edjune200810q_final.htm
UNITED
STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
[X] Quarterly
Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities
Exchange Act of 1934
For
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008
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 001-03492
HALLIBURTON
COMPANY
(a
Delaware Corporation)
75-2677995
5
Houston Center
1401
McKinney, Suite 2400
Houston,
Texas 77010
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
Telephone
Number – Area Code (713) 759-2600
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 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.
Large
accelerated
filer [X]
Non-accelerated
filer [ ]
|
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
As of
July 17, 2008, 876,875,508 shares of Halliburton Company common stock, $2.50 par
value per share, were outstanding.
HALLIBURTON
COMPANY
Index
|
|
|
Page No.
|
|
PART
I.
|
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
- Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
- Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
- Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results
of Operations
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART
II.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1(a).
|
Risk
Factors
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
Defaults
Upon Senior Securities
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
5.
|
Other
Information
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item
1. Financial Statements
HALLIBURTON
COMPANY
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Millions
of dollars and shares except per share data
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services
|
|
$ |
3,292 |
|
|
$ |
2,744 |
|
|
$ |
6,256 |
|
|
$ |
5,266 |
|
Product
sales
|
|
|
1,195 |
|
|
|
991 |
|
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
1,891 |
|
Total
revenue
|
|
|
4,487 |
|
|
|
3,735 |
|
|
|
8,516 |
|
|
|
7,157 |
|
Operating
costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of services
|
|
|
2,480 |
|
|
|
1,980 |
|
|
|
4,753 |
|
|
|
3,797 |
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
1,012 |
|
|
|
829 |
|
|
|
1,885 |
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
Gain
on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
Total
operating costs and expenses
|
|
|
3,538 |
|
|
|
2,842 |
|
|
|
6,720 |
|
|
|
5,476 |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
949 |
|
|
|
893 |
|
|
|
1,796 |
|
|
|
1,681 |
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(77 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
Interest
income
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Income
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and minority
interest
|
|
|
917 |
|
|
|
886 |
|
|
|
1,745 |
|
|
|
1,671 |
|
Provision
for income taxes
|
|
|
(288 |
) |
|
|
(284 |
) |
|
|
(526 |
) |
|
|
(543 |
) |
Minority
interest in net income of subsidiaries
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
1,206 |
|
|
|
1,124 |
|
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tax (provision) benefit of $1,
$19, $0, and $(11)
|
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
958 |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
507 |
|
|
$ |
1,530 |
|
|
$ |
1,091 |
|
|
$ |
2,082 |
|
Basic
income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.72 |
|
|
$ |
0.66 |
|
|
$ |
1.38 |
|
|
$ |
1.18 |
|
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net
|
|
|
(0.14 |
) |
|
|
1.03 |
|
|
|
(0.13 |
) |
|
|
1.01 |
|
Net
income per share
|
|
$ |
0.58 |
|
|
$ |
1.69 |
|
|
$ |
1.25 |
|
|
$ |
2.19 |
|
Diluted
income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
|
$ |
0.63 |
|
|
$ |
1.32 |
|
|
$ |
1.14 |
|
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net
|
|
|
(0.13 |
) |
|
|
0.99 |
|
|
|
(0.12 |
) |
|
|
0.98 |
|
Net
income per share
|
|
$ |
0.55 |
|
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.20 |
|
|
$ |
2.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
dividends per share
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
0.165 |
|
Basic
weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
869 |
|
|
|
905 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
949 |
|
Diluted
weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
914 |
|
|
|
942 |
|
|
|
912 |
|
|
|
983 |
|
See notes
to condensed consolidated financial statements.
HALLIBURTON
COMPANY
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
Millions
of dollars and shares except per share data
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Assets
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and equivalents
|
|
$ |
1,880 |
|
|
$ |
1,847 |
|
Receivables
(less allowance for bad debts of $53 and $49)
|
|
|
3,581 |
|
|
|
3,093 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
1,736 |
|
|
|
1,459 |
|
Current
deferred income taxes
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
376 |
|
Investments
in marketable securities
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
388 |
|
Other
current assets
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
410 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
7,945 |
|
|
|
7,573 |
|
Property,
plant, and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of $4,317 and
$4,126
|
|
|
4,146 |
|
|
|
3,630 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
838 |
|
|
|
790 |
|
Noncurrent
deferred income taxes
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
951 |
|
|
|
794 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
14,048 |
|
|
$ |
13,135 |
|
Liabilities
and Shareholders’ Equity
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
$ |
954 |
|
|
$ |
768 |
|
Employee
compensation and benefits
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
575 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
232 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
Current
maturities of long-term debt
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
159 |
|
Income
tax payable
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
553 |
|
|
|
491 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
2,606 |
|
|
|
2,411 |
|
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
2,565 |
|
|
|
2,627 |
|
Employee
compensation and benefits
|
|
|
407 |
|
|
|
403 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
785 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
6,363 |
|
|
|
6,175 |
|
Minority
interest in consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
Shareholders’
equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
shares, par value $2.50 per share – authorized 2,000 shares, issued
1,066
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and 1,063
shares
|
|
|
2,666 |
|
|
|
2,657 |
|
Paid-in
capital in excess of par value
|
|
|
1,801 |
|
|
|
1,741 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
(104 |
) |
Retained
earnings
|
|
|
9,127 |
|
|
|
8,202 |
|
|
|
|
13,493 |
|
|
|
12,496 |
|
Less
190 and 183 shares of treasury stock, at cost
|
|
|
5,908 |
|
|
|
5,630 |
|
Total
shareholders’ equity
|
|
|
7,585 |
|
|
|
6,866 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity
|
|
$ |
14,048 |
|
|
$ |
13,135 |
|
See notes
to condensed consolidated financial statements.
HALLIBURTON
COMPANY
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
1,091 |
|
|
$ |
2,082 |
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash from operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation,
depletion, and amortization
|
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
Provision
(benefit) for deferred income taxes
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
(Income)
loss from discontinued operations
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
(958 |
) |
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
– |
|
Gain
on sale of assets
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
Impairment
of assets
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
– |
|
Other
changes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables
|
|
|
(410 |
) |
|
|
(225 |
) |
Inventories
|
|
|
(277 |
) |
|
|
(263 |
) |
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Other
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Cash
flows from discontinued operations
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Total
cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
985 |
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
(837 |
) |
|
|
(682 |
) |
Sales
(purchases) of short-term investments in marketable securities,
net
|
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
(842 |
) |
Acquisitions
of assets, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
(125 |
) |
Sales
of property, plant, and equipment
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Other
investing activities
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
36 |
|
Cash
flows from discontinued operations
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
(1,474 |
) |
Total
cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
(541 |
) |
|
|
(3,003 |
) |
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments
to reacquire common stock
|
|
|
(381 |
) |
|
|
(926 |
) |
Payments
of dividends to shareholders
|
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(157 |
) |
Proceeds
from exercises of stock options
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Other
financing activities
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Cash
flows from discontinued operations
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
Total
cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
(415 |
) |
|
|
(1,037 |
) |
Effect
of exchange rate changes on cash
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
Increase
(decrease) in cash and equivalents
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
(3,031 |
) |
Cash
and equivalents at beginning of period, including $0 and $1,461 related
to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
discontinued
operations
|
|
|
1,847 |
|
|
|
4,379 |
|
Cash
and equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
1,880 |
|
|
$ |
1,348 |
|
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
payments during the period for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
72 |
|
|
$ |
72 |
|
Income
taxes from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
473 |
|
|
$ |
528 |
|
See notes
to condensed consolidated financial statements.
