UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

 

Form 10-Q

 

 

 

 

 

816.983.1303

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 

 

None

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report.)

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes  þ      No  o

 

Indicate by check mark 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  o      No  o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

 

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes  o      No  þ

 

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.

 

 

 

Kansas City Southern
Form 10-Q
March 31, 2009

Index

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Form 10-Q
March 31, 2009

PART I — FINANCIAL INFORMATION

 

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

Kansas City Southern

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

Kansas City Southern

 

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

Performance Based Awards.   During 2008 and 2007, the Company granted performance based nonvested stock awards. The awards granted establish an annual target number of shares that generally vest at the end of a three year requisite service period following the grant date. In addition to the three year service condition, the number of nonvested shares to be received depends on the attainment of certain annual performance goals. The number of nonvested shares ultimately earned will range from zero to 200% of the annual target award.

 

A summary of performance based nonvested awards activity at target is as follows:

 

 

 

 

The Company expenses the grant date fair value of the awards which are probable of being earned based on forecasted annual performance goals over the three year performance period. Compensation expense on performance based awards was $0.1 million and $1.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The total income tax benefit recognized in the statement of operations for performance based awards was less than $0.1 million and $0.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

 

As of March 31, 2009, $0.9 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to performance based awards is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 0.51 years. The unrecognized compensation cost includes only the amount determined to be probable of being earned based upon the attainment of the annual performance goals. The fair value (at vest date) of shares vested during the three months ended March 31, 2009 was $0.6 million.

 

 

Basic earnings (loss) per common share is computed by dividing income (loss) available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Restricted stock granted to employees and officers is included in weighted average shares for purposes of computing basic earnings (loss) per common share as it is earned. Diluted earnings (loss) per share adjusts basic earnings (loss) per common share for the effects of potentially dilutive common shares, if the effect is not antidilutive. Potentially dilutive common shares include the dilutive effects of shares issuable upon the conversion of preferred stock to common stock and shares issuable under the Stock Option and Performance Award Plan.

 

The following table reconciles the weighted average shares used for the basic earnings (loss) per share computation to the shares used for the diluted earnings (loss) per share computation (in thousands) :

 

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

For the three months ended March 31, 2009, the assumed conversion of preferred stock to 7,000,000 shares of common stock and approximately 561,000 stock options were excluded from the computation of diluted shares because the impact would have been antidilutive due to the loss reported in the period. For the three months ended March 31, 2008, approximately 46,000 stock options were excluded from the computation of diluted shares because the impact would have been anti-dilutive as the option price was higher than the average market price.

 

The following table reconciles net income (loss) available to common stockholders for purposes of basic earnings (loss) per share to net income (loss) available to common stockholders for purposes of diluted earnings (loss) per share (in millions) :

 

 

 

Financial Accounting Standards No. 157 “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS 157”), defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and enhances disclosures regarding fair value measurements. KCS adopted SFAS 157 prospectively for financial assets and liabilities recognized at fair value on a recurring basis on January 1, 2008. Effective January 1, 2009, KCS adopted SFAS 157 prospectively for assets and liabilities recognized at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. These assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on an ongoing basis but are subject to fair value only in certain circumstances.

 

SFAS 157 requires all assets and liabilities recognized at fair value to be classified into a three-level hierarchy. In general, fair values determined by Level 1 inputs utilize quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access. Level 2 inputs include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement in its entirety falls has been determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.

 

Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis (in millions) :

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents additional information about assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for which the Company has utilized Level 3 inputs to determine fair value.

 

Changes in Level 3 assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis (in millions) :

 

 

 

The Company does not engage in the trading of derivative financial instruments except where the Company’s objective is to manage the variability of forecasted interest payments attributable to changes in interest rates, fuel price risk, or foreign currency fluctuations. In general, the Company enters into derivative transactions in limited situations based on management’s assessment of current market conditions and perceived risks.

