal
Proceedings
On June
20, 2008, the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Atlas America, LLC, was named
as a co-defendant in the matter captioned
CNX Gas Company, LLC (“CNX”)
v. Miller Petroleum, Inc. (“Miller”)
, et al. (Chancery Court, Campbell
County, Tennessee). In its complaint, CNX alleged that Miller
breached a contract to assign to CNX certain leasehold rights (“Leases”)
representing approximately 30,000 acres in Campbell County, Tennessee and that
the Company and another defendant, Wind City Oil & Gas, LLC, interfered with
the closing of this assignment on June 6, 2008. The Company purchased
the Leases from Miller for approximately $19.1 million. On December
15, 2008, the Chancery Court dismissed the matter in its entirety, holding that
there had been no breach of the contract by Miller and, therefore, that Atlas
America could not have tortuously interfered with the contract. The
Chancery Court dismissed all claims against Atlas America, LLC; however, CNX has
appealed this decision.
Following
the announcement of the merger agreement on April 27, 2009, the following
actions were filed in Delaware Chancery Court purporting to challenge the
merger:
|
•
|
Alonzo v. Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC, et al.,
C.A. No. 4553-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
4/30/09);
|
|
•
|
Operating Engineers
Constructions Industry and Miscellaneous Pension Fund v. Atlas America,
Inc., et al.,
C.A. No. 4589-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
5/13/09);
|
|
•
|
Vanderpool v. Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC, et al.,
C.A. No. 4604-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
5/15/09);
|
|
•
|
Farrell v. Cohen, et
al.,
C.A. No. 4607-VCN (Del. Ch. filed 5/19/09);
and
|
|
•
|
Montgomery County Employees’
Retirement Fund v. Atlas Energy Resources, L.L.C., et al.,
C.A.
No. 4613-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
5/21/09).
|
On June
15, 2009, Vice Chancellor Noble issued an order consolidating all five lawsuits,
renaming the action
In re
Atlas Energy Resources, LLC Unitholder Litigation
, C.A. No. 4589-VCN, and
appointing as co-lead plaintiffs Operating Engineers Construction Industry and
Miscellaneous Pension Fund and Montgomery County Employees Retirement Fund.
Plaintiffs filed a Verified Consolidated Class Action Complaint on July 1, 2009,
which has superseded all prior complaints. On July 27, 2009, the Chancery Court
granted the parties’ scheduling stipulation, setting a preliminary injunction
hearing for September 4, 2009. The complaint advances claims of breach of
fiduciary duty in connection with the merger agreement, including allegations of
inadequate disclosures in connection with the unitholder vote on the merger, and
seeks monetary damages or injunctive relief, or both.
On August
7, 2009, plaintiffs advised the court by letter that the hearing date be removed
from the court’s calendar. Plaintiffs have advised counsel that they
intend to continue to pursue the case after the merger as a claim for monetary
damages. Predicting the outcome of this lawsuit is difficult. An
adverse judgment for monetary damages could have a material adverse effect on
the operations of the combined company after the merger. A preliminary
injunction, had plaintiffs successfully pursued it, could have delayed or
jeopardized the completion of the merger, and an adverse judgment granting
permanent injunctive relief could have indefinitely enjoined completion of the
merger. Based on the facts known to date, the defendants believe that the claims
asserted against them in this lawsuit are without merit, and intend to defend
themselves vigorously against the claims.
The
Company is also a party to various routine legal proceedings arising in the
ordinary course of its business. Management believes that none of these actions,
individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the
Company’s financial condition or results of operations.
NOTE
9—LONG-TERM DEBT
Total debt consists of the following at
the dates indicated (in thousands):
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revolving
credit facility
|
|
$
|
456,000
|
|
|
$
|
467,000
|
|
10.75%
senior unsecured notes – due 2018
|
|
|
400,000
|
|
|
|
400,000
|
|
Unamortized
notes premium
|
|
|
6,289
|
|
|
|
6,655
|
|
|
|
|
862,289
|
|
|
|
873,655
|
|
Less
current maturities
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
$
|
862,289
|
|
|
$
|
873,655
|
|
Revolving Credit
Facility
. At June 30, 2009, the Company had a credit facility
with a syndicate of banks with a borrowing base of $650.0 million that matures
in June 2012. The borrowing base is redetermined semiannually on
April 1 and October 1 subject to changes in the Company’s oil and gas reserves
or is automatically reduced by 25% of the stated principal of any senior
unsecured notes issued by the Company. On July 16, 2009, the Company
issued $200.0 million of senior unsecured notes, and the borrowing base was
reduced by $50.0 million to $600.0 million (see Note 13). Up to $50.0
million of the credit facility may be in the form of standby letters of credit,
of which $1.2 million was outstanding at June 30, 2009, which are not reflected
as borrowings on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The
credit facility is secured by substantially all of the Company’s assets and is
guaranteed by each of the Company’s subsidiaries and bears interest at either
the base rate plus the applicable margin or at adjusted LIBOR plus the
applicable margin, elected at the Company’s option. On April 9, 2009,
the credit agreement was amended to, among other things, increase the applicable
margin on Eurodollar Loans from a range of 100 to 175 basis points to a range of
200 to 300 basis points and the applicable margin for base rate loans from a
range of 0 to 75 basis points to a range of 112.5 to 212.5 basis
points. At June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the weighted average
interest rate on the credit facility’s outstanding borrowings was 2.9% and 2.8%,
respectively. The base rate for any day equals the higher of the
federal funds rate plus 0.50%, the J.P. Morgan prime rate or the Adjusted LIBOR
for a 30-day interest period plus 1.0%. Adjusted LIBOR is LIBOR
divided by 1.00 minus the percentage prescribed by the Federal Reserve Board for
determining the reserve requirement for Eurocurrency liabilities. The
credit agreement was amended on July 10, 2009, in anticipation of the merger
between the Company and Atlas America (see Note 13).
The
events which constitute an event of default for the Company’s credit facility
are also customary for loans of this size, including payment defaults, breaches
of representations or covenants contained in the credit agreement, adverse
judgments against the Company in excess of a specified amount, and a change of
control. In addition, the agreement limits sales, leases or transfers
of assets and the incurrence of additional indebtedness. The
agreement limits the distributions payable by the Company if an event of default
has occurred and is continuing or would occur as a result of such
distribution. The Company was in compliance with these covenants as
of June 30, 2009. The credit facility also requires the Company to
maintain ratios of current assets (as defined in the credit facility) to current
liabilities (as defined in the credit facility) of not less than 1.0 to 1.0 and
a ratio of total debt (as defined in the credit facility) to earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation, depletion and amortization (“EBITDA”, as defined
in the credit facility) of 3.75 to 1.0 commencing January 1, 2009, and
decreasing to 3.5 to 1.0 commencing January 1, 2010 and
thereafter. According to the definitions contained in the Company’s
credit facility, the Company’s ratio of current assets to current liabilities
was 1.3 to 1.0 and its ratio of total debt to EBITDA was 2.7 to 1.0 at June 30,
2009.
Senior Unsecured
Notes
. At June 30, 2009, the Company had $400.0 million
principal amount outstanding of 10.75% senior unsecured notes (“Senior Notes”)
due on February 1, 2018 (see Note 13). The Senior Notes are presented
combined with the $6.3 million unamortized premium received at June 30,
2009. Interest on the Senior Notes is payable semi-annually in
arrears on February 1 and August 1 of each year. The Senior Notes are
redeemable at any time at specified redemption prices, together with accrued and
unpaid interest to the date of redemption. In addition, before
February 1, 2011, the Company may redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal
amount of the Senior Notes with the proceeds of equity offerings at a stated
redemption price. The Senior Notes are also subject to repurchase by
the Company at a price equal to 101% of their principal amount, plus accrued and
unpaid interest, upon a change of control or upon certain asset sales if the
Company does not reinvest the net proceeds within 360 days. The
Senior Notes are junior in right of payment to the Company’s secured debt,
including its obligations under its credit facility. The indenture
governing the Senior Notes contains covenants, including limitations of the
Company’s ability to: incur certain liens; engage in sale/leaseback
transactions; incur additional indebtedness; declare or pay distributions if an
event of default has occurred; redeem, repurchase or retire equity interests or
subordinated indebtedness; make certain investments; or merge, consolidate or
sell substantially all of its assets. The Company is in compliance
with the covenants as of June 30, 2009.
NOTE
10—OPERATING SEGMENT INFORMATION
The
Company’s operations include three reportable operating segments. These
operating segments reflect the way the Company manages its operations and makes
business decisions. The Company organizes its oil and gas production
segments by geographic location. The Appalachia segment represents
the Company’s well interests in the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, West
Virginia and Tennessee. The Michigan/Indiana segment represents the
Company’s well interests in the Antrim Shale, located in Michigan’s northern,
Lower Peninsula and the New Albany Shale located in southwestern
Indiana.
Segment
profit per segment represents total revenues less costs and expenses
attributable thereto. Amounts for interest, provision for possible
losses and depreciation, depletion and amortization and general corporate
expenses are shown in the aggregate because these measures are not significant
drivers in deciding how to allocate resources and assessing performance of each
defined segment.
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas
and oil production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
32,556
|
|
|
$
|
33,988
|
|
|
$
|
62,150
|
|
|
$
|
62,896
|
|
Costs
and expenses
|
|
|
6,902
|
|
|
|
5,862
|
|
|
|
14,316
|
|
|
|
10,881
|
|
Segment
profit
|
|
$
|
25,654
|
|
|
$
|
28,126
|
|
|
$
|
47,834
|
|
|
$
|
52,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michigan/Indiana:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
37,423
|
|
|
$
|
44,969
|
|
|
$
|
79,772
|
|
|
$
|
92,287
|
|
Costs
and expenses
|
|
|
5,810
|
|
|
|
9,343
|
|
|
|
12,978
|
|
|
|
17,405
|
|
Segment
profit
|
|
$
|
31,613
|
|
|
$
|
35,626
|
|
|
$
|
66,794
|
|
|
$
|
74,882
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnership
management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
75,342
|
|
|
$
|
137,789
|
|
|
$
|
200,511
|
|
|
$
|
255,300
|
|
Costs
and expenses
|
|
|
62,122
|
|
|
|
114,547
|
|
|
|
164,259
|
|
|
|
211,541
|
|
Segment
profit
|
|
$
|
13,220
|
|
|
$
|
23,242
|
|
|
$
|
36,252
|
|
|
$
|
43,759
|
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Reconciliation
of segment profit to net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment
profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas
and oil production-Appalachia
|
|
$
|
25,654
|
|
|
$
|
28,126
|
|
|
$
|
47,834
|
|
|
$
|
52,015
|
|
Gas
and oil production-Michigan/Indiana
|
|
|
31,613
|
|
|
|
35,626
|
|
|
|
66,794
|
|
|
|
74,882
|
|
Partnership
management
|
|
|
13,220
|
|
|
|
23,242
|
|
|
|
36,252
|
|
|
|
43,759
|
|
Total
segment profit
|
|
|
70,487
|
|
|
|
86,994
|
|
|
|
150,880
|
|
|
|
170,656
|
|
General
and administrative expense
|
|
|
(12,268
|
)
|
|
|
(12,286
|
)
|
|
|
(26,817
|
)
|
|
|
(24,078
|
)
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
|
|
(27,275
|
)
|
|
|
(22,948
|
)
|
|
|
(55,303
|
)
|
|
|
(44,758
|
)
|
Loss
on asset sale
|
|
|
(4,250
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(4,250
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
Interest
expense
(1)
|
|
|
(15,124
|
)
|
|
|
(14,563
|
)
|
|
|
(28,108
|
)
|
|
|
(27,868
|
)
|
Other
− net
(
2
)
|
|
|
676
|
|
|
|
1,179
|
|
|
|
1,447
|
|
|
|
1,988
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$
|
12,246
|
|
|
$
|
38,376
|
|
|
$
|
37,849
|
|
|
$
|
75,940
|
|
________________
(1)
|
The
Company notes that interest expense has not been allocated to its
reportable segments as it would be impracticable to reasonably do so for
the periods presented.
|
(2)
|
Revenues, net of expenses, for
AGO well services and transportation of $0.7 million for both of the
three-month periods ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, and $1.4 million and
$1.5 million for the six-month periods ended June 30, 2009 and
2008, respectively, do not meet the quantitative threshold for
reporting segment information. These amounts have been included
in “Other – net” above.
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Capital
expenditures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas
and oil production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia
|
|
$
|
26,289
|
|
|
$
|
60,410
|
|
|
$
|
68,991
|
|
|
$
|
99,621
|
|
Michigan
|
|
|
4,480
|
|
|
|
18,930
|
|
|
|
11,396
|
|
|
|
34,193
|
|
Partnership
management
|
|
|
8,180
|
|
|
|
390
|
|
|
|
15,607
|
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
257
|
|
|
|
323
|
|
|
|
419
|
|
|
|
656
|
|
|
|
$
|
39,206
|
|
|
$
|
80,053
|
|
|
$
|
96,413
|
|
|
$
|
135,670
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Balance
sheets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas
and oil production – Appalachia
|
|
$
|
21,527
|
|
|
$
|
21,527
|
|
Partnership
management
|
|
|
13,639
|
|
|
|
13,639
|
|
|
|
$
|
35,166
|
|
|
$
|
35,166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas
and oil production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia
|
|
$
|
834,875
|
|
|
$
|
794,521
|
|
Michigan/Indiana
|
|
|
1,394,929
|
|
|
|
1,416,042
|
|
Partnership
management
|
|
|
49,475
|
|
|
|
53,031
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
25,534
|
|
|
|
27,723
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,304,813
|
|
|
$
|
2,291,317
|
|
The
following table reconciles revenues shown for each operating segment to total
revenues shown on the consolidated statements of income for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas
& oil production – Appalachia
|
|
$
|
32,556
|
|
|
$
|
33,988
|
|
|
$
|
62,150
|
|
|
$
|
62,896
|
|
Gas
& oil production – Michigan/Indiana
|
|
|
37,423
|
|
|
|
44,969
|
|
|
|
79,772
|
|
|
|
92,287
|
|
Partnership
management
|
|
|
75,342
|
|
|
|
137,789
|
|
|
|
200,511
|
|
|
|
255,300
|
|
Other
|
|
|
861
|
|
|
|
810
|
|
|
|
1,729
|
|
|
|
1,662
|
|
|
|
$
|
146,182
|
|
|
$
|
217,556
|
|
|
$
|
344,162
|
|
|
$
|
412,145
|
|
NOTE
11 - BENEFIT PLANS
The Company has a Long-Term Incentive
Plan (“LTIP”), which provides performance incentive awards to officers,
employees and board members and employees of its affiliates, consultants and
joint-venture partners. The LTIP is administered by the Company’s
compensation committee, which may grant awards of restricted stock units,
phantom units or unit options. Awards for a total of 3,742,000 common
units may be granted under the LTIP. Awards granted after 2006 vest
25% after three years and 100% upon the four-year anniversary of grant, except
for awards of 1,500 units to board members which vest 25% per year over four
years. Awards granted in 2006 vest 25% per year over four years. Upon
termination of service by a grantee, all unvested awards are forfeited. A
restricted stock or phantom unit entitles a grantee to receive a common
unit of the Company upon vesting of the unit or, at the discretion of the
Company’s compensation committee, cash equivalent to the then fair market
value of a common unit of the Company. In tandem with phantom unit
grants, the Company’s compensation committee may grant a distribution equivalent
right (“DER”), which is the right to receive cash per phantom unit in an amount
equal to, and at the same time as, the cash distributions the Company makes on a
common unit during the period such phantom unit is outstanding.