HALLIBURTON
COMPANY
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note
1. Basis of Presentation
The
accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements were prepared
using generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information
and the instructions to Form 10-Q and Regulation S-X. Accordingly,
these financial statements do not include all information or footnotes required
by generally accepted accounting principles for annual financial statements and
should be read together with our 2007 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Certain
prior period amounts have been reclassified to be consistent with the current
presentation.
Our
accounting policies are in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles in the United States of America. The preparation of
financial statements in conformity with these accounting principles requires us
to make estimates and assumptions that affect:
|
-
|
the
reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent
assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements;
and
|
|
-
|
the
reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting
period.
|
Ultimate
results could differ from our estimates.
In our
opinion, the condensed consolidated financial statements included herein contain
all adjustments necessary to present fairly our financial position as of June
30, 2008, the results of our operations for the three and six months ended June
30, 2008 and 2007, and our cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2008 and
2007. Such adjustments are of a normal recurring
nature. The results of operations for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2008 may not be indicative of results for the full year.
Note
2. KBR Separation
On April
5, 2007, we completed the separation of KBR, Inc. (KBR) from us by exchanging
the 135.6 million shares of KBR common stock owned by us on that date for 85.3
million shares of our common stock. In the second quarter of 2007, we
recorded a gain on the disposition of KBR of approximately $933 million, net of
tax and the estimated fair value of the indemnities and guarantees provided to
KBR as described below, which was included in “Income (loss) from discontinued
operations, net of income tax” on the condensed consolidated statement of
operations. During the second quarter of 2008, adjustments of $117
million, net of tax, to these indemnities and guarantees were reflected as a
loss in “Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income
tax.”
We
entered into various agreements relating to the separation of KBR, including,
among others, a master separation agreement, a registration rights agreement, a
tax sharing agreement, transition services agreements, and an employee matters
agreement. The master separation agreement provides for, among other
things, KBR’s responsibility for liabilities related to its business and our
responsibility for liabilities unrelated to KBR’s business. We
provide indemnification in favor of KBR under the master separation agreement
for certain contingent liabilities, including our indemnification of KBR and any
of its greater than 50%-owned subsidiaries as of November 20, 2006, the date of
the master separation agreement, for:
|
-
|
fines
or other monetary penalties or direct monetary damages, including
disgorgement, as a result of a claim made or assessed by a governmental
authority in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Nigeria,
Switzerland, and/or Algeria, or a settlement thereof, related to alleged
or actual violations occurring prior to November 20, 2006 of the United
States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) or particular, analogous
applicable foreign statutes, laws, rules, and regulations in connection
with investigations pending as of that date, including with respect to the
construction and subsequent expansion by TSKJ of a natural gas
liquefaction complex and related facilities at Bonny Island in Rivers
State, Nigeria; and
|
|
-
|
all
out-of-pocket cash costs and expenses, or cash settlements or cash
arbitration awards in lieu thereof, KBR may incur after the effective date
of the master separation agreement as a result of the replacement of the
subsea flowline bolts installed in connection with the Barracuda-Caratinga
project. See Note 8 for further discussion of these
matters.
|
Additionally, we provide indemnities,
performance guarantees, surety bond guarantees, and letter of credit guarantees
that are currently in place in favor of KBR’s customers or lenders under project
contract, credit agreements, letters of credit, and other KBR credit
instruments. These indemnities and guarantees will continue until
they expire at the earlier of: (1) the termination of the underlying
project contract or KBR obligations there under; (2) the expiration of the
relevant credit support instrument in accordance with its terms or release of
such instrument by the customer; or (3) the expiration of the credit
agreements. Further, KBR and we have agreed that, until December 31,
2009, we will issue additional guarantees, indemnification, and reimbursement
commitments for KBR’s benefit in connection with: (a) letters of
credit necessary to comply with KBR’s Egypt Basic Industries Corporation ammonia
plant contract, KBR’s Allenby & Connaught project, and all other KBR project
contracts that were in place as of December 15, 2005; (b) surety bonds issued to
support new task orders pursuant to the Allenby & Connaught project, two job
order contracts for KBR’s Government and Infrastructure segment, and all other
KBR project contracts that were in place as of December 15, 2005; and (c)
performance guarantees in support of these contracts. KBR is
compensating us for these guarantees. We have also provided a limited
indemnity, with respect to FCPA governmental and third-party claims, to the
lender parties under KBR’s revolving credit agreement expiring in December
2010. KBR has agreed to indemnify us, other than for the FCPA and
Barracuda-Caratinga bolts matter, if we are required to perform under any of the
indemnities or guarantees related to KBR’s revolving credit agreement, letters
of credit, surety bonds, or performance guarantees described above.
During
the second quarter of 2007, we recorded $190 million, as a reduction of the gain
on the disposition of KBR, to reflect the estimated fair value of the above
indemnities and guarantees, net of the associated estimated future tax benefit.
As noted previously, during the second quarter of 2008, we recorded $117
million, net of tax, in adjustments to these indemnities and guarantees as a
loss from discontinued operations to reflect our most recent assumptions
regarding the resolution of the FCPA investigations and Barracuda-Caratinga bolt
matter. These indemnities and guarantees are primarily included
in “Other liabilities” on the condensed consolidated balance sheets and totaled
$342 million at June 30, 2008.
The tax
sharing agreement provides for allocations of United States and certain other
jurisdiction tax liabilities between us and KBR.
Note
3. Acquisitions and Dispositions
In June
2008, we entered into an agreement with Shell Technology Ventures Fund 1 B.V.
(STV Fund) to purchase its remaining 49% minority interest in WellDynamics B.V.
(WellDynamics), a provider of intelligent well completion
technology. As of June 30, 2008, we owned 51% of WellDynamics and
consolidated its results in our condensed consolidated financial statements,
with the remaining 49% interest recorded as minority interest
in consolidated subsidiary. In July 2008, the transaction
closed resulting in our 100% ownership of WellDynamics. WellDynamics
results of operations are included in our Completion and Production
segment.