 

Interest Rate Swaps.   During 2008, the Company entered into five forward starting interest rate swaps, which have been designated as cash flow hedges under the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS 133”). The forward starting interest rate swaps effectively convert interest payments from variable rates to fixed rates. The swaps are highly effective as defined by SFAS 133 and as a result there will be de minimus statement of operations variability associated with ineffectiveness of these hedges. The hedging instruments have an aggregate notional amount of $250.0 million at an average fixed rate of 2.71%, with forward starting settlements indexed to the three-month LIBOR occurring every quarter, expiring September of 2010 through March of 2011.

 

Fuel Derivative Transactions.   In January 2009, the Company entered into fuel swap agreements, which have been designated as cash flow hedges under SFAS 133. The effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instruments is reported as a component of other comprehensive income (loss) and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transaction affects earnings. Gains and losses on the derivative representing either hedge ineffectiveness or hedge components excluded from the assessment of the effectiveness are recognized in current earnings. As of March 31, 2009, the Company has outstanding fuel swap agreements for 11.3 million gallons of diesel fuel purchases ratably through the end of 2009 at an average swap price of $1.74 per gallon.

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

Foreign Exchange Contracts.   The purpose of the foreign exchange contracts of Kansas City Southern de México, S.A. de C.V., a wholly-owned subsidiary of KCS (“KCSM”), is to limit exposure arising from exchange rate fluctuations in its Mexican peso-denominated monetary assets and liabilities. Management determines the nature and quantity of any hedging transactions based upon exposure and market conditions. These foreign currency contracts are accounted for as free-standing financial instruments and accordingly, all changes in fair value are recognized in earnings. As of March 31, 2009, the Company had one Mexican peso call option outstanding in the notional amount of $1.7 million based on the average exchange rate of Ps.12.5 per U.S. dollar. This call option will expire on May 29, 2009.

 

The following table presents the fair value of derivative instruments included in the consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2009 (in millions) :

 

 

The following table presents the amounts affecting the consolidated statement of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2009 (in millions) :

 

 

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

 

On January 14, 2009, pursuant to an offer to purchase, The Kansas City Southern Railway Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of KCS (“KCSR”) commenced a cash tender offer and consent solicitation for any and all outstanding $200.0 million KCSR 7 1 / 2 % Senior Notes due June 15, 2009 (the “7 1 / 2 % Senior Notes”). As of January 28, 2009 (the consent deadline), KCSR received consents in connection with the tender offer and consent solicitation from holders of over 88% of the 7 1 / 2 % Senior Notes. On January 29, 2009, KCSR purchased the tendered notes in accordance with the terms of the tender offer with proceeds received in 2008 from the issuance of the $190.0 million 13.0% Senior Notes due December 28, 2013 and other borrowings. On March 16, 2009, the Company transferred $24.2 million in principal and interest to U.S. Bank N.A., the trustee, in connection with the legal defeasance of the 7 1 / 2 % Senior Notes to be paid to the remaining holders upon maturity on June 15, 2009.

 

On February 11, 2009, KCSM entered into Amendment No. 3 and Waiver No. 2 (“KCSM Amendment No. 3”) to its unsecured credit agreement dated June 14, 2007 (the “2007 KCSM Credit Agreement”). KCSM Amendment No. 3 amended Section 7.4 of the 2007 KCSM Credit Agreement to permit KCSM’s loan of $4.2 million to Panama Canal Railway Company (“PCRC”) made on December 28, 2007. KCSM Amendment No. 3 also waived any Defaults or Events of Default (as defined in the 2007 KCSM Credit Agreement) resulting from KCSM’s compliance with Section 7.4 of the 2007 KCSM Credit Agreement prior to the effective date of KCSM Amendment No. 3.