Restricted Stock and Phantom
Units.
Under the LTIP, 23,523 and 26,375 units of
restricted stock and phantom units were awarded during the six months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The fair value of the grants is based
on the closing stock price on the grant date, and is being charged to operations
over the requisite service periods using a straight-line attribution
method.
The following table summarizes the
activity of restricted stock and phantom units for the six months ended June 30,
2009:
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
Date
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
Non-vested
shares outstanding at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
768,829
|
|
|
$
|
23.86
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
23,523
|
|
|
|
14.50
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(13,073
|
)
|
|
|
21.70
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(8,000
|
)
|
|
|
20.78
|
|
Non-vested
shares outstanding at June 30, 2009
|
|
|
771,279
|
|
|
$
|
23.65
|
|
Unit Options
.
There
were no unit options granted during the six months ended June 30,
2009. During the six months ended June 30, 2008, 14,000 unit options
were awarded under the LTIP. Option awards expire 10 years from the date of
grant and are generally granted with an exercise price equal to the market price
of the Company’s stock at the date of grant. The Company uses the Black-Scholes
option pricing model to estimate the weighted average fair value per option
granted.
The
following table sets forth option activity for the six months ended June 30,
2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
(in
years)
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
1,902,902
|
|
|
$
|
24.17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
or expired
|
|
|
(7,500
|
)
|
|
|
23.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at June 30, 2009
|
|
|
1,895,402
|
|
|
$
|
24.18
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
Options
exercisable at June 30, 2009
|
|
|
280,314
|
|
|
$
|
21.00
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available
for grant at June 30, 2009
|
|
|
1,038,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
following tables summarize information about unit options outstanding and
exercisable at June 30, 2009:
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
Range of
Exercise Prices
|
|
Number of
Shares
Outstanding
|
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life in Years
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
|
Number of
Shares
Exercisable
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
$21.00
– 23.06
|
|
|
1,647,302
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
$
|
22.59
|
|
|
280,314
|
|
|
$
|
21.00
|
|
$30.24
– 35.00
|
|
|
240,600
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
$
|
34.53
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
$37.79
and above
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
$
|
39.79
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
1,895,402
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
$
|
24.18
|
|
|
280,314
|
|
|
$
|
21.00
|
|
The Company recognized $1.5 million and
$1.3 million in compensation expense related to restricted stock units, phantom
units and unit options for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The Company recognized $3.0 million and $2.7 million in
related compensation expense for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The Company paid $0.3 million with respect to its LTIP
DERs for the three months ended June 30, 2008, and $0.4 million and $0.7 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. No
payment was made with respect to its LTIP DERs for the three months ending June
30, 2009. These amounts were recorded as a reduction of members’
equity on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet during the respective
period. At June 30, 2009, the Company had approximately $10.9 million
of unrecognized compensation expense related to the unvested portion of the
restricted stock units, phantom units and unit options.
NOTE
12 – CASH DISTRIBUTIONS
The
Company is required to distribute, within 45 days after the end of each quarter,
all of its available cash (as defined in its limited liability company
agreement) for that quarter to its Class A and Class B common unitholders in
accordance with their respective percentage interests. If Class A and
Class B common unit distributions exceed specified target levels in any quarter
during or subsequent to the completion of certain tests in accordance with the
Company’s limited liability company agreement, the Managing Member will receive
MIIs between 15% and 50% of such distributions in excess of the specified target
levels as defined in the Company’s limited liability company
agreement. The tests within the Company’s limited liability company
agreement include a 12-quarter test which requires, among other things, that the
Company pay a quarterly cash distribution per unit that, on average, exceeds
$0.42 per unit for 12 full, consecutive, non-overlapping calendar quarters and
does not have a calendar quarter during which the distribution per unit was not
reduced. Effective April 27, 2009, the Company has suspended further
distributions due to the announcement of its intent to merge with Atlas America
(see Note 1). The Company’s suspension of the quarterly distribution
during the three months and six months ended June 30, 2009 means that it has not
met the tests within the limited liability company agreement and, as such, the
Managing Member will not receive the MIIs that were previously reserved for
during previous periods. Distributions declared by the Company from
January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Total
Cash
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Date
Cash
|
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
to
Common
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
Paid
or Payable
|
|
For
Quarter Ended
|
|
Unit
|
|
|
Unitholders
|
|
|
to
the Manager
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
February
14 , 2008
|
|
December
31, 2007
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
$
|
34,605
|
|
|
$
|
706
|
|
May
15, 2008
|
|
March
31, 2008
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
|
$
|
36,173
|
|
|
$
|
738
|
|
August
14, 2008
|
|
June
30, 2008
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
38,663
|
|
|
$
|
789
|
|
November
14, 2008
|
|
September
30, 2008
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
38,663
|
|
|
$
|
789
|
|
February
13, 2009
|
|
December
31, 2008
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
38,663
|
|
|
$
|
789
|
|
NOTE
13 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
Issuance
of Senior Unsecured Notes
On July 16, 2009, the Company issued
$200.0 million of 12.125% senior unsecured notes (“12.125% Senior Notes”) due
2017 at 98.116% of par value to yield 12.5% at maturity. The Company
used the net proceeds from the issuance of approximately $191.7 million, net of
underwriting fees of $4.5 million, to repay outstanding borrowings under its
revolving credit facility. Under the terms of the Company’s credit
facility (see Note 9), the credit facility borrowing base is automatically
reduced by 25% of the stated principal amount of any senior unsecured notes
offering. As such, the borrowing base of the Company’s credit
facility was reduced by $50.0 million to $600.0 million upon the issuance of the
12.125% Senior Notes. Interest on the 12.125% Senior Notes is payable
semi-annually in arrears on February 1 and August 1 of each year. The
12.125% Senior Notes are redeemable at any time at certain redemption prices,
together with accrued interest at the date of redemption. In
addition, before August 1, 2012, the Company may redeem up to 35% of the
aggregate principal amount of the 12.125% Senior Notes with the proceeds of
certain equity offerings at a stated redemption price of 112.125% of the
principal, plus accrued interest. The 12.125% Senior Notes are junior
in right of payment to the Company’s secured debt, including its obligations
under its revolving credit facility. The indenture governing the
12.125% Senior Notes contains covenants, including limitations of the Company’s
ability to incur certain liens, engage in sale/leaseback transactions, incur
additional indebtedness; declare or pay distributions if an event of default has
occurred; redeem, repurchase, or retire equity interests or subordinated
indebtedness; make certain investments; or merge, consolidate or sell
substantially all of its assets.
Amendment
to Revolving Credit Facility
On July 10, 2009, the Company
received the requisite consent from its lenders to amend its revolving credit
facility to permit the merger with Atlas America. The material terms of the
amendment are:
|
|
The
merger with Atlas America will be
permitted,
|
|
•
|
Restrictions
on the Company’s ability to make payments with respect to its equity
interests will be revised to permit it to make distributions to Atlas
America in an amount equal to the income tax liability at the highest
marginal rate attributable to the Company’s net income. In addition, the
Company will be permitted to make distributions to Atlas America of up to
$40.0 million per year and, to the extent that it distributes less
than that amount in any year, may carry over up to $20.0 million for
use in the next year,
|
|
•
|
The
definition of change of control will be revised to include a change of
control of Atlas America.
|
The amendment will become effective
upon consummation of the merger.
Natural
Gas Derivative Contracts
On July 20, 2009, the Company entered
into certain natural gas derivative contracts for calendar 2013 production
volumes of 220,000 MMbtu per month with an average fixed price of $6.90 per
MMbtu.
ITEM
2: MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
When
used in this Form 10-Q, the words “believes” “anticipates,” “expects” and
similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements.
Such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties more particularly
described in Item 1A, under the caption “Risk Factors”, in our annual report on
Form 10-K for fiscal 2008 and Part II, Item 1A of this report. These
risks and uncertainties could cause actual results to differ materially.
Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. We undertake no
obligation to publicly release the results of any revisions to forward-looking
statements which we may make to reflect events or circumstances after the date
of this Form 10-Q or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated
events.
GENERAL
The
following discussion provides information to assist in understanding our
financial condition and results of operations. This discussion should
be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related
notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this report. Unless otherwise
indicated, references in this report to
we
,
our
or
us
include Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC, our wholly-owned subsidiaries and our interests in sponsored
drilling programs.
We are a
publicly-traded Delaware limited liability Company (NYSE: ATN) and an
independent developer and producer of natural gas and oil, with operations in
the Appalachian Basin, the Michigan Basin, and the Illinois
Basin. Within these Basins we focus our drilling and production in
four established shale plays; namely, the Marcellus Shale of western
Pennsylvania, the Antrim Shale of northern Michigan, the Chattanooga Shale of
northeastern Tennessee, and the New Albany Shale of west central
Indiana. Our Appalachian Basin operations are primarily located in
eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, and north central Tennessee. We
have additional operations in New York, West Virginia and
Kentucky. We specialize in the development of these natural gas
basins because they provide us with repeatable, low-risk drilling
opportunities. We are a leading sponsor and manager of
tax-advantaged, direct investment natural gas and oil partnerships in the United
States. Our focus is to increase our reserves, production, and cash flows
through a balanced mix of generating new opportunities of geologic prospects,
natural gas and oil exploitation and development, and sponsorship of investment
partnerships. We generate both upfront and ongoing fees from the drilling,
production, servicing, and administration of our wells in these
partnerships.
Our
business is conducted through three reportable business segments:
|
·
|
Two
gas and oil production segments, in Appalachia and Michigan/Indiana, which
consist of our interests in oil and gas properties;
and
|
|
·
|
Our
partnership management segment, which consists of well construction and
completion, administration and oversight, well services and gathering
activities.
|
RECENT
DEVELOPMENTS
Formation
of Atlas Resources Public #18-2009(B) L.P.
On June 29, 2009, we completed
fundraising for Atlas Resources Public #18-2008 Drilling Program, raising $122.8
million representing the second partnership (Atlas Resources Public #18-2009(B)
L.P.) in the program. Atlas Resources, LLC, our wholly-owned
subsidiary, serves as the managing general partner.
Sale
of Natural Gas Gathering and Processing Assets
On June 1, 2009, we completed the sale
of two natural gas processing plants and associated pipelines located in
southwestern Pennsylvania for cash of $10.0 million to Laurel Mountain
Midstream, LLC (“Laurel Mountain”), a newly-formed joint venture between our
affiliate, Atlas Pipeline Partners, L.P. (NYSE: APL) (“Atlas Pipeline”), and The
Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE: WMB). (“Williams”). Upon
contribution of its Appalachia Basin natural gas gathering system to Laurel
Mountain, Atlas Pipeline received $87.8 million in cash, a preferred equity
right to proceeds under a $25.5 million note issued to Laurel Mountain by
Williams and a 49.0% ownership interest in Laurel Mountain. Atlas
Pipeline is a subsidiary of our indirect parent company, Atlas America, Inc.
(NASDAQ: ATLS), (“Atlas America”). Laurel Mountain owns and operates
all of Atlas Pipeline’s previously owned northern Appalachian assets, excluding
its northern Tennessee operations, of which we will be the largest
customer. We recorded a loss on the sale of the two natural gas
processing plants and associated pipelines of $4.3 million which is recorded as
“Loss on asset sale” on our consolidated statements of income for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2009. We used the net proceeds to reduce
borrowings under our revolving credit facility.
Upon completion of the transaction with
Laurel Mountain, we entered into new gas gathering agreements with Laurel
Mountain which superseded the existing master natural gas gathering agreement
and omnibus agreement between us and Atlas Pipeline. Under the new
gas gathering agreement, we are obligated to pay Laurel Mountain all of the
gathering fees we collect from the partnerships, which generally ranges from
$0.35 per Mcf to the amount of the competitive gathering fee (which is currently
defined as 13% of the gross sales price received for the partnerships gas) plus
any excess amount of the gathering fees collected up to an amount equal to
approximately 16% of the natural gas sales price. The new gathering
agreement contains additional provisions which define certain obligations and
options of each party to build and connect newly drilled wells to any Laurel
Mountain gathering system.
Early
Termination of Derivative Instruments
In May
2009, we received approximately $28.5 million in proceeds from the early
settlement of natural gas and oil derivative positions for production periods
from 2011 through 2013. In conjunction with the early termination of these
derivatives, we entered into new derivative position at the prevailing prices at
the time of the transaction. The net proceeds from the early termination of
these derivatives were used to reduce indebtedness under our revolving credit
facility (see “Credit Facility”).
Merger
with Atlas America, Inc.
On April 27, 2009, we and Atlas America
executed a definitive merger agreement, pursuant to which a newly formed
subsidiary of Atlas America will merge with and into us, with us surviving as a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Atlas America. In the merger, each Class B
common unit of ours not currently held by Atlas America will be converted into
1.16 shares of Atlas America common stock, and Atlas America will be renamed
“Atlas Energy, Inc.” The Atlas America board of directors has
approved the merger agreement and has resolved to recommend that the Atlas
America stockholders vote in favor of the transactions contemplated by the
merger agreement. Our board of directors and a special committee of
our directors comprised entirely of independent directors have also approved the
merger agreement and have resolved to recommend that our unitholders vote in
favor of the merger. Pending consummation of the merger, we have
suspended distributions to our Class A and Class B members’
interests. The transaction will be subject to approval by holders of
a majority of the outstanding Atlas America common stock and a majority of our
outstanding Class B units and other customary closing conditions.
Credit
Agreement Amendment
Effective April 9, 2009, we entered
into a second amendment to our credit agreement with a syndicate of banks, which
among other things, adjusted our credit facility borrowing base to $650.0
million (see “Subsequent Events”). The amendment also modified the
definition of applicable margin above adjusted LIBOR or the base rate (as
defined in the credit agreement) upon which borrowings under the credit facility
bear interest by adjusting the Eurodollar Loans rate (as defined in the credit
agreement) from a range of 100 to 175 basis points to a range of 200 to 300
basis points and the applicable margin for base rate loans from a range of 0 to
75 basis points to a range of 112.5 to 212.5 basis points, subject to amounts
drawn against the credit facility.
SUBSEQUENT
EVENTS
Senior
Unsecured Notes
On July 16, 2008, we issued $200.0
million of 12.125% senior unsecured notes (“12.125% Senior Notes”) due 2017 at
98.116% of par value to yield 12.5% at maturity. We used the net
proceeds of $191.7 million, net underwriting fees of $4.5 million, to repay
outstanding borrowings under our revolving credit facility.Under the terms of
our credit facility (see “Credit Facility”), the credit facility borrowing base
is automatically reduced by 25% of the stated principal amount of any senior
unsecured notes offering by us. As such, the borrowing base of our
credit facility was reduced by $50.0 million to $600.0 million upon the issuance
of the 12.125% Senior Notes. Interest on the 12.125% Senior Notes is payable
semi-annually in arrears on February 1 and August 1 of each year. The
12.125% Senior Notes are redeemable at any time at certain redemption prices,
together with accrued interest at the date of redemption. In
addition, before August 1, 2012, we may redeem up to 35% of the aggregate
principal amount of the 12.125% Senior Notes with the proceeds of certain equity
offerings at a stated redemption price of 112.125% of the principal, plus
accrued interest.The 12.125% Senior Notes are junior in right of payment to our
secured debt, including our obligations under the revolving credit
facility. The indenture governing the 12.125% Senior Notes contains
covenants, including limitations of our ability to incur certain liens, engage
in sale/leaseback transactions, incur additional indebtedness; declare or pay
distributions if an event of default has occurred; redeem, repurchase, or retire
equity interests or subordinated indebtedness; make certain investments; or
merge, consolidate or sell substantially all of our assets.