In March 2008, we completed the sale of
a joint venture interest to our joint venture partner. As a result of
the transaction, we recorded a gain of $35 million during the first quarter of
2008. We accounted for our interest in the joint venture using the
cost method in our Completion and Production segment.
In July
2007, we acquired the entire share capital of PSL Energy Services Limited
(PSLES), a leading eastern hemisphere provider of process, pipeline, and well
intervention services. PSLES has operational bases in the United
Kingdom, Norway, the Middle East, Azerbaijan, Algeria, and Asia
Pacific. We paid approximately $332 million for PSLES, consisting of
$328 million in cash and $4 million in debt assumed, subject to adjustment for
working capital purposes. As of June 30, 2008, we had recorded
goodwill of $165 million and intangible assets of $61 million on a preliminary
basis until our analysis of the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities
assumed is complete. Beginning in August 2007, PSLES’s results of
operations are included in our Completion and Production segment.
In
January 2007, we acquired all intellectual property, current assets, and
existing business associated with Calgary-based Ultraline Services Corporation
(Ultraline), a division of Savanna Energy Services Corp. Ultraline is
a provider of wireline services in Canada. We paid approximately $178
million for Ultraline and recorded goodwill of $124 million and intangible
assets of $41 million. Beginning in February 2007, Ultraline’s
results of operations are included in our Drilling and Evaluation
segment.
Note
4. Business Segment Information
We
operate under two divisions, which form the basis for the two operating segments
we report: the Completion and Production segment and the Drilling and
Evaluation segment.
The
following table presents information on our business
segments. “Corporate and other” includes expenses related to support
functions and corporate executives. Also included are certain gains
and losses not attributable to a particular business segment.
Intersegment
revenue was immaterial. Our equity in earnings and losses of
unconsolidated affiliates that are accounted for by the equity method are
included in revenue and operating income of the applicable segment.
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Completion
and Production
|
|
$ |
2,437 |
|
|
$ |
2,066 |
|
|
$ |
4,628 |
|
|
$ |
3,910 |
|
Drilling
and Evaluation
|
|
|
2,050 |
|
|
|
1,669 |
|
|
|
3,888 |
|
|
|
3,247 |
|
Total
revenue
|
|
$ |
4,487 |
|
|
$ |
3,735 |
|
|
$ |
8,516 |
|
|
$ |
7,157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Completion
and Production
|
|
$ |
561 |
|
|
$ |
555 |
|
|
$ |
1,090 |
|
|
$ |
1,032 |
|
Drilling
and Evaluation
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
864 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
Total
operations
|
|
|
1,041 |
|
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
1,954 |
|
|
|
1,742 |
|
Corporate
and other
|
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
Total
operating income
|
|
$ |
949 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
1,796 |
|
|
$ |
1,681 |
|
As of
June 30, 2008, 34% of our gross trade receivables were from customers in the
United States. As of December 31, 2007, 35% of our gross trade
receivables were from customers in the United States. No other
country accounted for more than 10% of our gross trade receivables at these
dates.
Note
5. Inventories
Inventories
are stated at the lower of cost or market. In the United States, we
manufacture certain finished products and have parts inventories for drill bits,
completion products, bulk materials, and other tools that are recorded using the
last-in, first-out method totaling $86 million at June 30, 2008 and $71 million
at December 31, 2007. If the average cost method was used, total
inventories would have been $28 million higher than reported at June 30, 2008
and $25 million higher than reported at December 31, 2007. The cost
of the remaining inventory was recorded on the average cost
method. Inventories consisted of the following:
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Finished
products and parts
|
|
$ |
1,205 |
|
|
$ |
1,042 |
|
Raw
materials and supplies
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
Work
in process
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,736 |
|
|
$ |
1,459 |
|
Finished
products and parts are reported net of obsolescence reserves of $71 million at
June 30, 2008 and $65 million at December 31, 2007.
Note
6. Debt
Our
3.125% convertible senior notes due July 2023 became redeemable at our option on
July 15, 2008. If we choose to redeem the notes prior to their
maturity or if the holders choose to convert the notes, we must settle the
principal amount of the notes, which totaled $1.2 billion at June 30, 2008, plus
any applicable accrued interest in cash. We have the option to settle
any amounts due in excess of the principal, which has ranged between $1.6
billion to $2.0 billion since June 30, 2008, by delivering shares of our
common stock, cash, or a combination of common stock and cash. In the
second quarter of 2008, the stock conversion rate for the $1.2 billion of
convertible senior notes increased to 53.4069 shares of common stock per each
$1,000 principal amount of the convertible senior notes due to the quarterly
dividend paid on our common stock. If we decide to settle any amount
in excess of principal in common stock, we will do so by issuing shares of
treasury stock. If we decide to settle any amount in excess of principal
in cash, we will be required to take an earnings charge for the amount of the
cash paid. Therefore, in the event the entire amount in excess of
principal is paid in cash, we could record a loss on extinguishment of debt of
up to $2.0 billion based on current conversion rates.
From July
1 through July 24, 2008, $25 million of the principal amount of the convertible
debt had been converted for a total settlement amount of $62
million. We have also received additional notices to
convert approximately $500 million of principal amount that will be settled
during the third quarter of 2008.
We entered into an
unsecured, $2.5 billion, 364-day revolving credit facility in July 2008 in order
to ensure we will have sufficient cash available to pay off 100% of the
convertible notes. When added to our pre-existing unsecured, five-year,
revolving credit facility, this provides $3.7 billion of committed bank credit
to support any commercial paper we subsequently issue. We expect to
refinance all or a portion of any commercial paper issued or any other
borrowings under these credit facilities through the issuance of long-term
senior notes.