 

On March 30, 2009, KCSM issued $200.0 million of 12 1 / 2 % Senior Notes due April 1, 2016 (the “12 1 / 2 % Senior Notes”), which bear interest semiannually at a fixed annual rate of 12 1 / 2 %. The 12 1 / 2 % Senior Notes were issued at a discount to par value, resulting in an $11.0 million discount and a yield to maturity of 13 3 / 4 %. The 12 1 / 2 % Senior Notes are unsecured, unsubordinated obligations and rank pari passu in right of payment with KCSM’s existing and future unsecured, unsubordinated obligations. KCSM used a portion of the net proceeds from the offering, to repay all amounts outstanding under the 2007 KCSM Credit Agreement. Upon repayment of the outstanding amounts, KCSM terminated the 2007 KCSM Credit Agreement, effective March 30, 2009. The 12 1 / 2 % Senior Notes are redeemable at KCSM’s option in whole or in part on and after April 1, 2013, at the following redemption prices (expressed as percentages of principal amount) plus any accrued and unpaid interest: 2013 — 106.250%, 2014 — 103.125%, 2015 — 100.000%. In addition, KCSM may redeem up to 35% of the notes any time prior to April 1, 2012 from the proceeds of the sale of capital stock in KCSM or KCS. The 12 1 / 2 % Senior Notes include certain covenants that restrict or prohibit certain actions.

 

 

Concession Duty.   Under the Concession, the Mexican government has the right to receive a payment from KCSM equivalent to 0.5% of KCSM’s gross revenue during the first 15 years of the Concession period and 1.25% during the remaining years of the Concession period. For the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, the concession duty expense amounted to $0.7 million, and $1.1 million, respectively, which was recorded within operating expenses.

 

Litigation.   The Company is a party to various legal proceedings and administrative actions, all of which, except as set forth below, are of an ordinary, routine nature and incidental to its operations. Included in these proceedings are various tort claims brought by current and former employees for job related injuries and by third parties for injuries related to railroad operations. KCS aggressively defends these matters and has established liability reserves, which management believes are adequate to cover expected costs. Although it is not possible to predict the outcome of any legal proceeding, in the opinion of management, other than those proceedings described in detail below, such proceedings and actions should not, individually, or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and liquidity. However, a

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

material adverse outcome in one or more of these proceedings could have a material adverse impact on the operating results of a particular quarter or fiscal year.

 

Environmental Liabilities.   The Company’s U.S. operations are subject to extensive federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. The major U.S. environmental laws to which the Company is subject include, among others, the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA,” also known as the Superfund law), the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. CERCLA can impose joint and several liabilities for cleanup and investigation costs, without regard to fault or legality of the original conduct, on current and predecessor owners and operators of a site, as well as those who generate, or arrange for the disposal of, hazardous substances. The Company does not believe that compliance with the requirements imposed by the environmental legislation will impair its competitive capability or result in any material additional capital expenditures, operating or maintenance costs. The Company is, however, subject to environmental remediation costs as described below.

 

The Company’s Mexico operations are subject to Mexican federal and state laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment through the establishment of standards for water discharge, water supply, emissions, noise pollution, hazardous substances and transportation and handling of hazardous and solid waste. The Mexican government may bring administrative and criminal proceedings and impose economic sanctions against companies that violate environmental laws, and temporarily or even permanently close non-complying facilities.

 

The risk of incurring environmental liability is inherent in the railroad industry. As part of serving the petroleum and chemicals industry, the Company transports hazardous materials and has a professional team available to respond to and handle environmental issues that might occur in the transport of such materials. Additionally, the Company is a partner in the Responsible Care ^® program and, as a result, has initiated additional environmental, health and safety programs. The Company performs ongoing reviews and evaluations of the various environmental programs and issues within the Company’s operations, and, as necessary, takes actions intended to limit the Company’s exposure to potential liability.

 

The Company owns property that is, or has been, used for industrial purposes. Use of these properties may subject the Company to potentially material liabilities relating to the investigation and cleanup of contaminants, claims alleging personal injury, or property damage as the result of exposures to, or release of, hazardous substances. Although the Company is responsible for investigating and remediating contamination at several locations, based on currently available information, the Company does not expect any related liabilities, individually or collectively, to have a material impact on its financial position or cash flows. Should the Company become subject to more stringent cleanup requirements at these sites, discover additional contamination, or become subject to related personal or property damage claims, the Company could incur material costs in connection with these sites.