Amendment
to Revolving Credit Facility
On July 10, 2009, we received the
requisite consent from our lenders to amend our revolving credit facility to
permit the merger with Atlas America. The material terms of the amendment
are:
|
•
|
The
merger with Atlas America will be
permitted,
|
|
•
|
Restrictions
on our ability to make payments with respect to our equity interests will
be revised to permit us to make distributions to Atlas America in an
amount equal to the income tax liability at the highest marginal rate
attributable to our net income. In addition, we will be permitted to make
distributions to Atlas America of up to $40.0 million per year and,
to the extent that we distribute less than that amount in any year, may
carry over up to $20.0 million for use in the next
year,
|
|
•
|
The
definition of change of control will be revised to include a change of
control of Atlas America.
|
The amendment will become effective
upon consummation of the merger.
Natural
Gas Derivative Contracts
On July 20, 2009, we entered into
certain natural gas derivative contracts for calendar 2013 production volume of
220,000 MMbtu per month with an average fixed price of $6.90 per
MMbtu.
Key Performance Indicators as of and
for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009
:
In our
Appalachia gas and oil operations:
|
·
|
we
own direct and indirect working interests in approximately 8,631 gross
productive gas and oil wells;
|
|
·
|
we
own overriding royalty interests in approximately 629 gross productive gas
and oil wells;
|
|
·
|
our
net daily production was 43.6 Mmcfe per day and 42.9 Mmcfe per day for the
three months and six months ended June 30,
2009;
|
|
·
|
we
lease approximately 935,300 gross (889,700 net) acres, of which
approximately 623,300 gross (616,400 net) acres are
undeveloped;
|
|
·
|
included
in our undeveloped acreage are approximately 531,950 Marcellus acres in
Pennsylvania, New York and West Virginia, of which approximately 266,100
acres are located in our core Marcellus Shale position in southwestern
Pennsylvania;
|
|
·
|
we
drilled 126 gross wells (including 42 Marcellus Shale wells), during the
six months ended June 30, 2009, on behalf of our investment
partnerships;
|
|
·
|
we
have drilled 153 vertical and 10 horizontal gross Marcellus Shale wells to
date, of which 140 vertical and 5 horizontal Marcellus Shale wells have
been successfully completed and have been turned on line and are
producing;
|
|
·
|
of
the 153 Marcellus Shale wells we drilled to date, we have completed 42
wells using the multi-frac technique we developed with successful
results;
|
|
·
|
we
connected 179 gross wells to gathering systems during the six months ended
June 30, 2009; and
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
we
drilled and participated in 21 horizontal wells in the Chattanooga Shale
of eastern Tennessee to date. We have leased approximately
137,000 gross acres (106,000 net undeveloped) in this shale
area.
|
In our
Michigan gas and oil operations:
|
·
|
we
own direct and indirect working interests in approximately 2,488 gross
producing gas and oil wells;
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
we
own overriding royalty interests in approximately 93 gross producing gas
and oil wells;
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
our
net daily production was 57.9 Mmcfe per day and 58.0 Mmcfe per day for the
three months and six months ended June 30, 2009;
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
we
have leased approximately 344,400 gross (272,200 net) acres, of
which approximately 35,800 gross (28,100 net) acres are undeveloped;
and
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
we
drilled 24 gross wells (19 net wells) during the six months ended June 30,
2009.
|
In our
Indiana gas and oil operations:
|
·
|
we
own direct and indirect working interests in approximately 16 gross
producing gas and oil wells;
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
our
net daily production was 0.2 Mmcfe per day for both the three months and
six months ended June 30, 2009;
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
we
have leased approximately 244,100 gross (118,200 net) acres, of which
approximately 239,100 gross (114,400 net) acres are undeveloped;
and
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
we
drilled 16 gross wells (14 net wells) during the six months ended June 30,
2009.
|
In our
partnership management business:
|
·
|
our
investment partnership business includes equity interests in 95 investment
partnerships and a registered broker-dealer which acts as the dealer
manager of our investment partnership
offerings.
|
|
·
|
since
July 2008, we have raised $560.0 million in investor funds, including
$122.8 million raised in the three months ended June 30, 2009 for our most
recent investment partnership, Atlas Resources Public #18-2009(B)
L.P.
|
How
We Evaluate our Operations
Non-GAAP Financial
Measures
We use a
variety of financial and operations measures to assess our performance,
including non-GAAP financial measures, such as EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA and
distributable cash flow. These measures are not calculated or presented in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP. EBITDA,
Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow are significant performance metrics
used by our management to indicate the cash distributions we expect to pay to
our unitholders, prior to the establishment of any cash reserves (see “Recent
Developments” and “Cash Distributions”). Specifically, these
financial measures assist our investors in their assessment of whether or not we
are generating cash flow at a level that can sustain or support an increase in
our quarterly distribution rates. EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA and
distributable cash flow are also used as quantitative standards by our
management and by external users of our financial statements such as investors,
research analysts and others to assess:
|
·
|
the
financial performance of our assets without regard to financing methods,
capital structure or historical cost
basis;
|
|
·
|
the
ability of our assets to generate cash sufficient to pay interest costs
and support our indebtedness; and
|
|
·
|
our
operating performance and return on capital as compared to those of other
companies in our industry, without regard to financing or capital
structure.
|
Our
EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow should not be considered as
a substitute for net income, operating income, cash flows from operating
activities or any other measure of financial performance or liquidity presented
in accordance with GAAP. Our EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow
excludes some, but not all, items that affect net income and operating income
and these measures may vary among other companies. Therefore, our EBITDA,
Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow may not be comparable to similarly
titled measures of other companies.
The
following table presents a reconciliation of netincome, our most directly
comparable GAAP performance
Measure,
to EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow for each of the periods
presented:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Reconciliation
of net income to non-GAAP measures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$
|
12,246
|
|
|
$
|
38,376
|
|
|
$
|
37,849
|
|
|
$
|
75,940
|
|
Income
attributable to non-controlling interests
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
27,275
|
|
|
|
22,948
|
|
|
|
55,303
|
|
|
|
44,758
|
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
15,124
|
|
|
|
14,563
|
|
|
|
28,108
|
|
|
|
27,868
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
|
54,630
|
|
|
|
75,870
|
|
|
|
121,230
|
|
|
|
148,528
|
|
Adjustment
to reflect cash impact of derivatives
(1)
|
|
|
29,019
|
|
|
|
2,920
|
|
|
|
30,623
|
|
|
|
7,948
|
|
Non-cash
loss on sale of assets
|
|
|
4,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Non-cash
compensation expense
|
|
|
1,453
|
|
|
|
1,339
|
|
|
|
2,981
|
|
|
|
2,659
|
|
Adjusted
EBITDA
|
|
$
|
89,352
|
|
|
$
|
80,129
|
|
|
$
|
159,084
|
|
|
$
|
159,135
|
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(15,124
|
)
|
|
|
(14,563
|
)
|
|
|
(28,108
|
)
|
|
|
(27,868
|
)
|
Amortization
of deferred financing costs (included within interest
expense)
|
|
|
1,002
|
|
|
|
742
|
|
|
|
1,667
|
|
|
|
1,512
|
|
Maintenance
capital expenditures
|
|
|
(12,975
|
)
|
|
|
(12,975
|
)
|
|
|
(25,950
|
)
|
|
|
(25,950
|
)
|
Distributable
cash flow
|
|
$
|
62,255
|
|
|
$
|
53,333
|
|
|
$
|
106,693
|
|
|
$
|
106,829
|
|
________________
(1)
|
Consists
of (i) $28.5 million of cash proceeds received in May 2009 from the early
settlement of natural gas and oil derivative positions and (ii) cash
proceeds received from the settlement of ineffective derivative gains
recognized in fiscal 2007 associated with the acquisition of our Michigan
operations during the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
but not reflected in the consolidated statements of income for the
respective periods.
|
GENERAL
TRENDS AND OUTLOOK
We expect
our business to be affected by the following key trends. Our
expectations are based on assumptions made by us and information currently
available to us. To the extent our underlying assumptions about or
interpretations of available information prove to be incorrect, our actual
results may vary materially from our expected results.
Currently,
there is unprecedented uncertainty in the financial markets. This
uncertainty presents additional potential risks to us. These risks
include the availability and costs associated with our borrowing capabilities,
our ability to raise additional capital, and an increase in the volatility of
the market price of our common units. While we have no immediate
plans to access additional debt or equity in the capital markets (see
“Subsequent Events”), should we decide to do so in the near future, the terms,
size, and cost of new debt or equity could be less favorable than in previous
transactions. We do not believe our liquidity has been materially
affected by recent events in the financial markets and we will continue to
monitor events and circumstances which may affect it in the near
future.
Significant
factors that may impact future commodity prices include developments in the
issues currently impacting Iraq and Iran and the Middle East in general; the
extent to which members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and
other oil exporting nations are able to continue to manage oil supply through
export quotas; and overall North American gas supply and demand fundamentals,
including the impact of increasing liquefied natural gas deliveries to the
United States. Although we cannot predict the occurrence of events that will
affect future commodity prices or the degree to which these prices will be
affected, the prices for commodities that we produce will generally approximate
market prices in the geographic region of the production.
Commodity
prices for natural gas continued to decline during the three months ended June
30, 2009 from year-end commodity prices at December 31, 2008. This
decline may cause some of our oil and gas properties to become uneconomic to
develop or operate. Please read “Part II, Item 1A: — Risk Factors”
included in this report.
In order
to address volatility in commodity prices, we have implemented a hedging program
that is intended to reduce the volatility in our revenues. This program
mitigates, but does not eliminate, our sensitivity to short-term changes in
commodity prices. Please read Part I, Item 3, “— Quantitative and Qualitative
Disclosures About Market Risk.”
Natural
Gas Supply and Outlook
While
commodity prices for natural gas have declined during the three months ended
June 30, 2009, we believe that the current development of the Marcellus Shale
and the New Albany Shale, and new horizontal drilling techniques will likely
cause relatively high levels of natural gas-related drilling in these geological
areas as producers seek to increase their level of natural gas
production. Although the number of natural gas wells drilled in the
United States has increased overall in recent years, a corresponding increase in
production has not been realized, primarily as a result of smaller discoveries
and the decline in production from existing wells. However, we
believe that an increase in United States drilling activity, additional sources
of supply such as liquefied natural gas, and imports of natural gas will be
required for the natural gas industry to meet the expected increased demand for,
and to compensate for the slowing production of, natural gas in the United
States. However, the areas in which we operate are experiencing a
decline in the development of shallow wells, but a significant increase in
drilling activity related to new and increased drilling for deeper natural gas
formations and the implementation of new exploration and production techniques,
including horizontal and multiple fracturing techniques.
While we
anticipate continued high levels of exploration and production activities over
the long term in the areas in which we operate, fluctuations in energy prices
can greatly affect production rates and investments by third parties in the
development of new natural gas reserves. Drilling activity generally decreases
as natural gas prices decrease. We have no control over the level of drilling
activity in the areas of our operations.
Reserve
Outlook
Our
future oil and gas reserves, production, cash flow and our ability to make
payments on our debt and distributions (see “Recent Developments” and
“Subsequent Events”) depend on our success in producing our current reserves
efficiently, developing our existing acreage and acquiring additional proved
reserves economically. We face the challenge of natural production
declines and volatile natural gas and oil prices. As initial
reservoir pressures are depleted, natural gas production from particular well
decreases. We attempt to overcome this natural decline by drilling to
find additional reserves and acquiring more reserves than we
produce. In order to sustain and grow our level of distributions, we
may need to make acquisitions that are accretive to distributable cash flow per
unit. In addition, we intend to reserve a portion of our cash flow
from operations to allow us to develop our oil and gas properties at a level
that will allow us to maintain a flat production profile and reserve
levels.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
GAS
AND OIL PRODUCTION
Production
Profile
. The gas and oil wells in each geological basin in
which we operate share a relatively predictable production profile, producing
high quality natural gas at low pressures from several pay zones. Wells in each
region generally demonstrate moderate annual production declines throughout
their economic life, which may continue for 30 years or more without significant
remedial work or the use of secondary recovery techniques.
Production
Volumes.
The following table shows our total net gas and oil
production volumes and production per day during the three months and six months
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively (in thousands, except for production
per day):
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Production:
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia:
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (MMcf)
|
|
|
3,710
|
|
|
|
2,936
|
|
|
|
7,302
|
|
|
|
5,692
|
|
Oil
(000’s Bbls)
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
Total
(MMcfe)
|
|
|
3,968
|
|
|
|
3,164
|
|
|
|
7,770
|
|
|
|
6,136
|
|
Michigan/Indiana:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (MMcf)
|
|
|
5,284
|
|
|
|
5,439
|
|
|
|
10,526
|
|
|
|
10,813
|
|
Oil
(000’s Bbls)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Total
(MMcfe)
|
|
|
5,290
|
|
|
|
5,445
|
|
|
|
10,538
|
|
|
|
10,825
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (MMcf)
|
|
|
8,994
|
|
|
|
8,374
|
|
|
|
17,828
|
|
|
|
16,504
|
|
Oil
(000’s Bbls)
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
Total
(MMcfe)
|
|
|
9,258
|
|
|
|
8,608
|
|
|
|
18,308
|
|
|
|
16,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production per day:
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia:
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (Mcf/d)
|
|
|
40,770
|
|
|
|
32,259
|
|
|
|
40,341
|
|
|
|
31,272
|
|
Oil
(Bbl)
|
|
|
471
|
|
|
|
419
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
|
409
|
|
Total
(Mcfe/d)
|
|
|
43,596
|
|
|
|
34,773
|
|
|
|
42,933
|
|
|
|
33,726
|
|
Michigan/Indiana:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (Mcf/d)
|
|
|
58,058
|
|
|
|
59,767
|
|
|
|
58,154
|
|
|
|
59,411
|
|
Oil
(Bbl)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
Total
(Mcfe/d)
|
|
|
58,124
|
|
|
|
59,857
|
|
|
|
58,208
|
|
|
|
59,477
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (Mcf/d)
|
|
|
98,828
|
|
|
|
92,026
|
|
|
|
98,495
|
|
|
|
90,683
|
|
Oil
(bpd)
|
|
|
482
|
|
|
|
434
|
|
|
|
441
|
|
|
|
420
|
|
Total
(Mcfe/d)
|
|
|
101,720
|
|
|
|
94,630
|
|
|
|
101,141
|
|
|
|
93,203
|
|
______________
(1)
|
Production
quantities consist of the sum of (i) our proportionate share of production
from wells in which we have a direct interest, based on our proportionate
net revenue interest in such wells, and (ii) our proportionate share of
production from wells owned by the investment partnerships in which we
have an interest, based on our equity interest in each such partnership
and based on each partnership’s proportionate net revenue interest in
these wells.