Note
7. Comprehensive Income
The
components of comprehensive income included the following:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
507 |
|
|
$ |
1,530 |
|
|
$ |
1,091 |
|
|
$ |
2,082 |
|
Net
cumulative translation adjustments
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
Realized
defined benefit and other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
postretirement plans
adjustments, net
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
Net
unrealized gains (losses) on
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
investments
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
Total
comprehensive income
|
|
$ |
508 |
|
|
$ |
1,778 |
|
|
$ |
1,094 |
|
|
$ |
2,341 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss consisted of the following:
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Cumulative
translation adjustments
|
|
$ |
(60 |
) |
|
$ |
(61 |
) |
Defined
benefit and other postretirement liability adjustments
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
Unrealized
gains on investments and derivatives
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Total
accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
$ |
(101 |
) |
|
$ |
(104 |
) |
Note
8. Commitments and Contingencies
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
investigations
The
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is conducting a formal investigation
into whether improper payments were made to government officials in Nigeria
through the use of agents or subcontractors in connection with the construction
and subsequent expansion by TSKJ of a multibillion dollar natural gas
liquefaction complex and related facilities at Bonny Island in Rivers State,
Nigeria. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is also conducting a related
criminal investigation. The SEC has also issued subpoenas seeking
information, which we and KBR are furnishing, regarding current and former
agents used in connection with multiple projects, including current and prior
projects, over the past 20 years located both in and outside of Nigeria in which
the Halliburton energy services business, KBR or affiliates, subsidiaries or
joint ventures of Halliburton or KBR, are or were participants. In
September 2006 and October 2007, the SEC and the DOJ, respectively, each
requested that we enter into an agreement to extend the statute of limitations
with respect to its investigation. We have entered into tolling
agreements with the SEC and the DOJ.
TSKJ is a
private limited liability company registered in Madeira, Portugal whose members
are Technip SA of France, Snamprogetti Netherlands B.V. (a subsidiary of Saipem
SpA of Italy), JGC Corporation of Japan, and Kellogg Brown & Root LLC (a
subsidiary of KBR), each of which had an approximate 25% interest in the
venture. TSKJ and other similarly owned entities entered into various
contracts to build and expand the liquefied natural gas project for Nigeria LNG
Limited, which is owned by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Shell
Gas B.V., Cleag Limited (an affiliate of Total), and Agip International B.V. (an
affiliate of ENI SpA of Italy).
The SEC
and the DOJ have been reviewing these matters in light of the requirements of
the FCPA. In addition to performing our own investigation, we have
been cooperating with the SEC and the DOJ investigations and with other
investigations in France, Nigeria, and Switzerland regarding the Bonny Island
project. The government of Nigeria gave notice in 2004 to the French
magistrate of a civil claim as an injured party in the French
investigation. The Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom is also
conducting an investigation relating to the Bonny Island project. Our
Board of Directors has appointed a committee of independent directors to oversee
and direct the FCPA investigations.
The
matters under investigation relating to the Bonny Island project cover an
extended period of time (in some cases significantly before our 1998 acquisition
of Dresser Industries and continuing through the current time
period). We have produced documents to the SEC and the DOJ from the
files of numerous officers and employees of Halliburton and KBR, including
current and former executives of Halliburton and KBR, both voluntarily and
pursuant to company subpoenas from the SEC and a grand jury, and we are making
our employees and we understand KBR is making its employees available to the SEC
and the DOJ for interviews. In addition, the SEC has issued a
subpoena to A. Jack Stanley, who formerly served as a consultant and chairman of
Kellogg Brown & Root LLC, and to others, including certain of our and KBR’s
current or former executive officers or employees, and at least one
subcontractor of KBR. We further understand that the DOJ has made
requests for information abroad, and we understand that other partners in TSKJ
have provided information to the DOJ and the SEC with respect to the
investigations, either voluntarily or under subpoenas.
The SEC and DOJ investigations include
an examination of whether TSKJ’s engagements of Tri-Star Investments as an agent
and a Japanese trading company as a subcontractor to provide services to TSKJ
were utilized to make improper payments to Nigerian government
officials. In connection with the Bonny Island project, TSKJ entered
into a series of agency agreements, including with Tri-Star Investments, of
which Jeffrey Tesler is a principal, commencing in 1995 and a series of
subcontracts with a Japanese trading company commencing in 1996. We
understand that a French magistrate has officially placed Mr. Tesler under
investigation for corruption of a foreign public official. In
Nigeria, a legislative committee of the National Assembly and the Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission, which is organized as part of the executive branch
of the government, are or were also investigating these matters. Our
representatives have met with the French magistrate and Nigerian
officials. In October 2004, representatives of TSKJ voluntarily
testified before the Nigerian legislative committee.
TSKJ
suspended the receipt of services from and payments to Tri-Star Investments and
the Japanese trading company and has considered instituting legal proceedings to
declare all agency agreements with Tri-Star Investments terminated and to
recover all amounts previously paid under those agreements. In
February 2005, TSKJ notified the Attorney General of Nigeria that TSKJ would not
oppose the Attorney General’s efforts to have sums of money held on deposit in
accounts of Tri-Star Investments in banks in Switzerland transferred to Nigeria
and to have the legal ownership of such sums determined in the Nigerian
courts.
As a
result of these investigations, information has been uncovered suggesting that,
commencing at least 10 years ago, members of TSKJ planned payments to Nigerian
officials. We have reason to believe that, based on the ongoing
investigations, payments may have been made by agents of TSKJ to Nigerian
officials. The government has recently confirmed that it has evidence
of such payments. The government has also recently advised
Halliburton and KBR that it has evidence of payments to Nigerian officials by
another agent in connection with a separate KBR-managed project in Nigeria
called the Shell EA project and possibly evidence of payments in connection with
other projects in Nigeria, potentially including energy services
projects. In addition, information uncovered in the summer of 2006
suggests that, prior to 1998, plans may have been made by employees of The M.W.
Kellogg Company (a predecessor of a KBR subsidiary) to make payments to
government officials in connection with the pursuit of a number of other
projects in countries outside of Nigeria. We are reviewing a number
of more recently discovered documents related to KBR’s activities in countries
outside of Nigeria with respect to agents for projects after
1998. Certain activities discussed in this paragraph involve current
or former employees or persons who were or are consultants to KBR, and our
investigation is continuing.
In June
2004, all relationships with Mr. Stanley and another consultant and former
employee of M.W. Kellogg Limited were terminated. The terminations
occurred because of Code of Business Conduct violations that allegedly involved
the receipt of improper personal benefits from Mr. Tesler in connection with
TSKJ’s construction of the Bonny Island project.
In 2006
and 2007, we or KBR suspended the services of two agents in and outside of
Nigeria, including the agent in connection with the Shell EA project and another
agent who, until such suspension, had worked for KBR outside of Nigeria on
several current projects and on numerous older projects going back to the early
1980s. Such suspensions have occurred when possible improper conduct
has been discovered or alleged or when we and KBR have been unable to confirm
the agent’s compliance with applicable law and the Code of Business
Conduct.
The SEC
and DOJ are also investigating and have issued subpoenas concerning TSKJ's use
of an immigration services provider, apparently managed by a Nigerian
immigration official, to which approximately $1.8 million in payments in excess
of costs of visas were allegedly made between approximately 1997 and the
termination of the provider in December 2004. We understand that TSKJ
terminated the immigration services provider after a KBR employee discovered the
issue. We reported this matter to the United States government in
2007. The SEC has indicated that it believes documents concerning
this immigration service provider may have been responsive to earlier
subpoenas. The SEC has issued a subpoena requesting documents among
other things concerning any payment of anything of value to Nigerian government
officials. In response to such subpoena, we have produced and
continue to produce additional documents regarding KBR and Halliburton’s energy
services business use of immigration and customs service providers, which may
result in further inquiries. Furthermore, as a result of these
matters, we have expanded our own investigation to consider any matters raised
by energy services activities in Nigeria.