 

The Company records liabilities for remediation and restoration costs related to past activities when the Company’s obligation is probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated. Costs of ongoing compliance activities to current operations are expensed as incurred. The Company’s recorded liabilities for these issues represent its best estimates (on an undiscounted basis) of remediation and restoration costs that may be required to comply with present laws and regulations. Although these costs cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes that the ultimate outcome of identified matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or cash flows.

 

Environmental remediation expense was $1.9 million and $1.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and was included in casualties and insurance expense on the consolidated statements of operations. Additionally, as of March 31, 2009, KCS had a liability for environmental remediation of $6.5 million. This amount was derived from a range of reasonable estimates

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

based upon the studies and site surveys described above and in accordance with the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies” (“SFAS 5”).

 

Casualty Claim Reserves.   The Company’s casualty and liability reserve is based on actuarial studies performed on an undiscounted basis. This reserve is based on personal injury claims filed and an estimate of claims incurred but not yet reported. While the ultimate amount of claims incurred is dependent on various factors, it is management’s opinion that the recorded liability is a reasonable estimate of aggregate future payments. Adjustments to the liability are reflected as operating expenses in the period in which changes to estimates are known. Casualty claims in excess of self-insurance levels are insured up to certain coverage amounts, depending on the type of claim and year of occurrence. The activity in the reserve follows (in millions):

 

 

The casualty claim reserve balance as of March 31, 2009 is based on an updated study of casualty reserves for data through November 30, 2008 and review of the last four month’s experience. The activity for the three months ended March 31, 2009 primarily relates to the net settlements and the reserves for Federal Employers Liability Act (“FELA”), third-party, and occupational illness claims. The changes to the reserve in the current year compared to the prior year primarily reflect litigation settlements and the current accruals related to the trend of loss experience since the date of the prior study.

 

Reflecting potential uncertainty surrounding the outcome of casualty claims, it is reasonably possible based on assessments that future costs to settle casualty claims may range from approximately $85 million to $94 million. While the final outcome of these claims cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes that the $89.4 million recorded is the best estimate of the Company’s future obligations for the settlement of casualty claims at March 31, 2009.

 

Management believes that previous reserve estimates for prior claims were reasonable based on current information available. The Company is continuing its practice of accruing monthly for estimated claim costs, including any changes recommended by completed studies and evaluation of recent known trends; based on this practice, management believes all accruals are appropriately reflected.

 

Antitrust Lawsuit.   In May 2007, KCSR, along with other Class I U.S. railroads (and, in some cases, the Association of American Railroads), was included in various Federal district court actions alleging that the railroads conspired to fix fuel surcharges in violation of U.S. antitrust laws. On November 6, 2007, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered that these putative class action cases be consolidated for pretrial handling before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, where the matters remain pending (“the Multidistrict Litigation”). KCSR entered into an agreement with the plaintiffs in the Multidistrict Litigation to toll the statute of limitations as to KCSR and KCSR was not named as a defendant in the Consolidated Amended Complaint filed on April 15, 2008. The Multidistrict Litigation will proceed without KCSR as a party. In any event, KCSR maintains there is no merit to the price fixing allegations asserted against the Company. If KCSR is named as a defendant in lawsuits making such claims in the future, either in the Multidistrict Litigation or otherwise, the Company intends to vigorously contest such allegations.

 

Certain Disputes with Ferromex.   KCSM and Ferrocarril Mexicano, S.A. de C.V. (“Ferromex”) both initiated administrative proceedings seeking a determination by the Mexican Secretaría de Comunicaciones y

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

Transportes (“Ministry of Communications and Transportation” or “SCT”) of the rates that the companies should pay each other in connection with the use of trackage rights. The SCT issued a ruling setting the rates for trackage rights in March of 2002. KCSM and Ferromex challenged the ruling.