|
(2)
|
Appalachia
includes our production located in Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, West
Virginia, and Tennessee.
|
Production
Revenues, Prices and Costs
. Our production revenues and estimated gas and
oil reserves are substantially dependent on prevailing market prices for natural
gas, which comprised 99% of our proved reserves on an energy equivalent basis at
December 31, 2008. The following table shows our production revenues and average
sales prices for our oil and gas production during the three and six months
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, along with our average production costs, taxes,
and transmission and compression costs in each of the reported
periods:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Production
Revenues (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas revenue
|
|
$
|
29,527
|
|
|
$
|
29,404
|
|
|
$
|
57,071
|
|
|
$
|
55,010
|
|
Oil
revenue
|
|
|
3,029
|
|
|
|
4,584
|
|
|
|
5,079
|
|
|
|
7,886
|
|
Total
revenues
|
|
$
|
32,556
|
|
|
$
|
33,988
|
|
|
$
|
62,150
|
|
|
$
|
62,896
|
|
Michigan/Indiana:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas revenue
|
|
$
|
37,370
|
|
|
$
|
44,813
|
|
|
$
|
79,700
|
|
|
$
|
92,082
|
|
Oil
revenue
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
205
|
|
Total
revenues
|
|
$
|
37,423
|
|
|
$
|
44,969
|
|
|
$
|
79,772
|
|
|
$
|
92,287
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas revenue
|
|
$
|
66,897
|
|
|
$
|
74,217
|
|
|
$
|
136,771
|
|
|
$
|
147,092
|
|
Oil
revenue
|
|
|
3,082
|
|
|
|
4,740
|
|
|
|
5,151
|
|
|
|
8,091
|
|
Total
revenues
|
|
$
|
69,979
|
|
|
$
|
78,957
|
|
|
$
|
141,922
|
|
|
$
|
155,183
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
Sales Price:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (per Mcf)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
realized price, after hedge
|
|
$
|
7.96
|
|
|
$
|
10.02
|
|
|
$
|
7.82
|
|
|
$
|
9.67
|
|
Total
realized price, before hedge
|
|
$
|
3.32
|
|
|
$
|
11.82
|
|
|
$
|
4.44
|
|
|
$
|
10.35
|
|
Michigan/Indiana:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (per Mcf)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
realized price, after hedge
(1)
|
|
$
|
7.16
|
|
|
$
|
8.78
|
|
|
$
|
7.77
|
|
|
$
|
9.25
|
|
Total
realized price, before hedge
|
|
$
|
3.63
|
|
|
$
|
10.88
|
|
|
$
|
4.29
|
|
|
$
|
9.49
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas (per Mcf)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
realized price, after hedge
(1)
|
|
$
|
7.49
|
|
|
$
|
9.21
|
|
|
$
|
7.79
|
|
|
$
|
9.39
|
|
Total
realized price, before hedge
|
|
$
|
3.50
|
|
|
$
|
11.21
|
|
|
$
|
4.35
|
|
|
$
|
9.79
|
|
Appalachia:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
(per Bbl)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
realized price, after hedge
|
|
$
|
70.59
|
|
|
$
|
120.27
|
|
|
$
|
68.35
|
|
|
$
|
106.01
|
|
Total
realized price, before hedge
|
|
$
|
57.06
|
|
|
$
|
126.48
|
|
|
$
|
46.27
|
|
|
$
|
109.19
|
|
Michigan/Indiana:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
(per Bbl)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
realized price, after hedge
|
|
$
|
50.50
|
|
|
$
|
112.61
|
|
|
$
|
45.81
|
|
|
$
|
106.59
|
|
Total
realized price, before hedge
|
|
$
|
50.50
|
|
|
$
|
112.61
|
|
|
$
|
45.81
|
|
|
$
|
106.59
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
(per Bbl)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
realized price, after hedge
|
|
$
|
70.23
|
|
|
$
|
120.00
|
|
|
$
|
67.66
|
|
|
$
|
106.02
|
|
Total
realized price, before hedge
|
|
$
|
57.16
|
|
|
$
|
125.99
|
|
|
$
|
46.26
|
|
|
$
|
109.12
|
|
(1)
|
Includes
cash proceeds of $0.5 million and $2.9 million for the three months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively and $2.1 million and $7.9 million for
the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, received from
the settlement of ineffective derivative gains associated with the
acquisition of our Michigan operations during the three and six months
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, but not reflected in the consolidated
statements of income for the respective
periods.
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production
Costs (per Mcfe):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease
operating expenses
|
|
$
|
0.98
|
|
|
$
|
0.98
|
|
|
$
|
1.01
|
|
|
$
|
0.92
|
|
Production
taxes
|
|
|
0.02
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.04
|
|
Transportation
and compression
|
|
|
0.73
|
|
|
|
0.84
|
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
0.81
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.73
|
|
|
$
|
1.85
|
|
|
$
|
1.84
|
|
|
$
|
1.77
|
|
Michigan/Indiana:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease
operating expenses
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
$
|
0.77
|
|
|
$
|
0.71
|
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
Production
taxes
|
|
|
0.23
|
|
|
|
0.67
|
|
|
|
0.27
|
|
|
|
0.57
|
|
Transportation
and compression
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.27
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.10
|
|
|
$
|
1.72
|
|
|
$
|
1.23
|
|
|
$
|
1.60
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease
operating expenses
|
|
$
|
0.78
|
|
|
$
|
0.83
|
|
|
$
|
0.84
|
|
|
$
|
0.81
|
|
Production
taxes
|
|
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
0.43
|
|
|
|
0.17
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
Transportation
and compression
|
|
|
0.45
|
|
|
|
0.50
|
|
|
|
0.48
|
|
|
|
0.48
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.37
|
|
|
$
|
1.76
|
|
|
$
|
1.49
|
|
|
$
|
1.67
|
|
Three
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Three Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our
natural gas revenues were $66.9 million for the three months ended June 30,
2009, a decrease of $7.3 million (10%) from $74.2 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2008. The $7.3 million decrease consisted of a $7.9
million decrease resulting from lower realized natural gas sales prices and $1.0
million of subordinated gas revenues to our investment partnerships, partially
offset by a $1.6 million increase attributable to increases in natural gas
production volumes In accordance with the terms of our investment
partnerships, we may be required to subordinate a part of our net revenues from
the investment partnerships to the investor partners’ cash distributions from
the investment partnerships equal to at least 10% of their subscriptions
determined on a cumulative basis.
We had an
increase in Appalachian production volumes of 8,511Mcf/day for the three months
ended June 30, 2009 when compared with the prior year comparable period which
was principally attributable to the increase in production we received from our
Marcellus Shale wells and an increase in wells drilled in the most recent
six-month period as they were connected to gas gathering facilities and
transportation pipelines.
Our oil
revenues were $3.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009, a decrease
of $1.6 million (34%) from $4.7 million for the three months ended June 30,
2008. The decrease resulted primarily from a 41% decrease in the
average realized sales price of oil ($1.9 million), partially offset by an 11%
($0.3 million) increase in production volumes.
Our
Appalachia production costs were $6.9 million for the three months ended June
30, 2009, an increase of $1.0 million (18%) from $5.9 million for the three
months ended June 30, 2008. This increase principally consists of a $0.8 million
increase in water hauling and disposal costs associated with an increase in the
number of Marcellus Shale wells we drilled.
Our
Michigan/Indiana production costs were $5.8 million for the three months ended
June 30, 2009, a decrease of $3.5 million (37%) from $9.3 million for the three
months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease is primarily attributable
to a decrease in production taxes of $3.0 million due to a state reduction in
the production tax rate beginning January 1, 2009, and a decrease of $0.4
million attributable to lower well treating and water disposal costs compared
with the prior year comparable period.
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Six Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our
natural gas revenues were $136.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009,
a decrease of $10.3 million (7%) from $147.1 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2008. The $10.3 million decrease consisted of $16.5 million
attributable to decreases in realized natural gas sales prices and $1.0 million
of subordinated gas revenues to our investment partnerships, partially offset by
$7.2 million attributable to increases in natural gas production
volumes.
We had an
increase in Appalachian production volumes of 9,069 Mcf/day for the six months
ended June 30, 2009 when compared to the prior year comparable period which was
principally attributable to the increase in production we received from our
Marcellus Shale wells and as wells drilled in the most recent six-month period
were connected to gas gathering facilities and transportation
pipelines.
Our oil
revenues were $5.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, a decrease of
$2.9 million (36%) from $8.0 million for the six months ended June 30,
2008. The decrease resulted primarily from a 38% decrease in the
average realized sales price of oil ($3.1 million), partially offset by a 4%
increase in production volumes.
Our
Appalachia production costs were $14.3 million for the six months ended June 30,
2009, an increase of $3.4 million (32%) from $10.9 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2008. This increase is principally due to a $1.2 million
increase in transportation and compressor costs, a $1.7 million increase in
water hauling and disposal costs, and a $0.4 million increase in labor costs
associated with an increase in the number of Marcellus Shale wells we
drilled from the prior year comparable period.
Our
Michigan/Indiana production costs were $13.0 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2009, a decrease of $4.4 million (25%) from $17.4 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease is primarily attributable
to a decrease in production taxes of $3.4 million due to a state reduction in
the production tax rate beginning January 1, 2009, and a decrease of $0.8
million attributable to well treating and water disposal compared with the prior
year comparable period.
PARTNERSHIP
MANAGEMENT
Well
Construction and Completion
Drilling
Program Results
. The number of wells we drill will vary depending on the
amount of money we raise through our investment partnerships, the cost of each
well, the depth or type of each well, the estimated recoverable reserves
attributable to each well and accessibility to the well site. The following
table shows the number of gross and net development wells we drilled exclusively
for us and for our investment partnerships during the three and six months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008. We did not drill any exploratory wells during
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008.
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
241
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
491
|
|
Michigan/Indiana
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
281
|
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
577
|
|
Net:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
430
|
|
Michigan/Indiana
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
252
|
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
Our well
construction and completion revenues and costs and expenses incurred represent
the billings and costs associated with the completion of wells for investment
partnerships we sponsor. The following table sets forth information
relating to these revenues and the related costs and number of net wells drilled
and completed during the periods indicated (dollars in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
Average
construction and completion:
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenue
per well
|
|
$
|
2,044
|
|
|
$
|
577
|
|
|
$
|
1,273
|
|
|
$
|
527
|
|
Cost
per well
|
|
|
1,732
|
|
|
|
502
|
|
|
|
1,080
|
|
|
|
458
|
|
Gross
profit per well
|
|
$
|
312
|
|
|
$
|
75
|
|
|
$
|
193
|
|
|
$
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
profit margin
|
|
$
|
9,666
|
|
|
$
|
15,957
|
|
|
$
|
26,637
|
|
|
$
|
29,540
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
wells drilled and completed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcellus
Shale
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
Chattanooga
Shale
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Michigan/Indiana
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Other
– shallow
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
174
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
387
|
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
430
|
|
Three
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Three Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our well
construction and completion segment margin was $9.7 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2009, a decrease of $6.3 million (39%) from $16.0 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2008. The decrease of $6.3 million in
segment margin due to the decrease in the number of wells drilled ($56.4
million), partially offset by an increase in the gross profit per well ($50.1
million). Since our drilling contracts are on a “cost-plus” basis
(typically cost-plus 18%), an increase in our average cost per well also results
in a proportionate increase in our average revenue per well which directly
affects the number of wells we drill. Our average cost and revenue
per well have increased due to a shift from drilling less expensive shallow
wells to more expensive deep or horizontal shale wells in Appalachia and in
Michigan/Indiana during the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 in
comparison to the prior year comparable periods.
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Six Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our well
construction and completion segment margin was $26.6 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2009, a decrease of $2.9 million (10%) from $29.5 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2008. The decrease in segment margin was
due to the decrease in the number of wells drilled ($56.4 million), partially
offset by an increase in the gross profit per well ($53.5 million).
Our
consolidated balance sheet at June 30, 2009 includes $88.9 million of
“liabilities associated with drilling contracts” for funds raised by our
investment partnerships that have not been applied to the completion of wells
due to the timing of drilling operations, and thus had not been recognized as
well construction and completion revenue on our consolidated statements of
income. We expect to recognize this amount as revenue during the third
quarter of fiscal 2009.
Administration
and Oversight
Administration
and oversight represents supervision and administrative fees earned for the
drilling and subsequent ongoing management of wells for our investment
partnerships.
Our
administration and oversight fees were $2.6 million for the three months ended
June 30, 2009, a decrease of $2.5 million (49%) from $5.1 million for the three
months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease principally resulted from $2.6 million
associated with fewer wells drilled during the period in comparison to the prior
year.
Our
administration and oversight fees were $6.5 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2009, a decrease of $3.7 million (36%) from $10.2 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease resulted from a $3.9 million
decrease associated with fewer wells drilled during the period in comparison to
the prior year and an increase of $0.2 million from partnership management fees
due to an increase in the number of wells we managed for our investment
partnerships.
Well
Services
Well
service revenue and expenses represent the monthly operating fees we charge and
the work our service company performs for our investment partnership wells
during the drilling and completing phase as well as ongoing maintenance of these
wells and other wells in which we serve as operator.
Our well
services revenues were $4.8 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009, a
decrease of $0.5 million (10%) from $5.3 million for the three months ended June
30, 2008. This decrease was partially attributable to the slowdown in drilling
for shallow wells for our investment partnerships of $0.9 million, partially
offset by an increase of $0.4 million in well operating revenues for the
investment partnership wells put into operation during the twelve months ended
June 30, 2009.
Our well
services expenses were $2.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009, a
decrease of $0.6 million (20%) from $2.7 million for the three months ended June
30, 2008. This decrease of $0.6 million is primarily attributable to
a decrease in labor costs associated with drilling a large number of shallow
wells in prior periods to fewer, but more productive, wells for our investment
partnerships during the current period.
Our well
services revenues were $9.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, a
decrease of $0.2 million (2%) from $10.1 million for the six months ended June
30, 2008. This decrease was partially attributable to the slowdown in drilling
for shallow wells for our investment partnerships of $1.0 million, partially
offset by an increase of $0.9 million in well operating revenues for the
investment partnership wells put into operation during the twelve months ended
June 30, 2009.
Our well
services expenses were $4.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009,
a decrease of $0.6 million (10%) from $5.1 million for the six months ended June
30, 2008. The decrease of $0.6 million was primarily attributable to
a decrease in labor costs associated with drilling a large number of shallow
wells in prior periods to fewer, but more productive, wells for our investment
partnerships during the current period.
Gathering
We charge
gathering fees to our investment partnership wells that are connected to Laurel
Mountain‘s Appalachian gathering systems. On May 31, 2009, Atlas Pipeline
contributed its Appalachian gathering systems to Laurel Mountain, a joint
venture in which Atlas Pipeline retained a 49% ownership interest (see “Recent
Developments”). Under new gas gathering agreements with Laurel
Mountain entered into upon formation of the joint venture, we are obligated to
pay to Laurel Mountain all of the gathering fees we collect from the
partnerships. During the period from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2009,
we were required to remit these gathering fees to Atlas America.