From time
to time, we and KBR have engaged in discussions with the SEC and the DOJ
regarding a settlement of these matters. There can be no assurance
that a settlement will be reached or, if a settlement is reached, that the terms
of any settlement would not have a material adverse effect on us.
If
violations of the FCPA were found, a person or entity found in violation could
be subject to fines, civil penalties of up to $500,000 per violation, equitable
remedies, including disgorgement (if applicable) generally of profits, including
prejudgment interest on such profits, causally connected to the violation, and
injunctive relief. Criminal penalties could range up to the greater
of $2 million per violation or twice the gross pecuniary gain or loss from the
violation, which could be substantially greater than $2 million per
violation. It is possible that both the SEC and the DOJ could assert
that there have been multiple violations, which could lead to multiple
fines. The amount of any fines or monetary penalties that could be
assessed would depend on, among other factors, the findings regarding the
amount, timing, nature, and scope of any improper payments, whether any such
payments were authorized by or made with knowledge of us, KBR or our or KBR’s
affiliates, the amount of gross pecuniary gain or loss involved, and the level
of cooperation provided the government authorities during the
investigations. The government has expressed concern regarding the
level of our cooperation. Agreed dispositions of these types of
violations also frequently result in an acknowledgement of wrongdoing by the
entity and the appointment of a monitor on terms negotiated with the SEC and the
DOJ to review and monitor current and future business practices, including the
retention of agents, with the goal of assuring compliance with the
FCPA.
These
investigations could also result in third-party claims against us, which may
include claims for special, indirect, derivative or consequential damages,
damage to our business or reputation, loss of, or adverse effect on, cash flow,
assets, goodwill, results of operations, business prospects, profits or business
value or claims by directors, officers, employees, affiliates, advisors,
attorneys, agents, debt holders, or other interest holders or constituents of us
or our current or former subsidiaries. In addition, we could incur
costs and expenses for any monitor required by or agreed to with a governmental
authority to review our continued compliance with FCPA law.
As of
June 30, 2008, we are unable to estimate an amount of probable loss or a range
of possible loss related to these matters as it relates to us
directly. Therefore, we have not recorded any amounts as it relates
to us directly, other than for the indemnities provided to KBR, in connection
with these matters in our condensed consolidated financial
statements. We provided indemnification in favor of KBR under the
master separation agreement for certain contingent liabilities, including our
indemnification of KBR and any of its greater than 50%-owned subsidiaries as of
November 20, 2006, the date of the master separation agreement, for fines or
other monetary penalties or direct monetary damages, including disgorgement, as
a result of a claim made or assessed by a governmental authority in the United
States, the United Kingdom, France, Nigeria, Switzerland, and/or Algeria, or a
settlement thereof, related to alleged or actual violations occurring prior to
November 20, 2006 of the FCPA or particular, analogous applicable foreign
statutes, laws, rules, and regulations in connection with investigations pending
as of that date, including with respect to the construction and subsequent
expansion by TSKJ of a natural gas liquefaction complex and related facilities
at Bonny Island in Rivers State, Nigeria. As noted previously, our
estimation of the value of the indemnity regarding FCPA matters is recorded as a
liability in our condensed consolidated financial statements as of June 30, 2008
and December 31, 2007. See Note 2 for additional
information.
Our
indemnification obligation to KBR does not include losses resulting from
third-party claims against KBR, including claims for special, indirect,
derivative or consequential damages, nor does our indemnification apply to
damage to KBR’s business or reputation, loss of, or adverse effect on, cash
flow, assets, goodwill, results of operations, business prospects, profits or
business value or claims by directors, officers, employees, affiliates,
advisors, attorneys, agents, debt holders, or other interest holders or
constituents of KBR or KBR’s current or former subsidiaries.
In
consideration of our agreement to indemnify KBR for the liabilities referred to
above, KBR has agreed that we will at all times, in our sole discretion, have
and maintain control over the investigation, defense and/or settlement of these
FCPA matters until such time, if any, that KBR exercises its right to assume
control of the investigation, defense and/or settlement of the FCPA matters as
it relates to KBR. KBR has also agreed, at our expense, to assist
with our full cooperation with any governmental authority in our investigation
of these FCPA matters and our investigation, defense and/or settlement of any
claim made by a governmental authority or court relating to these FCPA matters,
in each case even if KBR assumes control of these FCPA matters as it relates to
KBR. If KBR takes control over the investigation, defense, and/or
settlement of FCPA matters, refuses a settlement of FCPA matters negotiated by
us, enters into a settlement of FCPA matters without our consent, or materially
breaches its obligation to cooperate with respect to our investigation, defense,
and/or settlement of FCPA matters, we may terminate the indemnity.
Barracuda-Caratinga
arbitration
We also
provided indemnification in favor of KBR under the master separation agreement
for all out-of-pocket cash costs and expenses (except for legal fees and other
expenses of the arbitration so long as KBR controls and directs it), or cash
settlements or cash arbitration awards in lieu thereof, KBR may incur after
November 20, 2006 as a result of the replacement of certain subsea flowline
bolts installed in connection with the Barracuda-Caratinga
project. Under the master separation agreement, KBR currently
controls the defense, counterclaim, and settlement of the subsea flowline bolts
matter. As a condition of our indemnity, for any settlement to be
binding upon us, KBR must secure our prior written consent to such settlement’s
terms. We have the right to terminate the indemnity in the event KBR
enters into any settlement without our prior written consent. Our
estimation of the value of the indemnity regarding the Barracuda-Caratinga
arbitration is recorded as a liability in our condensed consolidated financial
statements as of June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007. See Note 2 for
additional information regarding the KBR indemnification.
At
Petrobras’ direction, KBR replaced certain bolts located on the subsea flowlines
that failed through mid-November 2005, and KBR has informed us that additional
bolts have failed thereafter, which were replaced by Petrobras. These
failed bolts were identified by Petrobras when it conducted inspections of the
bolts. A key issue in the arbitration is which party is responsible
for the designation of the material to be used for the bolts. We
understand that KBR believes that an instruction to use the particular bolts was
issued by Petrobras, and as such, KBR believes the cost resulting from any
replacement is not KBR’s responsibility. We understand Petrobras
disagrees. We understand KBR believes several possible solutions may
exist, including replacement of the bolts. Estimates indicate that
costs of these various solutions range up to $148 million. In March
2006, Petrobras commenced arbitration against KBR claiming $220 million plus
interest for the cost of monitoring and replacing the defective bolts and all
related costs and expenses of the arbitration, including the cost of attorneys’
fees. We understand KBR is vigorously defending and pursuing recovery
of the costs incurred to date through the arbitration process and to that end
has submitted a counterclaim in the arbitration seeking the recovery of $22
million. The arbitration panel held an evidentiary hearing during the
week of March 31, 2008 and took evidence and arguments under
advisement.