 

Following the trial and appellate court decisions, in February 2006 the Mexican Supreme Court sustained KCSM’s appeal of the SCT’s trackage rights ruling, in effect vacating the ruling and ordering the SCT to issue a new ruling consistent with the Court’s decision. On June 27, 2008, KCSM was served with the new ruling issued by the SCT. In this ruling, the SCT established the consideration that KCSM and Ferromex must pay each other in connection with the use of the trackage rights granted in their respective concessions between 2002 and 2004, and further stated that in the event KCSM and Ferromex failed to reach an agreement in connection with the rates for the years after 2004, the SCT shall make a determination along the same lines. In September 2008, KCSM and Ferromex appealed this new ruling with the Mexican Tribunal Federal de Justicia Fiscal y Administrativa (“Administrative and Fiscal Federal Court”).

 

KCSM and Ferromex both initiated administrative proceedings seeking a determination by the SCT of the rates that the companies should pay each other in connection with the use of interline and terminal services. The SCT issued a ruling setting the rates for interline and terminal services in August of 2002. KCSM and Ferromex both challenged the ruling. In April 2005, the Administrative and Fiscal Federal Court ruled in favor of KCSM in the challenge to the SCT interline and terminal services decision. Ferromex, however, challenged this court ruling before the Fifteenth Collegiate Court, and the Court ruled in its favor. Both Ferromex and KCSM have challenged the ruling on different grounds. This most recent challenge is now before the Mexican Supreme Court, which as of the date of this filing has yet to issue a decision on the matter.

 

In addition to the above, Ferromex has filed three commercial proceedings against KCSM. In the first claim, which was served in 2001 and is related to the payment of consideration for interline services, KCSM received a favorable decision and Ferromex has been ordered to pay related costs and expenses. Ferromex has appealed the decision. KCSM received an unfavorable decision in the second claim filed in 2004 and has filed a challenge to this judgment, the outcome of which is still pending. The third claim, filed in 2006, is an action for access to records related to interline services between 2002 and 2004. A final decision has not been rendered on the third claim. KCSM is continually analyzing all of the records related to this dispute to determine the adequacy of the reserves for the amounts due to, as well as due from, Ferromex.

 

KCSM expects various proceedings and appeals related to the matters described above to continue over the next few years. Although KCSM and Ferromex have challenged these matters based on different grounds and these cases continue to evolve, management believes the reserves related to these matters are adequate and does not believe there will be a future material impact to the results of operations arising out of these disputes.

 

Disputes Relating to the Provision of Services to a Mexican Subsidiary of a Large U.S. Auto Manufacturer.   KCSM is involved in several disputes related to providing service to a Mexican subsidiary of a large U.S. auto manufacturer (the “Auto Manufacturer”).

 

In March 2008, the Auto Manufacturer filed an arbitration suit against KCSM under a contract entered into in 1999 for services to the Auto Manufacturer’s plants in Mexico, which, as amended, had a stated termination date of January 31, 2008. The Auto Manufacturer claims that the contract was implicitly extended and continued in effect beyond its stated termination date, and that KCSM is therefore required to continue abiding by its terms, including, but not limited to, the rates contemplated in such contract. KCSM claims that the contract did in fact expire on its stated termination date of January 31, 2008, and that services rendered thereafter are thus subject to the general terms and conditions (including rates) applicable in the absence of a specific contract, pursuant to Mexican law. Accordingly, KCSM filed a counterclaim against the Auto Manufacturer to, among other things, recover the applicable rate difference between the rates under the contract and KCSM’s rates. The Auto Manufacturer is also seeking a declaration by the arbitrator that the rates being assessed by KCSM are discriminatory, even though the rates being charged are within the legal

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

rate limits set by Mexican law for such freight transportation. KCSM believes that the facts of this dispute provide it with strong legal arguments and intends to vigorously defend its claims in this proceeding. As a result, management believes the final resolution of these claims will not have any material impact on KCSM’s results of operations.

 

In May 2008, the arbitrator ordered that KCSM continue providing the service in the same way and at the same rates as it had done through March 2008, and ordered the Auto Manufacturer to provide a guaranty by depositing with KCSM the difference between the rates under the agreement and KCSM’s rates. KCSM initiated a judicial proceeding seeking enforcement of the Auto Manufacturer’s obligation to provide the guaranty and on January 8, 2009, KCSM received a court ruling ordering the Auto Manufacturer to deposit the amount of the guaranty with KCSM as required by the arbitrator. On February 11, 2009, the Auto Manufacturer was granted an injunction to avoid making the payment, but was ordered to provide a guaranty for the amount as determined by the court. The Auto Manufacturer posted a bond as a guaranty in March of 2009 and filed an appeal requesting that the amount of the guaranty be reduced. On April 2, 2009, the Collegiate Court reduced the amount of the guaranty to an amount it determined would compensate KCSM for the delay until the appeal was decided.