The
gathering fee generally ranges from $0.35 per Mcf to the amount of the
competitive gathering fee currently defined as 13% of the gross sales
price. Pursuant to our new agreements with Laurel Mountain, we must
also pay an additional amount equal to the excess of the gathering fees
collected from the investment partnerships up to an amount equal to
approximately 16% of the natural gas sales price. As a result of our agreements
with Laurel Mountain, our Appalachian gathering expenses within our partnership
management segment will generally exceed the revenues collected from the
investment partnerships by approximately 3%. We also pay our
proportionate share of gathering fees based on our percentage interest in the
well, which is included in gas and oil production expense.
As a
result of our new agreements with Laurel Mountain, our net gathering fee expense
in Appalachia was $1.4 million for the three months ended June 30,
2009. This amount represents $4.7 million we received in
gathering fees collected from our investment partnerships, less $4.7 million we
were obligated to remit as gathering expense plus an additional $1.4 million due
to Laurel Mountain calculated as the excess of the gathering fees collected to
bring the gathering expense to an amount equal to approximately 16% of the
natural gas sales price.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2009, we received $9.0 million in gathering fees
collected from our investment partnerships and were obligated to remit $10.4
million in gathering expense during the six months ended June 30,
2009.
As part
of our Michigan operations , we own a small gas gathering and processing system
. We received $0.4 million and $0.3 million of transportation and
natural gas liquid revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively, and $0.8 million and $0.7 million for the six-month periods ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
OTHER
COSTS AND EXPENSES
General
and Administrative
Three
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Three Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our
general and administrative expenses were $12.3 million for both the three
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008. These expenses include, among other things,
salaries and benefits not allocated to a specific segment, partnership
syndication activities and other miscellaneous costs of managing our business.
We experienced a decrease of $0.7 million in the three months ended June
30, 2009, principally attributable to a decrease in salaries and wages,
partially offset by a $0.6 million increase in professional fees related to our
anticipated merger with Atlas America (see “Recent Developments”).
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Six Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our
general and administrative expenses were $26.8 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2009, an increase of $2.7 million (11%) from $24.1 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2008. The increase of $2.7 million was
principally attributable to a $1.1 million increase in salaries and wages, a
$0.6 million increase in professional fees related to our anticipated merger
with Atlas America, a $0.5 million increase in land and leasing costs, and a
$0.6 million increase in office operations and legal and accounting fees related
to increased regulatory compliance activities and overall growth.
Depletion
Three
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Three Months Ended June 30,
2008
Depletion
expense varies from period to period and is directly affected by changes in our
oil and gas reserve quantities, production levels, product prices and changes in
the depletable cost basis of our oil and gas properties. Our
depletion (including accretion of our asset retirement obligations) of oil and
gas properties as a percentage of oil and gas revenues was 37% for the
three months ended June 30, 2009, compared with 28% for the three months ended
June 30, 2008. Depletion expense per Mcfe was $2.82 for the three months
ended June 30, 2009, an increase of $0.26 (10%) per Mcfe from $2.56 for the
three months ended June 30, 2008. Increases in our depletable basis and
production volumes caused depletion expense to increase $4.0 million to $26.1
million for the three months ended June 30, 2009 compared with $22.1 million for
the three months ended June 30, 2008.
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Three Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our
depletion (including accretion of our asset retirement obligations) of oil and
gas properties as a percentage of oil and gas revenues was 37% for the six
months ended June 30, 2009, compared with 28% for the six months ended June 30,
2008. Depletion expense per Mcfe was $2.90 for the six months ended June
30, 2009, an increase of $0.36 (14%) per Mcfe from $2.54 for the six months
ended June 30, 2008. Increases in our depletable basis and production volumes
caused depletion expense to increase $10.0 million to $53.1 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2009 compared with $43.1 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2008.
The
following table shows our depletion expense and depletion expense per Mcfe for
our Appalachia and Michigan/Indiana business segments for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Depletion
Expense (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia
|
|
$
|
12,159
|
|
|
$
|
8,582
|
|
|
$
|
25,261
|
|
|
$
|
16,398
|
|
Michigan/Indiana
|
|
|
13,956
|
|
|
|
13,502
|
|
|
|
27,864
|
|
|
|
26,722
|
|
Total
|
|
|
26,115
|
|
|
|
22,084
|
|
|
$
|
53,125
|
|
|
$
|
43,120
|
|
Depletion
expense as a percent of gas and oil production
|
|
|
37
|
%
|
|
|
28
|
%
|
|
|
37
|
%
|
|
|
28
|
%
|
Depletion
per Mcfe:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appalachia
|
|
$
|
3.04
|
|
|
$
|
2.71
|
|
|
$
|
3.24
|
|
|
$
|
2.67
|
|
Michigan/Indiana
|
|
$
|
2.66
|
|
|
$
|
2.48
|
|
|
$
|
2.65
|
|
|
$
|
2.47
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2.82
|
|
|
$
|
2.56
|
|
|
$
|
2.90
|
|
|
$
|
2.54
|
|
Interest
Expense
Three
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the three Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our
interest expense was $15.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009, an
increase of $0.5 million (4%) compared with $14.6 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2008. The increase consists of $0.5 million of higher
interest expense associated with our revolving credit facility and a $1.5
million increase in interest expense associated with our senior unsecured notes
issued in May 2008, offset by a $1.2 million increase in capitalized
interest. The increase in capitalized interest is principally due to
higher weighted average borrowings associated with the funding of our acreage
expansions and drilling capital expenditures.
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2009 Compared to the Six Months Ended June 30,
2008
Our
interest expense was $28.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, an
increase of $0.2 million (1%) compared with $27.9 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2008. This increase is principally attributable to a
$7.2 million increase in interest expense associated with our senior unsecured
notes issued in May 2008, partially offset by $4.2 million of lower interest
expense associated with our revolving credit facility and a $2.5 million
increase in capitalized interest. The increase in capitalized
interest is principally due to higher weighted average borrowings associated
with the funding of our acreage expansions and drilling capital
expenditures.
Loss
on Asset Sale
Loss on asset sale for both the three
months and six months ended June 30, 2009 represents a $4.3 million loss
associated with the sale of certain natural gas gathering and processing assets
for net proceeds of $10.0 million (see “Recent Developments”).
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
General
We fund
our development and production operations with a combination of cash generated
by operations, capital raised through investment partnerships, issuance of our
common units and senior unsecured notes and use of our revolving credit
facility. The following table sets forth our sources and uses of cash
(in thousands):
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
135,741
|
|
|
$
|
66,194
|
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(86,189
|
)
|
|
|
(135,764
|
)
|
Net
cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(50,358
|
)
|
|
|
48,684
|
|
Net
change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
(806
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,886
|
)
|
We had
$4.9 million in cash and cash equivalents at June 30, 2009, as compared to $5.7
million at December 31, 2008. We had a working capital deficit of
$70.0 million at June 30, 2009, a favorable decrease of $18.0 million from a
working capital deficit of $88.0 million at December 31, 2008. The
favorable decrease in our working capital deficit was principally attributable
to the following:
|
·
|
a
decrease of $8.0 million in liabilities associated with drilling
contracts; and
|
|
·
|
an
increase in net current unrealized hedge receivables of $17.2 million;
partially offset by
|
|
·
|
an
increase of $2.6 million in accounts payable and accrued well drilling and
completion costs;
|
|
·
|
an
increase of $2.1 million in accrued liabilities and interest expense;
and
|
|
·
|
a
decrease of $2.6 million in prepaid
expenses.
|
At June
30, 2009, we had $196.0 million available committed capacity under our credit
facility, subject to covenant limitations, to fund working capital
obligations. On July 16, 2009, we issued $200.0 million of 12.125%
senior unsecured notes due 2017 at 98.116% of par value to yield 12.5% at
maturity (see “Subsequent Events”). We used the net proceeds of
$191.7 million, net underwriting fees of $4.5 million, to repay outstanding
borrowings under our revolving credit facility.Under the terms of our credit
facility (see “Recent Developments” and “Credit Facility”), the credit facility
borrowing base is automatically reduced by 25% of the stated principal amount of
any senior unsecured notes offering by us. As such, the borrowing
base of our credit facility was reduced by $50.0 million to $600.0 million upon
the issuance of the 12.125% Senior Notes.
Our level
of liabilities associated with drilling contracts is dependent upon the
remaining amount of our drilling obligations at any balance sheet date, which is
dependent upon the timing and level of funds raised through our investment
partnerships. We are subject to business and operational risks that
could adversely affect our cash flow. We may need to supplement our
cash generation with proceeds from financing activities, including borrowings
under our credit facility and other borrowings, the issuance of additional
common units and sales of our assets.
Recent
instability in the financial markets, as a result of recession or otherwise, has
increased the cost of capital while the availability of funds from those markets
has diminished significantly. This may affect our ability to raise
capital and reduce the amount of cash available to fund our
operations. We rely on our cash flow from operations and our credit
facility to execute our growth strategy and to meet our financial commitments
and other short-term liquidity needs. We cannot be certain that
additional capital will be available to the extent required and on acceptable
terms. We believe that we will have sufficient liquid assets, cash
from operations and borrowing capacity to meet our financial commitments, debt
service obligations, contingencies and anticipated capital expenditures for at
least the next twelve-month period.
Cash
Flows
Cash flows
from
operating
activities
. Cash provided by operations is an important source of
short-term liquidity for us. It is directly affected by changes in the
price of natural gas and oil, interest rates and our ability to raise funds from
our drilling investment partnerships. Net cash generated by operating
activities increased $69.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009 to
$135.7 million from cash provided of $66.2 million for the six months ended June
30, 2008, principally as a result of the following:
|
·
|
changes
in current assets and liabilities increased operating cash flows by $69.8
million for the six months ended June 30, 2009 compared with the six
months ended June 30, 2008;
|
|
·
|
in
May 2009, we received $28.5 million in proceeds from the early settlement
of natural gas and oil derivative positions;
and
|
|
·
|
an
increase in non-cash items of $4.2 million related to our loss on the sale
of our natural gas gathering and processing assets to Laurel Mountain;
partially offset by
|
|
·
|
a
decrease of $27.4 million in net income before depreciation, depletion and
amortization of $94.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009 as
compared with the prior year period of $122.2 million, principally due to
the decline in natural gas and oil and prices from our production business
segments and a decrease of $7.5 million in our partnership management
business segment due to the decline in the number of wells we drilled;
and
|
|
·
|
for
the six months ended June 30, 2009, we received $2.1 million in proceeds
from the settlement of ineffective derivative gains, a decrease of $5.9
million from $8.0 million in proceeds received for the prior year
comparable period;
|
The
change in operating assets and liabilities is principally a result of the
following:
|
·
|
an
increase of $73.5 million in liabilities associated with our drilling
contracts. Our level of liabilities associated with drilling
contracts is dependent upon the remaining amount of our drilling
obligations at any balance sheet date, which is dependent upon the timing
and level of funds raised through our investment
partnerships;
|
|
·
|
an
increase in cash flows provided by accounts receivable and prepaid
expenses of $17.9 million; partially offset
by
|
|
·
|
a
decrease in cash flows provided by accounts payable and accrued
expenses of $1.4 million; and
|
|
·
|
a
decrease in cash flows provided by accrued well drilling and completion
costs of $20.3 million.
|
Cash flows from
investing activities.
Cash used in our investing activities
decreased $49.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009 to $86.2 million
from $135.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008 primarily due to a
$39.3 million decrease in capital expenditures related to the decrease of our
share of costs associated with wells drilled compared to the prior year
period. We also received $10.0 million in proceeds from the sale of
our natural gas gathering and processing assets to Laurel Mountain on June 1,
2009.
Cash flows from
financing activities
.
Cash used in our financing activities was 50.4 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2009, compared with cash provided of $48.7 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2008. The change between periods was principally the
result of the following:
|
·
|
we
received proceeds of $407.0 million from the issuance of our senior
unsecured notes during the six months ended June 30, 2008, while we had no
such issuances during the six months ended June 30, 2009;
and
|
|
·
|
we
received $107.7 million from the sale of our Class B member units during
the six months ended June 30, 2008, while we had no such sales during the
six months ended June 30, 2009; partially offset
by
|
|
·
|
net
repayments of credit facility borrowings of $11.0 million during the six
months ended June 30, 2009 compared with $380.0 million of net repayments
during the prior year comparable
period;
|
|
·
|
we
paid $39.5 million in distributions to our unitholders for the six months
ended June 30, 2009, a decrease of $33.4 million from $72.9 million paid
for the six months ended June 30,
2008;
|
|
·
|
we
paid deferred debt financing costs of $10.1 million during the six months
ended June 30, 2008, while no amounts were paid during the current period;
and
|
|
·
|
net
monies borrowed from Atlas America increased $4.1 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2009, compared to the six months ended June 30,
2008.
|
Capital
Expenditures
Our
capital expenditures consisted of maintenance capital expenditures and expansion
capital expenditures, as defined below:
|
·
|
maintenance
capital expenditures are those capital expenditures we made on an ongoing
basis to maintain our capital asset base and our current production
volumes at a steady level; and
|
|
·
|
expansion
capital expenditures are those capital expenditures we made to expand our
capital asset base for longer than the short-term and include new
leasehold interests and the development and exploitation of existing
leasehold interests through acquisitions of our investments in our
drilling partnerships.
|
The
following table summarizes maintenance and expansion capital expenditures for
the periods indicated (in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance
capital expenditures
|
|
$
|
12,975
|
|
|
$
|
12,975
|
|
|
$
|
25,950
|
|
|
$
|
25,950
|
|
Expansion
capital expenditures
|
|
|
26,231
|
|
|
|
67,078
|
|
|
|
70,463
|
|
|
|
109,720
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
39,206
|
|
|
$
|
80,053
|
|
|
$
|
96,413
|
|
|
$
|
135,670
|
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, our capital expenditures related primarily
to $23.8 million of investments in our investment partnerships compared with
$40.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. We also
invested $6.5 million in leasehold acreage and $0.4 million in wells drilled
exclusively for our own account for the three months ended June 30,
2009.
During
the six months ended June 30, 2009, our capital expenditures related primarily
to $51.6 million of investments in our investment partnerships compared with
$66.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. We also invested $12.1
million in wells drilled exclusively for our own account and incurred $16.9
million in leasehold costs for the six months ended June 30, 2009. We
funded and expect to continue to fund these capital expenditures through cash on
hand, cash flows from operations and from amounts available under our credit
facility.
The level
of capital expenditures we devote to our exploration and production operations
depends upon any acquisitions made and the level of funds raised through our
investment partnerships. We believe cash flows from operations and
amounts available under our credit facility will be adequate to fund our capital
expenditures. However, the amount of funds we raise and the level of our
capital expenditures will vary in the future depending on market conditions for
natural gas and other factors.
We expect to fund our maintenance
capital expenditures with cash flow from operations and the temporary use of
funds raised in our investment partnerships in the period before we invest these
funds, as well as funding our investment capital expenditures and any expansion
capital expenditures that we might incur with borrowings under our credit
facility and with the temporary use of funds raised in our investment
partnerships in the period before we invest the funds.