Securities
and related litigation
In June
2002, a class action lawsuit was filed against us in federal court alleging
violations of the federal securities laws after the SEC initiated an
investigation in connection with our change in accounting for revenue on
long-term construction projects and related disclosures. In the weeks
that followed, approximately twenty similar class actions were filed against
us. Several of those lawsuits also named as defendants several of our
present or former officers and directors. The class action cases were
later consolidated, and the amended consolidated class action complaint, styled
Richard Moore, et al. v.
Halliburton Company, et al., was filed and served upon us in April
2003. As a result of a substitution of lead plaintiffs, the case is
now styled Archdiocese of
Milwaukee Supporting Fund (“AMSF”) v. Halliburton Company, et
al. We settled with the SEC in the second quarter of
2004.
In early
May 2003, we entered into a written memorandum of understanding setting forth
the terms upon which the Moore class action would be
settled. In June 2003, the lead plaintiffs filed a motion for leave
to file a second amended consolidated complaint, which was granted by the
court. In addition to restating the original accounting and
disclosure claims, the second amended consolidated complaint included claims
arising out of the 1998 acquisition of Dresser Industries, Inc. by Halliburton,
including that we failed to timely disclose the resulting asbestos liability
exposure (the “Dresser claims”). The memorandum of understanding
contemplated settlement of the Dresser claims as well as the original
claims.
In June
2004, the court entered an order preliminarily approving the
settlement. Following the transfer of the case to another district
judge, the court held that evidence of the settlement’s fairness was inadequate,
denied the motion for final approval of the settlement, and ordered the parties
to mediate. The mediation was unsuccessful.
In April
2005, the court appointed new co-lead counsel and named AMSF the new lead
plaintiff, directing that it file a third consolidated amended complaint and
that we file our motion to dismiss. The court held oral arguments on
that motion in August 2005, at which time the court took the motion under
advisement. In March 2006, the court entered an order in which it
granted the motion to dismiss with respect to claims arising prior to June 1999
and granted the motion with respect to certain other claims while permitting
AMSF to re-plead some of those claims to correct deficiencies in its earlier
complaint. In April 2006, AMSF filed its fourth amended consolidated
complaint. We filed a motion to dismiss those portions of the
complaint that had been re-pled. A hearing was held on that motion in
July 2006, and in March 2007 the court ordered dismissal of the claims against
all individual defendants other than our CEO. The court ordered that
the case proceed against our CEO and Halliburton. In response to a
motion by the lead plaintiff, on February 26, 2007, the court ordered the
removal and replacement of their co-lead counsel. In June 2007, upon
becoming aware of a United States Supreme Court opinion issued in that month,
the court allowed further briefing on the motion to dismiss filed on behalf of
our CEO. The court again denied the motion to dismiss in March
2008. In September 2007, AMSF filed a motion for class certification,
and our response was filed in November 2007. A hearing was held in
March 2008, and we await the court’s ruling. The case is set for
trial in July 2009.
As of
June 30, 2008, we had not accrued any amounts related to this matter because we
do not believe that a loss is probable. Further, an estimate of
possible loss or range of loss related to this matter cannot be
made.
Asbestos
insurance settlements
At
December 31, 2004, we resolved all open and future asbestos- and silica-related
claims in the prepackaged Chapter 11 proceedings of DII Industries LLC, Kellogg
Brown & Root LLC, and our other affected subsidiaries that had previously
been named as defendants in a large number of asbestos- and silica-related
lawsuits. During 2004, we settled insurance disputes with
substantially all the insurance companies for asbestos- and silica-related
claims and all other claims under the applicable insurance policies and
terminated all the applicable insurance policies.
Under the
insurance settlements entered into as part of the resolution of our Chapter 11
proceedings, we have agreed to indemnify our insurers under certain historic
general liability insurance policies in certain situations. We have
concluded that the likelihood of any claims triggering the indemnity obligations
is remote, and we believe any potential liability for these indemnifications
will be immaterial. Further, an estimate of possible loss or range of
loss related to this matter cannot be made. At June 30, 2008, we had
not recorded any liability associated with these indemnifications.
M-I,
LLC antitrust litigation
On
February 16, 2007, M-I, LLC, a competitor of ours in the drilling fluids market,
filed an antitrust lawsuit against us alleging that our enforcement of a patent
that was subject to a prior lawsuit was an improper attempt to monopolize the
market for one of our drilling fluids. The lawsuit alleged that one
of our drilling fluids patents was invalid as a result of its allegedly having
been procured by fraud, that our prosecution of an infringement action against
them amounted to predatory action, and that we had falsely advertised our
product. This case was settled in the first quarter of 2008 for an
immaterial amount.
Dirt,
Inc. litigation
In April
2005, Dirt, Inc. brought suit in Alabama against Bredero-Shaw (a joint venture
in which we formerly held a 50% interest that we sold to the other party in the
venture, ShawCor Ltd., in 2002), Halliburton Energy Services, Inc., and ShawCor
Ltd., claiming that Bredero-Shaw disposed of hazardous waste in a construction
materials landfill owned and operated by Dirt, Inc. On November 1,
2007, the trial court in the above-referenced matter entered a judgment in the
total amount of $108 million. In the second quarter of 2008, an
agreement was reached among Dirt, Inc., ShawCor Ltd., and us to settle the suit,
of which we agreed to fund and have funded an immaterial amount.
Environmental
We are
subject to numerous environmental, legal, and regulatory requirements related to
our operations worldwide. In the United States, these laws and
regulations include, among others:
|
-
|
the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act;
|
|
-
|
the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act;
|
|
-
|
the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act;
and
|
|
-
|
the
Toxic Substances Control Act.
|
In
addition to the federal laws and regulations, states and other countries where
we do business often have numerous environmental, legal, and regulatory
requirements by which we must abide. We evaluate and address the
environmental impact of our operations by assessing and remediating contaminated
properties in order to avoid future liabilities and comply with environmental,
legal, and regulatory requirements. On occasion, we are involved in
specific environmental litigation and claims, including the remediation of
properties we own or have operated, as well as efforts to meet or correct
compliance-related matters. Our Health, Safety and Environment group
has several programs in place to maintain environmental leadership and to
prevent the occurrence of environmental contamination.