 

In May 2008, the SCT initiated a proceeding against KCSM, at the Auto Manufacturer’s request, alleging that KCSM impermissibly bundled international rail services and engaged in discriminatory pricing practices with respect to rail services provided by KCSM to the Auto Manufacturer. In March of 2009, the SCT issued a decision determining that KCSM had engaged in the activities alleged, but imposed no sanction since this was the first time KCSM had engaged in such activities. KCSM intends to challenge the SCT’s decision.

 

On July 23, 2008, the SCT delivered notice to KCSM of new proceedings against KCSM, claiming, among other things, that KCSM refused to grant Ferromex access to certain trackage over which Ferromex alleges it has trackage rights on six different occasions and thus denied Ferromex the ability to provide service to the Auto Manufacturer at this location.

 

KCSM does not believe that these SCT proceedings will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations or financial condition. However, if KCSM is ultimately sanctioned in connection with the bundling and discriminatory pricing practices alleged by the Auto Manufacturer, any such sanction would be considered a “generic” sanction under Mexican law (i.e., sanctions applied to conduct not specifically referred to in specific subsections of the Mexican railway law). If challenges against any such sanction are conclusively ruled adversely to KCSM and a sanction is effectively imposed, and if the SCT imposes other “generic” sanctions on four additional occasions over the remaining term of KCSM’s railroad concession from the Mexican government (“the Concession”), KCSM could be subject to possible future SCT action seeking revocation of its Concession. Likewise, if each of the six refusals to allow Ferromex to serve the Auto Manufacturer in Coahuila were to be finally decided to warrant a separate sanction, KCSM could be subject to a future SCT action seeking revocation of its Concession. Revocation of the Concession would materially adversely affect KCSM’s results of operations and financial condition.

 

Disputes Relating to the Scope of the Mandatory Trackage Rights.   KCSM and Ferromex are parties to various cases involving disputes over the application and proper interpretation of the mandatory trackage rights. In particular, in August 2002, the SCT issued a ruling related to Ferromex’s trackage rights in Monterrey, Nuevo León. KCSM and Ferromex both appealed the SCT’s ruling and after considerable litigation, on September 17, 2008, the Mexican Administrative and Fiscal Federal Court announced a decision, which if upheld, would grant Ferromex rights that KCSM believes to be broader than those set forth in both its and Ferromex’s concession titles. KCSM further believes that this decision conflicts with current applicable law and with relevant judicial precedents. KCSM has challenged such resolution and intends to continue to pursue all other remedies available to it. KCSM believes that there will be no material adverse effect on KCSM’s results of operations or financial condition from the outcome of this case.

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

Other SCT Sanction Proceedings.   In April 2006, the SCT initiated proceedings against KCSM, claiming that KCSM had failed to make certain minimum capital investments projected for 2004 and 2005 under its five-year business plan filed with the SCT prior to its April 2005 acquisition by Kansas City Southern (collectively, the “Capital Investment Proceedings”). KCSM believes it made capital expenditures exceeding the required amounts. KCSM responded to the SCT by providing evidence in support of its investments and explaining why it believes sanctions are not appropriate. In May 2007, KCSM was served with an SCT resolution regarding the Capital Investment Proceeding for 2004, where the SCT determined that KCSM had indeed failed to make the minimum capital investments required for such year, but resolved to impose no sanction as this would have been KCSM’s first breach of the relevant legal provisions. In June 2007, KCSM was served with an SCT resolution regarding the Capital Investment Proceeding for 2005, where the SCT determined that KCSM had indeed failed to make the minimum capital investments required for such year, and imposed a fine in the amount of Ps.46,800. KCSM has filed actions challenging both the 2004 and 2005 investment plan resolutions issued by the SCT. KCSM will have the right to challenge any adverse ruling by the Mexican Administrative and Fiscal Federal Court.