We continuously evaluate acquisitions
of gas and oil assets. In order to make any acquisition, we believe
we will be required to access outside capital either through debt or equity
placements or through joint venture operations with other energy companies.
There can be no assurance that we will be successful in our efforts to obtain
outside capital.
Credit
Facility
At June
30, 2009, we had a credit facility with a syndicate of banks with a borrowing
base of $650.0 million that matures in June 2012. The borrowing base
is redetermined semiannually on April 1 and October 1 subject to changes in our
oil and gas reserves or is automatically reduced by 25% of the stated principal
of any senior unsecured notes we issue. On July 16, 2009, we issued
$200.0 million of senior unsecured notes, and the borrowing base was reduced by
$50.0 million to $600.0 million (see “Recent Developments”). Up to
$50.0 million of the credit facility may be in the form of standby letters of
credit, of which $1.2 million was outstanding at June 30, 2009, which are not
reflected as borrowings on our consolidated balance sheets. The
credit facility is secured by substantially all of our assets and is guaranteed
by each of our subsidiaries and bears interest at either the base rate plus the
applicable margin or at adjusted LIBOR plus the applicable margin, elected at
our option. On April 19, 2009, the credit agreement was amended to,
among other things, increase the applicable margin on Eurodollar Loans from a
range of 100 to 175 basis points to a range of 200 to 300 basis points and the
applicable margin for base rate loans from a range of 0 to 75 basis points to a
range of 112.5 to 212.5 basis points. At June 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008, the weighted average interest rate on the credit facility’s
outstanding borrowings was 2.9% and 2.8%, respectively. The base rate
for any day equals the higher of the federal funds rate plus 0.50%, the J.P.
Morgan prime rate or the Adjusted LIBOR for a 30-day interest period plus
1.0%. Adjusted LIBOR is LIBOR divided by 1.00 minus the percentage
prescribed by the Federal Reserve Board for determining the reserve requirement
for Eurocurrency liabilities.
The
events which constitute an event of default for our credit facility are also
customary for loans of this size, including payment defaults, breaches of
representations or covenants contained in the credit agreement, adverse
judgments against us in excess of a specified amount, and a change of
control. In addition, the agreement limits sales, leases or transfers
of assets and the incurrence of additional indebtedness. The
agreement limits the distributions payable by us if an event of default has
occurred and is continuing or would occur as a result of such
distribution. We were in compliance with these covenants as of June
30, 2009. The credit facility also requires us to maintain ratios of
current assets (as defined in the credit facility) to current liabilities (as
defined in the credit facility) of not less than 1.0 to 1.0 and a ratio of total
debt (as defined in the credit facility) to earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation, depletion and amortization (“EBITDA”, as defined in the credit
facility) of 3.75 to 1.0 commencing January 1, 2009, and decreasing to 3.5 to
1.0 commencing January 1, 2010 and thereafter. According to the
definitions contained in our credit facility, our ratio of current assets to
current liabilities was 1.3 to 1.0 and our ratio of total debt to EBITDA was 2.7
to 1.0 at June 30, 2009.
Shelf
Registration Statement
On May 1,
2009, our shelf registration statement was declared effective by the Securities
and Exchange Commission. The registration statement permits us to
periodically issue up to $500.0 million of equity and debt
securities. On July 28, 2009, we filed an additional shelf
registration in connection with our July 16, 2009 Senior Notes offering (see
“Recent Developments”). The amount, type and timing of any additional offerings
will depend upon, among other things, our funding requirements, prevailing
market conditions and compliance with our credit facility and unsecured senior
note covenants.
CHANGES
IN PRICES AND INFLATION
Our revenues, the value of our assets,
our ability to obtain bank loans or additional capital on attractive terms and
our ability to finance our drilling activities through investment partnerships
have been and will continue to be affected by changes in oil and gas prices.
Natural gas and oil prices are subject to significant fluctuations that are
beyond our ability to control or predict.
Although certain of our costs and
expenses are affected by general inflation, inflation has not normally had a
significant effect on us. However, inflationary trends may occur if the price of
natural gas were to increase since such an increase may increase the demand for
acreage and for energy equipment and services, thereby increasing the costs of
acquiring or obtaining such equipment and services.
ENVIRONMENTAL
REGULATION
To date, compliance with environmental
laws and regulations has not had a material impact on our capital expenditures,
earnings or competitive position. We cannot assure you that compliance with
environmental laws and regulations will not, in the future, materially adversely
affect our operations through increased costs of doing business or restrictions
on the manner in which we conduct our operations.
CASH
DISTRIBUTIONS
We do not
have a contractual obligation to make distributions to our
unitholders. We distribute our “available cash,” to our unitholders
each quarter in accordance with their respective percentage interests.
“Available cash” is defined in our operating agreement, and it generally means,
for each fiscal quarter:
|
·
|
all
cash on hand at the end of the
quarter;
|
|
·
|
less
the amount of cash that our board of directors determines in its
reasonable discretion is necessary or appropriate
to:
|
|
·
|
provide
for the proper conduct of our business (including reserves for future
capital expenditures and credit needs);
|
|
|
|
|
·
|
comply
with applicable law, any of our debt instruments, or other agreements;
or
|
|
·
|
provide
funds for distributions to our unitholders for any one more of the next
four quarters or with respect to our management incentive
interests;
|
|
·
|
plus
all cash on hand on the date of determination of available cash for the
quarter resulting from working capital borrowings made after the end of
the quarter.
|
All cash distributed to unitholders
will be characterized as either operating surplus or capital surplus, as defined
in our limited liability company agreement and is subject to different
distribution rules. We will treat all available cash distributed as
coming from operating surplus until the sum of all available cash distributed
since we began operations equals the operating surplus as of the most recent
date of determination of available cash. We do not anticipate
distributing any cash from capital surplus.
Available cash is initially distributed
98% to our common unitholders and 2% to Atlas Energy Management,
Inc. These distribution percentages are modified to provide for
incentive distributions (any distribution paid to Atlas Energy Management, Inc.
in excess of 2% of the aggregate amount of cash being distributed) to be paid to
Atlas Energy Management, Inc. if quarterly distributions to the common
unitholders exceed specified targets as defined in our limited liability company
agreement.
On April 27, 2009, we and Atlas America
executed a definitive merger agreement (see “Recent
Developments”). Pending consummation of the merger, we have suspended
distributions to our Class A and Class B members’ interests. Due to
the suspension of distributions and in accordance with our limited liability
company agreement, we have determined that previously accrued distributions to
our MII’s of $8.0 million are no longer payable to Atlas Energy Management,
Inc.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET
ARRANGEMENTS
As of June 30, 2009, our off-balance
sheet arrangements are limited to our 50% share ($8.7 million) of the guarantee
of Crown Drilling of Pennsylvania, LLC’s $17.4 million credit arrangement and
our letters of credit outstanding of $1.2 million.
FAIR
VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
We have
applied the provisions of SFAS No. 157 to our financial assets and
liabilities. SFAS No. 157 establishes a single authoritative
definition of a fair value and hierarchy which requires an entity to maximize
the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when
measuring fair value. SFAS No. 157 expands disclosure requirements about items
measured at fair value but does not change existing accounting rules governing
what can or what must be recognized and reported at fair value in our financial
statements. As a result, we will not be required to recognize any new
assets or liabilities at fair value.
SFAS No.
157’s hierarchy defines three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair
value:
Level 1–
Unadjusted quoted
prices in active markets for identical, unrestricted assets and liabilities that
the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement
date.
Level 2 –
Inputs other than
quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset and
liability or can be corroborated with observable market data for substantially
the entire contractual term of the asset or liability.
Level 3 –
Unobservable inputs
that reflect the entity’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market
participants would use in the pricing of the asset or liability and are
consequently not based on market activity, but rather through particular
valuation techniques.
We use
the fair value methodology outlined in SFAS No. 157 to value the assets and
liabilities. Assets and liabilities that are required to be measured
on a recurring basis are our outstanding derivative contracts. All of our
derivative contracts are defined as Level 2. Our natural gas and
crude oil derivative contracts are valued based on prices quoted on the NYMEX or
WTI and adjusted by the respective counterparty using various assumptions
including quoted forward prices, time value, volatility factors, and contractual
prices for the underlying instruments. Our interest rate derivative
contracts are valued using a LIBOR rate-based forward price curve
model.
Liabilities
that are required to be measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis include
asset retirement obligations, or ARO’s, that are defined as Level
3. Estimates of the fair value of ARO’s are based on discounted cash
flows using numerous estimates, assumptions, and judgments regarding the cost,
timing of settlement, our credit-adjusted risk-free rate and inflation
rates.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
The discussion and analysis of our
financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated
financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation
of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that
affect the reported amounts of our assets, liabilities, revenues and cost and
expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an
on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to the
provision for possible losses, goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, and
certain accrued liabilities. We base our estimates on historical experience and
on various other assumptions that we believe reasonable under the circumstances,
the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying
values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other
sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different
assumptions or conditions. A discussion of our significant accounting
policies we have adopted and followed in the preparation of our consolidated
financial statements is included within “Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements” in Part I, Item 1, “Financial Statements” in this quarterly report
and in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008.
RECENTLY
ADOPTED FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
In June
2009, the FASB issued Statement No. 165, “Subsequent Events” (“SFAS No.
165”). SFAS No. 165 establishes general standards of accounting for
and disclosure of events that occur after the balance sheet date but before
financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. SFAS
No. 165 requires management of a reporting entity to evaluate events or
transactions that may occur after the balance sheet date for potential
recognition or disclosure in the financial statements and provides guidance for
disclosures that an entity should make about those events. SFAS No.
165 is effective for interim or annual financial periods ending after June 15,
2009 and shall be applied prospectively. We adopted the requirements
of SFAS No. 165 on April 1, 2009 and its adoption did not have a material impact
on our financial position or results of operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 157-4, “Determining Fair Value When the
Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly
Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly” (“FSP FAS
157-4”). FSP FAS 157-4 applies to all fair value measurements and
provides additional clarification on estimating fair value when the market
activity for an asset has declined significantly. FSP FAS 157-4 also
requires an entity to disclose a change in valuation technique and related
inputs to the valuation calculation and to quantify its effects, if
practicable. FSP FAS 157-4 is effective for interim and annual
periods ending after June 15, 2009, with early adoption permitted for periods
ending after March 15, 2009. We adopted the requirements of FSP FAS
157-4 on April 1, 2009 and its adoption did not have a material impact on our
financial position and results of operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 115-2 and 124-2, “Recognition and
Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments” (“FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS
124-2”). FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 change existing guidance for
determining whether an impairment is other than temporary for debt
securities. FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 replaces the existing
requirement that an entity’s management asset it has both the intent and ability
to hold an impaired security until recovery with a requirement that management
assess that it does not have the intent to sell the security and that it is more
likely than not that it will not have to sell the security before recovery of
its cost basis. FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 also require that an
entity recognize noncredit losses on held-to-maturity debt securities in other
comprehensive income and amortize that amount over the remaining life of the
security and for the entity to present the total other-than-temporary impairment
in the statement of operations with an offset for the amount recognized in other
comprehensive income. FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 are effective for
interim and annual periods ending after June 15, 2009, with early adoption
permitted for periods ending after March 15, 2009. We adopted the
requirements of FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2 on April 1, 2009 and its adoption
did not have a material impact on our financial position and results of
operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 107-1 and APB 28-1, “Interim Disclosures
about Fair Value of Financial Instruments” (“FSP FAS 107-1 and APB
28-1”). FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1 require an entity to provide
disclosures about fair value of financial instruments in interim financial
information. In addition, an entity shall disclose in the body or in
the accompanying notes of its summarized financial information for interim
reporting periods and in its financial statements for annual reporting periods
the fair value of all financial instruments for which it is practicable to
estimate that value, whether recognized or not recognized in the statement of
financial position. FSP FAS 107-1 APB 28-1 is effective for interim
periods ending after June 15, 2009, with early adoption permitted for periods
ending after March 15, 2009. We adopted the requirements of FSP FAS
107-1 APB 28-1 on April 1, 2009 and its adoption did not have a material impact
on our financial position and results of operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position 141(R)-1, “Accounting for Assets Acquired
and Liabilities Assumed in a Business Combination That Arise from Contingencies”
(“FSP 141(R)-1”). FSP 141(R)-1 requires that assets acquired and
liabilities assumed in a business combination that arise from contingencies be
recognized at fair value if fair value can be reasonably
estimated. If fair value of such an asset or liability cannot be
reasonably estimated, the asset or liability would generally be recognized in
accordance with FASB Statement No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies” and FASB
Interpretation No. 14, “Reasonable Estimation of the Amount of a
Loss”. FSP 141(R)-1 also eliminates the requirement to disclose an
estimate of the range of outcomes of recognized contingencies at the acquisition
date. FSP FAS 141(R)-1 is effective for business combinations for
which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008 (January 1, 2009 for
us). We adopted the requirements of FSP 141(R)-1 on January 1, 2009
and its adoption did not have a material impact on our financial position and
results of operations.
In March
2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities - an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133” (“SFAS No.
161”). SFAS No. 161 amends the requirements of SFAS No. 133,
“Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS No. 133”),
to require enhanced disclosure about how and why an entity uses derivative
instruments, how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted
for under SFAS No. 133 and its related interpretations, and how derivative
instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position,
financial performance and cash flows. We adopted the requirements of
SFAS No. 161 on January 1, 2009 and it did not have a material impact on our
financial position or results of operations.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.
160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements-an amendment
of ARB No. 51” (“SFAS No. 160”). SFAS No. 160 amends Accounting Research
Bulletin 51, “Consolidated Financial Statements” (“ARB No. 51”) to establish
accounting and reporting standards for the noncontrolling interest (minority
interest) in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It
clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary is an ownership
interest in the consolidated entity that should be reported as equity in the
consolidated financial statements. SFAS No. 160 also requires consolidated net
income to be reported, and disclosed on the face of the consolidated statement
of operations, at amounts that include the amounts attributable to both the
parent and the noncontrolling interest. Additionally, SFAS No. 160
establishes a single method of accounting for changes in a parent’s ownership
interest in a subsidiary that does not result in deconsolidation and that the
parent recognize a gain or loss in net income when a subsidiary is
deconsolidated. We adopted the requirements of SFAS No. 160 on
January 1, 2009 and adjusted our presentation of our financial position and
results of operations. Prior period financial position and results of
operations have been adjusted retrospectively to conform to the provisions of
SFAS No. 160.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No 141(R), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS
No. 141(R)”). SFAS No. 141(R) replaces SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations”
(“SFAS No. 141”), however retains the fundamental requirements that the
acquisition method of accounting be used for all business combinations and for
an acquirer to be identified for each business combination. SFAS No.
141(R) requires an acquirer to recognize the assets acquired, liabilities
assumed, and any non-controlling interest in the acquiree at the acquisition
date, at their fair values as of that date, with specified limited
exceptions. Changes subsequent to that date are to be recognized in
earnings, not goodwill. Additionally, SFAS No. 141 (R) requires costs
incurred in connection with an acquisition be expensed as
incurred. Restructuring costs, if any, are to be recognized
separately from the acquisition. The acquirer in a business combination achieved
in stages must also recognize the identifiable assets and liabilities, as well
as the non-controlling interests in the acquiree, at the full amounts of their
fair values. We adopted the requirements of SFAS No. 141(R) on January 1, 2009
and it did not have a material impact on our financial position and results of
operations.