We do not
expect costs related to these remediation requirements to have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or our results of
operations. Our accrued liabilities for environmental matters were
$68 million as of June 30, 2008 and $72 million as of December 31,
2007. Our total liability related to environmental matters covers
numerous properties.
We have
subsidiaries that have been named as potentially responsible parties along with
other third parties for 9 federal and state superfund sites for which we have
established a liability. As of June 30, 2008, those 9 sites accounted
for approximately $10 million of our total $68 million liability. For
any particular federal or state superfund site, since our estimated liability is
typically within a range and our accrued liability may be the amount on the low
end of that range, our actual liability could eventually be well in excess of
the amount accrued. Despite attempts to resolve these superfund
matters, the relevant regulatory agency may at any time bring suit against us
for amounts in excess of the amount accrued. With respect to some
superfund sites, we have been named a potentially responsible party by a
regulatory agency; however, in each of those cases, we do not believe we have
any material liability. We also could be subject to third-party
claims with respect to environmental matters for which we have been named as a
potentially responsible party.
Letters
of credit
In the
normal course of business, we have agreements with banks under which
approximately $2.3 billion of letters of credit, surety bonds, or bank
guarantees were outstanding as of June 30, 2008, including $1.0 billion that
relate to KBR. These KBR letters of credit, surety bonds, or bank
guarantees are being guaranteed by us in favor of KBR’s customers and
lenders. KBR has agreed to compensate us for these guarantees and
indemnify us if we are required to perform under any of these
guarantees. Some of the outstanding letters of credit have triggering
events that would entitle a bank to require cash collateralization.
Note
9. Income per Share
Basic
income per share is based on the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding during the period. Diluted income per share includes
additional common shares that would have been outstanding if potential common
shares with a dilutive effect had been issued. A reconciliation of
the number of shares used for the basic and diluted income per share
calculations is as follows:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Millions
of shares
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Basic
weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
869 |
|
|
|
905 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
949 |
|
Dilutive
effect of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible senior notes
premium
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Stock options
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Restricted
stock
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Diluted
weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
914 |
|
|
|
942 |
|
|
|
912 |
|
|
|
983 |
|
Excluded
from the computation of diluted income per share are options to purchase one
million shares of common stock that were outstanding during both the three and
six months ended June 30, 2008 and four million and three million shares during
the three and six months ended June 30, 2007. These options were
outstanding during these quarters but were excluded because they were
antidilutive, as the option exercise price was greater than the average market
price of the common shares.
Effective
April 5, 2007, common shares outstanding were reduced by the 85.3 million shares
of our common stock that we accepted in exchange for the shares of KBR, Inc.
common stock we owned.
Note
10. Retirement Plans
The
components of net periodic benefit cost related to pension benefits for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2008 and June 30, 2007 were as
follows:
|
|
Three
Months Ended June 30
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
United
States
|
|
|
International
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
|
International
|
|
Service
cost
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Expected
return on plan assets
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Amortization
of unrecognized loss
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Net
periodic benefit cost
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended June 30
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
United
States
|
|
|
International
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
|
International
|
|
Service
cost
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Expected
return on plan assets
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
Settlements/curtailments
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Amortization
of unrecognized loss
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Net
periodic benefit cost
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
18 |
|
We
currently expect to contribute approximately $28 million to our international
pension plans in 2008. During the six months ended June 30, 2008, we
contributed $20 million to our international pension plans. We do not
have a required minimum contribution for our domestic plans; however, we may
make additional discretionary contributions.
The
components of net periodic benefit cost related to other postretirement benefits
for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008 and June 30, 2007 were as
follows:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Service
cost
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Unrecognized
actuarial loss
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
– |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
– |
|
Net
periodic benefit cost
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
Note
11. Common Stock
In
February 2006, our Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program of up
to $1.0 billion. In September 2006, our Board of Directors approved
an increase to our existing common share repurchase program of up to an
additional $2.0 billion. In July 2007, our Board of Directors
approved an additional increase to our existing common share repurchase program
of up to $2.0 billion, bringing the entire authorization to $5.0
billion. This additional authorization may be used for open market
share purchases or to settle the conversion premium on our 3.125% convertible
senior notes, should they be redeemed. From the inception of this
program, we have repurchased approximately 89 million shares of our common stock
for approximately $3.0 billion at an average price of $34.28 per
share. These amounts include the repurchases of approximately 10
million shares of our common stock for approximately $360 million at an average
price of $37.26 per share during the first six months of 2008. As of
June 30, 2008, approximately $2.0 billion remained available under this
program.
Note
12. New Accounting Standards
In June
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Staff Position
(FSP) Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) 03-6-1, “Determining Whether Instruments
Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities.”
This FSP provides 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
both basic and diluted earnings per share. We will adopt the provisions
of FSP EITF 03-6-1 on January 1, 2009, which will require us to restate prior
periods’ basic and diluted earnings per share to include outstanding unvested
restricted common shares in the weighted average shares outstanding
calculation. We estimate that, had we calculated earnings per share under
these new provisions during the six months ended June 30, 2008, basic and
diluted earnings per share would have decreased by approximately $0.01 for both
continuing operations and net income per share.
In May
2008, the FASB issued FSP Accounting Principles Board (APB) 14-1, “Accounting
for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be Settled in Cash upon Conversion
(Including Partial Cash Settlement).” This FSP clarifies that
convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion,
including partial cash settlement, are not addressed by paragraph 12 of APB
Opinion No. 14, “Accounting for Convertible Debt and Debt Issued with Stock
Purchase Warrants.” Additionally, this FSP specifies that issuers of
such instruments should separately account for the liability and equity
components in a manner that will reflect the entity’s nonconvertible debt
borrowing rate when interest cost is recognized in subsequent
periods. This FSP is effective for financial statements issued for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and interim periods within those
fiscal years. We will adopt the provisions of FSP APB 14-1 on January
1, 2009 and will be required to retroactively apply its provisions, which means
we will restate our consolidated financial statements for prior
periods. We have not yet determined the impact of this FSP on our
consolidated financial statements, which may be material, as it will depend on
the timing and method of any redemptions by us or conversions by the
noteholders.
In March
2008, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No.