 

KCSM believes that even if sanctions are ultimately imposed as a consequence of the Capital Investment Proceedings, there will be no material adverse effect on its results of operations or financial condition. However, each of these potential sanctions is considered a “generic” sanction under Mexican law (i.e., sanctions applied to conduct not specifically referred to in specific subsections of the Mexican railway law). If these potential sanctions are conclusively ruled adversely against KCSM and sanctions are imposed, and if the SCT imposes other sanctions related to KCSM’s capital investments or other “generic” sanctions on three additional occasions over the remaining term of the Concession, KCSM could be subject to possible future SCT action seeking revocation of its Concession. Revocation would materially adversely affect the results of operations and financial condition of KCSM.

 

Mancera Proceeding.   In February 2006, Mancera Ernst & Young, S.C., (“Mancera”) filed a claim against KCSM seeking payment for an additional contingency fee for costs and expenses related to Mancera’s representation of KCSM in its value added tax or “VAT” claim against the Mexican government. Following litigation, KCSM was notified on February 10, 2009 that the Appeals Court of Mexico City released KCSM from any obligation for damages to Mancera but increased the amount of fees to be paid to Mancera above the contractual terms outlined in its engagement agreement with Mancera as interpreted by KCSM. KCSM has appealed this decision and intends to vigorously defend the matter. In addition, the Company believes that it has adequately reserved for its obligation and does not believe that the final resolution of this claim will have a material effect on the Company’s financial statements.

 

Third Party Contractual Agreements.   In the normal course of business, the Company enters into various third party contractual agreements related to the use of other railroads’ or municipalities’ infrastructure needed for the operations of the business. The Company is involved in certain disputes involving transportation rates and charges related to these agreements. While the outcome of these matters can not be predicted with certainty, the Company does not believe, when finally resolved, that these disputes will have a material effect on its results of operations or financial condition. However, an unexpected adverse resolution could have a material effect on the results of operations in a particular quarter or year.

 

Credit Risk.   The Company continually monitors risks related to the downturn in the economy and certain customer receivable concentrations. Significant changes in customer concentration or payment terms, deterioration of customer credit-worthiness or further weakening in economic trends could have a significant impact on the collectability of the Company’s receivables and operating results. If the financial condition of the Company’s customers were to deteriorate, resulting in an impairment of their ability to make payments, additional allowances may be required. The Company has recorded reserves for uncollectability based on its best estimate at March 31, 2009.

 

Kansas City Southern

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)

 

 

The Company strategically manages its rail operations as one reportable business segment over a single coordinated rail network that extends from the midwest and southeast portions of the United States south into Mexico and connects with other Class I railroads. Financial information reported at this level, such as revenues, operating income and cash flows from operations, is used by corporate management, including the Company’s chief operating decision-maker, in evaluating overall financial and operational performance, market strategies, as well as the decisions to allocate capital resources.

 

The following tables (in millions) provide information by geographic area pursuant to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information” (“SFAS 131”) as follows:

 

 

 

 

KCSR has outstanding $275.0 million of 8.0% Senior Notes due 2015 and $190.0 million of 13.0% Senior Notes due 2013, which are unsecured obligations of KCSR, which are also jointly and severally and fully and unconditionally guaranteed on an unsecured senior basis by KCS and certain wholly-owned domestic subsidiaries. As a result, the following accompanying condensed consolidating financial information (in millions) has been prepared and presented pursuant to SEC Regulation S-X Rule 3-10 “Financial statements of guarantors and issuers of guaranteed securities registered or being registered.” This condensed information is not intended to present the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of the individual companies or groups of companies in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The 8.0% Senior Notes were registered by means of an amendment to KCS’ shelf registration statement filed and declared effective by the SEC on May 23, 2008. The 13.0% Senior Notes were registered under KCS’ shelf registration statement filed and declared effective by the SEC on November 21, 2008.