Recently
Issued Accounting Standards
In June
2009, the FASB issued Statement No. 168, “The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles – A
Replacement of FASB Statement No. 162” (“SFAS No. 168”). SFAS No. 168
establishes the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“Codification”) as the
single source of authoritative U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. The
Codification supersedes all existing non-Securities and Exchange Commission
accounting and reporting standards. Following SFAS No. 168, the FASB
will not issue new standards in the form of Statements, FASB Staff Positions, or
Emerging Issues Task Force Abstracts. Instead, the FASB will issue
Accounting Standards Updates, which will serve only to update the
Codification. SFAS No. 168 is effective for financial statements
issued for interim and annual periods ending after September 15,
2009. We will apply the requirements of SFAS No. 168 to our financial
statements for the interim period ending September 30, 2009, and we do not
expect it to have a material impact on our financial position or results of
operations or related disclosures.
In June
2009, the FASB issued Statement No. 167, “Amendments to FASB Interpretation No.
46(R)” (“SFAS No. 167”). SFAS No. 167 is a revision to FASB
Interpretation No. 46(R), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” and
changes how a reporting entity determines when an entity that is insufficiently
capitalized or is not controlled through voting (or similar rights) should be
consolidated. SFAS No. 167 requires a reporting entity to provide
additional disclosures about its involvement with variable interest entities and
any significant changes in risk exposure due to that involvement. A
reporting entity will be required to disclose how its involvement with a
variable interest entity affects the reporting entity’s financial
statements. SFAS No. 167 is effective at the start of a reporting
entity’s first fiscal year beginning after November 15, 2009 (January 1, 2010
for us). We will apply the requirements of SFAS No. 167 upon its
adoption on January 1, 2010 and we do not expect it to have a material impact on
our financial position or results of operations or related
disclosures.
MODERNIZATION
OF OIL AND GAS REPORTING
In
December 2008, the SEC announced that it had approved revisions to its oil and
gas reporting disclosures by adopting amendments to Rule 4-10 of Regulation S-X
and Items 201, 801, and 802 of Regulation S-K. These new disclosure requirements
are referred to as “Modernization of Oil and Gas Reporting” and include
provisions that:
|
·
|
Introduce
a new definition of oil and gas producing activities. This new definition
allows companies to include in their reserve base volumes from
unconventional resources. Such unconventional resources include bitumen
extracted from oil sands and oil and gas extracted from coal beds and
shale formations.
|
|
·
|
Report
oil and gas reserves using an unweighted average price using the prior
12-month period, based on the closing prices on the first day of each
month, rather than year-end pricing. This should maximize the
comparability of reserve estimates among companies and mitigate the
distortion of the estimates that arises when using a single pricing
date.
|
|
·
|
Permit
companies to disclose their probable and possible reserves on a voluntary
basis. Current rules limit disclosure to only proved
reserves.
|
|
·
|
Update
and revise reserve definitions to reflect changes in the oil and gas
industry and new technologies. New updated definitions include
“by geographic area” and “reasonable
certainty”.
|
|
·
|
Permit
the use of new technologies to determine proved reserves if those
technologies have been demonstrated empirically to lead to reliable
conclusions about reserves volumes.
|
|
·
|
Require
additional disclosures regarding the qualifications of the chief technical
person who oversees the company’s overall reserve estimation process.
Additionally, disclosures are required related to internal controls over
reserve estimation, as well as a report addressing the independence and
qualifications of a company’s reserves preparer or auditor
based on Society of Petroleum Engineers
criteria.
|
We will
begin complying with the disclosure requirements in our annual report on Form
10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009. The new rules may not be applied to
disclosures in quarterly reports prior to the first annual report in which the
revised disclosures are required. We are currently in the process of evaluating
the new requirements.
ITEM
3:
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
|
The primary objective of the following
information is to provide forward-looking quantitative and qualitative
information about our potential exposure to market risks. The term “market risk”
refers to the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in interest rates and
oil and gas prices. The disclosures are not meant to be precise indicators of
expected future losses, but rather indicators of reasonable possible losses.
This forward-looking information provides indicators of how we view and manage
our ongoing market risk exposures. All of our market risk sensitive instruments
were entered into for purposes other than trading.
General
We are exposed to various market risks,
principally changes in commodity prices and fluctuating interest rates. These
risks can impact our results of operations, cash flows and financial position.
We manage these risks through regular operating and financing activities and
periodically use derivative financial instruments such as forward contracts and
swap agreements.
Current
market conditions elevate our concern over counterparty risks and may adversely
affect the ability of these counterparties to fulfill their obligations to
us. The counterparties related to our commodity and interest-rate
derivative contracts are banking institutions which also participate in our
revolving credit facility. The creditworthiness of our counterparties
is constantly monitored, and we currently believe them to be financially
viable. We are not aware of any inability on the part of our
counterparties to perform under our contracts and believe our exposure to
non-performance is remote.
Commodity
Price Risk
Our major
market risk exposure in commodities is fluctuations in the pricing of our gas
and oil production. Realized pricing is primarily driven by the
prevailing worldwide prices for crude oil and spot market prices applicable to
United States natural gas production. Pricing for gas and oil production
has been volatile and unpredictable for many years. To limit our
exposure to changing natural gas prices, we enter into natural gas and oil
costless collar, and option contracts. At any point in time, such
contracts may include regulated NYMEX futures and options contracts and
non-regulated over-the-counter futures contracts with qualified counterparties.
NYMEX contracts are generally settled with offsetting positions, but may
be settled by the delivery of natural gas. Oil contracts are based on
a West Texas Intermediate, or WTI index.
Our risk
management objective regarding commodity price risk is to utilize available
instruments, including financial derivatives and physical forward contracts, to
maximize the value of our production while also reducing our exposure to the
volatility of commodity markets. Considering those volumes for which we have
entered into financial derivative agreements for the twelve-month period ending
June 30, 2010, and current indices, a theoretical 10% upward or downward change
in the price of natural gas and crude oil would result in a change in net income
of approximately $5.2 million.
We
formally document all relationships between derivative instruments and the items
being hedged, including the risk management objective and strategy for
undertaking the derivative transactions. This includes matching the natural gas
and oil futures and options contracts to the forecasted transactions. We assess,
both at the inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, whether the
derivatives are highly effective in offsetting changes in the fair value of
hedged items. Historically these contracts have qualified and been designated as
cash flow hedges in accordance with SFAS 133, and are recorded at their fair
values. Gains or losses on future contracts are determined as the difference
between the contract price and a reference price, generally prices on NYMEX or
WTI. Changes in fair value are recognized in consolidated equity and
recognized within the consolidated statements of income in the month
the hedged commodity is sold. If it is determined that a derivative is not
highly effective as a hedge or it has ceased to be a highly effective hedge, due
to the loss of correlation between changes in reference prices underlying a
hedging instrument and actual commodity prices, we will discontinue hedge
accounting for the derivative and subsequent changes in fair value for the
derivative will be recognized immediately into earnings.
We
recognized gains on settled contracts covering natural gas and oil production of
$31.5 million and a loss of $4.9 million for the three months ended June 30,
2009 and 2008, respectively and gains of $47.1 million and $1.6 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
As the underlying prices
and terms in our derivative contracts were consistent with the indices used to
sell our natural gas, there were no gains or losses recognized during the three
and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 for hedge ineffectiveness or as a
result of the discontinuance of these cash flow hedges.
In May
2009, we received approximately $28.5 million in proceeds from the early
settlement of natural gas and oil derivative positions for production periods
from 2011 through 2013. In conjunction with the early termination of
these derivatives, we entered into new derivative positions at prevailing prices
at the time of the transaction. The net proceeds from the early
termination of these derivatives were used to reduce indebtedness under our
revolving credit facility. The derivative gain recognized upon early
termination of these discontinued derivative positions will continue to be
reported in accumulated other comprehensive income, and will be reclassified to
our consolidated statements of income during the periods which the physical
transactions would have affected earnings.
We have a
$123.3 million net unrealized gain related to financial derivatives in
accumulated other comprehensive loss associated with commodity derivatives at
June 30, 2009, compared to a net unrealized gain of $106.1 million at December
31, 2008. If the fair values of the instruments remain at current
market values, we will reclassify $83.0 million of unrealized gains to our
consolidated statements of income over the next twelve-month period as these
contracts settle and $40.3 million of unrealized gains will be reclassified in
later periods.
The fair
value of the derivatives at June 30, 2009 is a net unrealized derivative asset
of $141.9 million, of which our portion is $94.2 million and $47.7 million of
unrealized gains have been reallocated to our investment
partnerships.
As of
June 30, 2009, we had the following natural gas and oil volumes
hedged:
Natural
Gas Fixed Price Swaps
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Fixed Price
|
|
|
Asset (Liability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(MMBtu)
|
|
|
(per
MMBtu)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
(1)
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
21,790,000
|
|
|
$
|
8.044
|
|
|
$
|
79,987
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
31,880,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.708
|
|
|
|
52,270
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
20,720,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.040
|
|
|
|
2,973
|
|
2012
|
|
|
|
|
19,680,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.223
|
|
|
|
1,131
|
|
2013
|
|
|
|
|
10,620,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.126
|
|
|
|
(1,631
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
134,730
|
|
Natural
Gas Costless Collars
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Option Type
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Floor and Cap
|
|
|
Asset (Liability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(MMBtu)
|
|
|
(per
MMBtu)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
(1)
|
|
2009
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
$
|
11.000
|
|
|
$
|
795
|
|
2009
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.350
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2010
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
3,360,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.839
|
|
|
|
6,584
|
|
2010
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
3,360,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.007
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2011
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
9,540,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.523
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
2011
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
9,540,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.666
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2012
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
4,020,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.514
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2012
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
4,020,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.718
|
|
|
|
(978
|
)
|
2013
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
5,340,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.516
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2013
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
5,340,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.811
|
|
|
|
(1,737
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,809
|
|
Crude
Oil Fixed Price Swaps
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Fixed Price
|
|
|
Asset (Liability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Bbl)
|
|
|
(per
Bbl)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
(2)
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
31,700
|
|
|
$
|
99.497
|
|
|
$
|
896
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
48,900
|
|
|
$
|
97.400
|
|
|
|
1,079
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
42,600
|
|
|
$
|
77.460
|
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
2012
|
|
|
|
|
33,500
|
|
|
$
|
76.855
|
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
2013
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
77.360
|
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,805
|
|
Crude
Oil Costless Collars
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Option Type
|
|
Volumes
|
|
|
Floor and Cap
|
|
|
Asset (Liability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Bbl)
|
|
|
(per
Bbl)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
(2)
|
|
2009
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
19,500
|
|
|
$
|
85.000
|
|
|
$
|
289
|
|
2009
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
19,500
|
|
|
$
|
116.884
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2010
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
31,000
|
|
|
$
|
85.000
|
|
|
|
448
|
|
2010
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
31,000
|
|
|
$
|
112.918
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2011
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
$
|
67.223
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2011
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
$
|
89.436
|
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
2012
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
21,500
|
|
|
$
|
65.506
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2012
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
21,500
|
|
|
$
|
91.448
|
|
|
|
(73
|
)
|
2013
|
|
Puts
purchased
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
$
|
65.358
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
2013
|
|
Calls
sold
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
$
|
93.442
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
595
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Net Asset
|
|
|
$
|
141,939
|
|
|
(1)
|
Fair
value based on forward NYMEX natural gas prices, as
applicable.
|
|
(2)
|
Fair
value based on forward WTI crude oil prices, as
applicable.
|
Interest
Rate Risk
At June
30, 2009, we had $456.0 of borrowings outstanding under our revolving credit
facility. At June 30, 2009, we had interest rate derivative contracts
having an aggregate notional principal amount of $150.0 million through January
2011, which were designated as cash flow hedges. Under the terms of
the contract, we will pay an interest rate of 3.11%, plus the applicable margin
as defined under the terms of our revolving credit facility, and will receive
LIBOR, plus the applicable margin, on the notional principal
amounts. This derivative effectively converts $150.0 million of our
floating rate debt under the revolving credit facility to fixed-rate
debt.
Holding
all other variables constant, including the effect of interest rate derivatives,
a hypothetical 100 basis–point, or 1%, change in interest rates would change our
consolidated net income by $3.1 million.
At June
30, 2009, the Company had the following interest rate derivatives:
Interest
Fixed Rate Swap
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
Period Ended
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Term
|
|
Amount
|
|
Option
Type
|
|
December
31,
|
|
Liability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
January
2008 – January 2011
|
|
$
|
150,000,000
|
|
Pay
3.11% - Receive
LIBOR
|
|
2009
|
|
$
|
(1,932
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
(2,757
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
(126
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Net Liability
|
|
$
|
(4,815
|
)
|
ITEM
4.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
|
We
maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in Securities and Exchange Act of 1934
reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods
specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated
and communicated to our management, including our chief executive officer and
our chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding
required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure
controls and procedures, our management recognized that any controls and
procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only
reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and our
management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the
cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
Under the
supervision of our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, we have
carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based
upon that evaluation, our chief executive officer and chief financial officer
concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective at the
reasonable assurance level at June 30, 2009.
There
have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during our
most recent fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably
likely to materially effect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
PART
II.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
ITEM
1:
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
On June
20, 2008, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Atlas America, LLC, was named as a
co-defendant in the matter captioned
CNX Gas Company, LLC (“CNX”)
v. Miller Petroleum, Inc. (“Miller”)
, et al. (Chancery Court, Campbell
County, Tennessee). In its complaint, CNX alleged that Miller
breached a contract to assign to CNX certain leasehold rights (“Leases”)
representing approximately 30,000 acres in Campbell County, Tennessee and that
we and another defendant, Wind City Oil & Gas, LLC, interfered with the
closing of this assignment on June 6, 2008. We purchased the Leases
from Miller for approximately $19.1 million. On December 15, 2008,
the Chancery Court dismissed the matter in its entirety, holding that there had
been no breach of the contract by Miller and, therefore, that Atlas America
could not have tortuously interfered with the contract. The Chancery
Court dismissed all claims against Atlas America, LLC; however, CNX has appealed
this decision.
Following
the announcement of the merger agreement on April 27, 2009, the following
actions were filed in Delaware Chancery Court purporting to challenge the
merger:
|
•
|
Alonzo v. Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC, et al.,
C.A. No. 4553-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
4/30/09);
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Operating Engineers
Constructions Industry and Miscellaneous Pension Fund v. Atlas America,
Inc., et al.,
C.A. No. 4589-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
5/13/09);
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Vanderpool v. Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC, et al.,
C.A. No. 4604-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
5/15/09);
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Farrell v. Cohen, et
al.,
C.A. No. 4607-VCN (Del. Ch. filed 5/19/09);
and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Montgomery County Employees’
Retirement Fund v. Atlas Energy Resources, L.L.C., et al.,
C.A.
No. 4613-VCN (Del. Ch. filed
5/21/09).
|
On June
15, 2009, Vice Chancellor Noble issued an order consolidating all five lawsuits,
renaming the action
In re
Atlas Energy Resources, LLC Unitholder Litigation
, C.A. No. 4589-VCN, and
appointing as co-lead plaintiffs Operating Engineers Construction Industry and
Miscellaneous Pension Fund and Montgomery County Employees Retirement Fund.
Plaintiffs filed a Verified Consolidated Class Action Complaint on July 1, 2009,
which has superseded all prior complaints. On July 27, 2009, the Chancery Court
granted the parties’ scheduling stipulation, setting a preliminary injunction
hearing for September 4, 2009. The complaint advances claims of breach of
fiduciary duty in connection with the merger agreement, including allegations of
inadequate disclosures in connection with the unitholder vote on the merger, and
seeks monetary damages or injunctive relief, or both.
On August
7, 2009, plaintiffs advised the court by letter that the hearing date be removed
from the court’s calendar. Plaintiffs have advised counsel that they
intend to continue to pursue the case after the merger as a claim for monetary
damages. Predicting the outcome of this lawsuit is difficult. An
adverse judgment for monetary damages could have a material adverse effect on
the operations of the combined company after the merger. A preliminary
injunction, had plaintiffs successfully pursued it, could have delayed or
jeopardized the completion of the merger, and an adverse judgment granting
permanent injunctive relief could have indefinitely enjoined completion of the
merger. Based on the facts known to date, the defendants believe that the claims
asserted against them in this lawsuit are without merit, and intend to defend
themselves vigorously against the claims.
Our
business operations and financial position are subject to various
risks. These risks are described elsewhere in this report and in our
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 and Form 10Q for the three months
ended March 31, 2009. The risk factors identified therein have not
changed in any material respect, except the additional risk factors added
below.
The
exchange ratio for the merger is fixed and will not be adjusted in the event of
any change in either the price of Atlas America common stock or the price of our
common units.
If the
merger is completed, each common unit outstanding as of immediately prior to the
effective time will be converted into the right to receive 1.16 shares of Atlas
America common stock. This exchange ratio was fixed in the merger agreement and
will not be adjusted for changes in the market price of either Atlas America
common stock or our common units. Changes in the price of Atlas America common
stock prior to the effective time will affect the market value of the merger
consideration that our unitholders will receive in the merger. Stock price
changes may result from a variety of factors (many of which are beyond the
control of Atlas America and us), including:
|
•
|
changes
in the company’s businesses, operations and prospects;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
changes
in market assessments of the business, operations and prospects of the
company;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
market
assessments of the likelihood that the merger will be completed, including
related considerations regarding regulatory approvals of the
merger;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
interest
rates, general market and economic conditions and other factors generally
affecting the price of securities;
and
|
|
•
|
federal,
state and local legislation, governmental regulation and legal
developments in the businesses in which we
operate.
|
The price
of Atlas America common stock at the closing of the merger may vary from its
price on the date the merger agreement was executed. As a result, the market
value represented by the exchange ratio will also vary.
There
will be material differences between the current rights of our unitholders and
the rights they can expect to have as Atlas America stockholders.
Our
unitholders will receive Atlas America common stock in the merger and will
become Atlas America stockholders. As Atlas America stockholders, their rights
as stockholders will be governed by the Atlas America charter and bylaws. In
addition, whereas we are currently a Delaware limited liability company,
governed by the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act, Atlas America is a
Delaware corporation, governed by the Delaware General Corporation Law. As a
result, there will be material differences between the current rights of our
unitholders and the rights they can expect to have as Atlas America
stockholders, as well as differences in how stockholders and unitholders are
taxed. For example, our profits flow through us and are taxed once, at the
unitholder level, regardless of whether distributions are made to our
unitholders. After the merger, profits of the combined company will be subject
to tax at the corporation level, and potentially again, if and when distributed
to Atlas America stockholders at the stockholder level. In addition, after the
merger, the combined company will have a classified board, with directors
elected for a three-year term on a staggered basis, whereas all our directors
are currently elected every year for an annual term.
The
combined company may fail to realize the anticipated cost savings, growth
opportunities and synergies and other benefits anticipated from the merger,
which could adversely affect the value of Atlas America common
stock.
Atlas
America and we currently operate as separate public companies. The success of
the merger will depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated
synergies and growth opportunities from combining the businesses, as well as the
projected stand-alone cost savings and revenue growth trends identified by each
company. In addition, on a combined basis, we expect to benefit from operational
synergies resulting from the consolidation of capabilities and elimination of
redundancies as well as greater efficiencies from increased scale. Management
also intends to focus on revenue synergies for the combined entity. However,
management must successfully combine our businesses in a manner that permits
these cost savings and synergies to be realized. In addition, it must achieve
the anticipated savings without adversely affecting current revenues and our
investments in future growth. If it is not able to successfully achieve these
objectives, the anticipated cost savings, revenue growth and synergies may not
be realized fully or at all, or may take longer to realize than
expected.
The
receipt of the merger consideration will be taxable for U.S. federal income tax
purposes and our unitholders could recognize tax gain or have tax liability in
excess of the merger consideration received.
Our
unitholders generally will recognize gain with respect to the exchange of their
common units for shares of Atlas America common stock in the merger in an amount
equal to the excess of (1) each unitholder’s “amount realized” for U.S.
federal income tax purposes, which equals the sum of the fair market value of
the shares of Atlas America common stock and any cash received in lieu of
fractional shares (including any amounts of cash withheld), plus his or her
share of our pre-merger liabilities, over (2) such unitholder’s aggregate
adjusted tax basis in his or her common units (including basis attributable to
his or her share of our pre-merger liabilities). Unitholders generally will
recognize a loss to the extent that the amount of their basis described in
clause (2) above exceeds the amount realized described in clause
(1) above.
Because
the “amount realized” includes the amount of our liabilities allocated to each
unitholder immediately prior to the merger, it is possible that the amount of
gain unitholders recognize, or even their resulting tax liability, could exceed
the fair market value of the shares of Atlas America common stock plus any cash
they receive, perhaps by a significant amount. The application of other,
complicated tax rules also may give rise to adverse tax consequences to
unitholders. Because the tax consequences of the merger to a unitholder will
depend on his or her particular factual circumstances and are uncertain in some
material respects, unitholders should consult their tax advisors regarding the
potential tax consequences of exchanging our common units for shares of Atlas
America common stock in the merger.
Our
unitholders will be allocated our taxable income and gain through the time of
the merger and will not receive any additional distributions attributable to
that income.
Our
unitholders will be allocated their proportionate share of our taxable income
and gain for the period ending at the time of the merger. Unitholders will have
to report such income even though they will not receive any additional cash
distributions from us attributable to such income. Such income, however, will be
included in the tax basis of the units held by unitholders, and thus reduce
their gain (or increase their loss) recognized as a result of the
merger.
Lawsuits
have been filed against us, certain officers and members of our board of
directors and Atlas America challenging the merger, and any adverse judgment may
prevent the merger from becoming effective or from becoming effective within the
expected timeframe.
We,
certain officers and members of our board of directors and Atlas America are
named as defendants in a consolidated purported class action lawsuit brought by
our unitholders in Delaware Chancery Court challenging the proposed merger,
seeking, among other things, to enjoin the defendants from consummating the
merger on the agreed-upon terms. Plaintiffs initially filed five separate
purported class actions, and the Chancery Court issued an order of consolidation
on June 15, 2009. Plaintiffs filed a Verified Consolidated Class Action
Complaint on July 1, 2009, which has superseded all prior complaints. On July
27, 2009, the Chancery Court granted the parties’ scheduling stipulation,
setting a preliminary injunction hearing for September 4, 2009. The complaint
advances claims of breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the merger
agreement, including allegations of inadequate disclosures in connection with
the unitholder vote on the merger, and seeks monetary damages or injunctive
relief, or both. Predicting the outcome of this lawsuit is
difficult.
One of
the conditions to the completion of the merger is that no judgment, order,
injunction, decision, opinion or decree issued by a court or other governmental
entity that makes the merger illegal or prohibits the consummation of the merger
shall be in effect. A preliminary injunction could delay or jeopardize the
completion of the merger, and an adverse judgment granting permanent injunctive
relief could indefinitely enjoin completion of the merger. An adverse judgment
for monetary damages could have a material adverse effect on the operations of
the combined company after the merger.
The
merger is subject to various closing conditions, and any delay in completing the
merger may reduce or eliminate the benefits expected.
The
merger is subject to the satisfaction of a number of other conditions beyond the
parties’ control that may prevent, delay or otherwise materially adversely
affect the completion of the transaction. On May 15, 2009, early termination of
the waiting period under the HSR Act was granted. In July 2009, two other
conditions to completion of the merger were satisfied. On July 10, 2009, we
received the requisite consent from our lenders to amend our credit agreement to
permit the merger, and on July 13, 2009, the Atlas America stockholders approved
an amendment to the Atlas America charter to increase the number of authorized
shares of Atlas America common stock so that Atlas America has sufficient
authorized shares to complete the merger. We cannot predict with certainty,
however, whether and when any of the other conditions to completion of the
merger will be satisfied. Any delay in completing the merger could cause the
combined company not to realize, or delay the realization, of some or all of the
benefits that the companies expect to achieve from the transaction.
Failure
to complete the merger or delays in completing the merger could negatively
affect the price of our common units and Atlas America common stock and each
company’s future business and operations.
If the
merger is not completed for any reason, Atlas America and we may be subject to a
number of material risks, including the following:
|
•
|
the
individual companies will not realize the benefits expected from the
merger, including a potentially enhanced financial and competitive
position;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
the
price of the our common units or the Atlas America common stock may
decline to the extent that the current market price of these securities
reflects a market assumption that the merger will be completed;
and
|
|
•
|
some
costs relating to the merger must be paid even if the merger is not
completed.
|
The
market price of the Atlas America common stock and the results of operations of
Atlas America after the merger may be affected by factors different from those
affecting us or Atlas America currently.
Our
businesses, while similar in many respects, also have some differences, and,
accordingly, the results of operations of Atlas America following the merger and
the market price of Atlas America common stock following the merger may be
affected by factors different from those currently affecting the independent
results of operations and market prices of each of Atlas America and us. As a
holder of Atlas America common stock following the merger, you will be subject
to the risks and liabilities affecting these other businesses, including those
of Atlas Pipeline Holdings and Atlas Pipeline, as well as those of
ours.
Exhibit
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger dated as of April 27, 2009 among Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC, Atlas America, Inc., Atlas Energy Management, Inc. and
Merger Sub, as defined therein
(5)
|
|
3.1
|
|
Amended
and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC
(1)
|
|
3.2
|
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC
(2)
|
|
3.3
|
|
Certificate
of Formation of Atlas Energy Resources, LLC
(3)
|
|
4.1
|
|
Form
of common unit certificate (included as Exhibit A to the Amended and
Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Atlas Energy Resources,
LLC)
(1)
|
|
4.2
|
|
Indenture
dated as of January 23, 2008 among Atlas Energy Operating Company,
LLC, Atlas Energy Finance Corp., as Issuers, the subsidiaries named
therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as
Trustee
(9)
|
|
4.3
|
|
Form
of 10.75% Senior Note due 2018 (included as an exhibit to the Indenture
filed as Exhibit 4.2 hereto)
|
|
4.4
|
|
Senior
Indenture dated July 16, 2009 among Atlas Energy Operating Company,
LLC, Atlas Energy Finance Corp., as Issuers, the subsidiaries named
therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as
Trustee
(10)
|
|
4.5
|
|
First
Supplemental Indenture dated July 16, 2009
(10)
|
|
4.6
|
|
Form
of Note for 12.125% Senior Notes due 2017 (contained in Annex A to the
First Supplemental Indenture filed as Exhibit 4.5
hereto)
|
|
10.1(a)
|
|
Revolving
Credit Agreement, dated as of June 29, 2007, among Atlas Energy Operating
Company, LLC, its subsidiaries, J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Administrative Agent and the other lenders signatory thereto
(2)
|
|
10.1(b)
|
|
First
Amendment to Credit Agreement, dated as of October 25, 2007
(4)
|
|
10.1(c)
|
|
Second
Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of April 9, 2009
(6)
|
|
10.2
|
|
Third
Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of July 10, 2009
(11)
|
|
10.3
|
|
Management
Agreement, dated as of December 18, 2006, among Atlas Energy Resources,
LLC, Atlas Energy Operating Company, LLC and Atlas Energy Management,
Inc
(1)
|
|
10.4
|
|
Agreement
for Services among Atlas America, Inc. and Richard Weber, dated April 5,
2006
(3)
|
|
10.5
|
|
Amended
and Restated Long-Term Incentive Plan
(7)
|
|
10.6
|
|
ATN
Option Agreement dated as of June 1, 2009, by and among APL Laurel
Mountain, LLC, Atlas Pipeline Operating Partnership, L.P. and Atlas Energy
Resources, LLC
(8)
|
|
10.7
|
|
Gas
Gathering Agreement for Natural Gas on the Legacy Appalachian System dated
as of June 1, 2009 between Laurel Mountain Midstream, LLC and Atlas
America, LLC, Atlas Energy Resources, LLC, Atlas Energy Operating Company,
LLC, Atlas Noble LLC, Resource Energy, LLC, Viking Resources, LLC, Atlas
Pipeline Partners, L.P. and Atlas Pipeline Operating Partnership,
L.P. Specific terms in this exhibit have been redacted, as
marked three asterisks (***), because confidential treatment for those
terms has been requested. The redacted material has been
separately filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
|
|
10.8
|
|
Gas
Gathering Agreement for Natural Gas on the Expansion Gathering System
dated as of June 1, 2009 between Laurel Mountain Midstream, LLC and Atlas
America, LLC, Atlas Energy Resources, LLC, Atlas Energy Operating Company,
LLC, Atlas Noble LLC, Resource Energy, LLC, Viking Resources, LLC, Atlas
Pipeline Partners, L.P. and Atlas Pipeline Operating Partnership,
L.P. Specific terms in this exhibit have been redacted, as
marked three asterisks (***), because confidential treatment for those
terms has been requested. The redacted material has been
separately filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
|
|
12.1
|
|
Ratio
of Earnings to Fixed Charges
|
|
31.1
|
|
Rule
13(a)-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification
|
|
31.2
|
|
Rule
13(a)-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification
|
|
32.1
|
|
Section
1350 Certification
|
|
32.2
|
|
Section
1350 Certification
|
(1)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed December 22,
2006.
|
(2)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed June 29,
2007.
|
(3)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our registration statement on Form S-1 (Reg. No.
333-136094).
|
(4)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed October 26,
2007.
|
(5)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed April 28,
2009.
|
(6)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed April 17,
2009.
|
(7)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008
filed March 2, 2009.
|
(8)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed June 5, 2009.
|
(9)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed January 24,
2008.
|
(10)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed July 17,
2009.
|
(11)
|
Previously
filed as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed July 24,
2009.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
|
ATLAS
ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC
|
|
(Registrant)
|
|
|
Date: August 10, 2009
|
By:
|
/s/ Matthew A. Jones
|
|
|
|
Matthew
A. Jones
|
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
|
Date: August 10,
2009
|
By:
|
/s/Sean P. McGrath
|
|
|
|
Sean
P. McGrath
Chief
Accounting
Officer
|
Action Performance (NYSE:ATN)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jan 2025 to Feb 2025
Action Performance (NYSE:ATN)
Historical Stock Chart
From Feb 2024 to Feb 2025