161, “Disclosure about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities – An
Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133.” SFAS No. 161 requires more
disclosures about an entity’s derivative and hedging activities in order to
improve the transparency of financial reporting. SFAS No. 161 is
effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods
beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application
encouraged. This Statement encourages, but does not require,
comparative disclosures for earlier periods at initial adoption. We
will adopt the provisions of SFAS No. 161 on January 1, 2009, which we do not
expect will have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements,” which
is intended to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements
by defining fair value, establishing a framework for measuring fair value, and
expanding disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157
applies to other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value
measurements and is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007 and interim periods within those fiscal
years. In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (FSP)
FAS 157-1, “Application of FASB Statement No. 157 to FASB Statement
No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements That Address Fair Value
Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or Measurement under Statement
13,” which removes certain leasing transactions from the scope of SFAS
No. 157, and FSP FAS 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement
No. 157,” which defers the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for one year
for certain nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, except those that
are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a
recurring basis. On January 1, 2008, we adopted without material
impact on our consolidated financial statements the provisions of SFAS No. 157
related to financial assets and liabilities and to nonfinancial assets and
liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis. Beginning
January 1, 2009, we will adopt the provisions for nonfinancial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities that are not required or permitted to be measured at
fair value on a recurring basis, which include those measured at fair value in
goodwill impairment testing, indefinite-lived intangible assets measured at fair
value for impairment assessment, nonfinancial long-lived assets measured at fair
value for impairment assessment, asset retirement obligations initially measured
at fair value, and those initially measured at fair value in a business
combination. We do not expect the provisions of SFAS No. 157 related
to these items to have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
Item
2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations
EXECUTIVE
OVERVIEW
Organization
We are a
leading provider of products and services to the energy industry. We serve
the upstream oil and gas industry throughout the lifecycle of the reservoir,
from locating hydrocarbons and managing geological data, to drilling and
formation evaluation, well construction and completion, and optimizing
production through the life of the field. Activity
levels within our operations are significantly impacted by spending on upstream
exploration, development, and production programs by major, national, and
independent oil and natural gas companies. We report our results
under two segments, Completion and Production and Drilling and
Evaluation:
|
-
|
our
Completion and Production segment delivers cementing, stimulation,
intervention, and completion services. The segment consists of
production enhancement services, completion tools and services, and
cementing services; and
|
|
-
|
our
Drilling and Evaluation segment provides field and reservoir modeling,
drilling, evaluation, and precise well-bore placement solutions that
enable customers to model, measure, and optimize their well construction
activities. The segment consists of fluid services, drilling
services, drill bits, wireline and perforating services, Landmark software
and consulting services, and project management
services.
|
The
business operations of our segments are organized around four primary geographic
regions: North America, Latin America, Europe/Africa/CIS, and Middle
East/Asia. We have significant manufacturing operations in various
locations, including, but not limited to, the United States, Canada, the United
Kingdom, Continental Europe, Malaysia, Mexico, Brazil, and
Singapore. With more than 53,000 employees, we operate in
approximately 70 countries around the world, and our corporate headquarters are
in Houston, Texas and Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Financial results
During
the first half of 2008, we produced revenue of $8.5 billion and operating income
of $1.8 billion, reflecting an operating margin of 21%. Revenue
increased $1.4 billion or 19% over the first half of 2007, while operating
income improved $115 million or 7% over the first half of
2007. Consistent with our initiative to grow our non-North America
operations, we experienced 25% revenue growth and 23% operating income growth
outside of North America in the first six months of 2008 compared to the first
six months of 2007. Revenue from our Latin America region increased
30% to $1.1 billion, and operating income increased 39% to $235 million in the
first six months of 2008 compared to the first six months of
2007. Our Middle East/Asia and Europe/Africa/CIS regions also
returned revenue growth in excess of 20% in the first six months of 2008
compared to the first six months of 2007.
Business
outlook
The
outlook for our business remains generally favorable barring significant demand
declines due to high commodity prices. During 2007, the North America
region experienced challenging market conditions as a result of downward
pressure on the pricing of our services, as well as reduced activity in
Canada. During the first six months of 2008, operating margins in the
region continued to decline from prior period levels, primarily as a result of
lower effective pricing for our United States fracturing services and cost
inflation for fuel and other materials used in our
operations. However, we saw signs of prices stabilizing for
fracturing services near the end of the second quarter, and we negotiated fuel
surcharges with many of our customers. We expect to see the positive
impacts of these negotiations starting in the third quarter of
2008. In addition, we believe pricing has now stabilized for product
lines outside of fracturing, with the exception of some weakness in
cementing. Canada has also recovered from its seasonal decline in
activity, and we expect stronger activity in this market in the second half of
2008. Our customers announced increases to their capital programs for
the remainder of 2008 and 2009. This potential increased activity
with tightening of supply capacity provides us with an improved outlook for our
fracturing volumes and pricing. We also see unconventional drilling
activity, such as emerging shale plays, increasing in the second half of 2008,
which could create additional demand for our services.
Outside
of North America, our outlook also remains positive. Worldwide demand
for hydrocarbons continues to grow, and the reservoirs are becoming more
complex. The trend toward exploration and exploitation of more
complex reservoirs bodes well for the mix of our product line offerings and
degree of service intensity on a per rig basis. Therefore, we have
been investing and will continue to invest in infrastructure, capital, and
technology predominantly outside of North America, consistent with our
initiative to grow our operations in that part of the world and balance our
geographic portfolio. As our customers award larger tranches of work,
pricing competition in the international arena has
intensified. However, we expect this price competition to be offset
partially with continued expansion of our margins driven by value created
through the introduction of new technologies, consistency of execution, and
fixed cost leverage. In addition, we believe our Latin America region
will continue to experience the highest growth rate of all our regions, driven
by contract awards in Mexico and higher activity in Colombia, Brazil, and
Venezuela.
In 2008,
we are focusing on:
|
-
|
maintaining
optimal utilization of our equipment and
resources;
|
|
-
|
managing
pricing, particularly in our North America
operations;
|
|
-
|
hiring
and training additional personnel to meet the increased demand for our
services;
|
|
-
|
continuing
the globalization of our manufacturing and supply chain
processes;
|
|
-
|
balancing
our United States operations by capitalizing on the trend toward
horizontal drilling;
|
|
-
|
leveraging
our technologies to provide our customers with the ability to more
efficiently drill and complete their wells and to increase their
productivity. To that end, we
opened one international research and development center with global
technology and training missions in 2007 and opened another in the first
quarter of 2008;
|
|
-
|
maximizing
our position to win meaningful international tenders, especially in
deepwater fields, complex reservoirs, and high-pressure/high-temperature
environments;
|
|
-
|
expanding
our business with national oil companies, including preparing for a shift
to more demand for our integrated project management
services;
|
|
-
|
pursuing
strategic acquisitions that enhance our technological position and our
product and service portfolio in key geographic areas such
as:
|
|
-
|
in
June 2008, we entered into a definitive agreement with Shell Technology
Ventures Fund 1 B.V. to acquire its remaining 49% equity interest in
WellDynamics B.V. (WellDynamics). Upon completion of the transaction in
July 2008, we now own 100% of
WellDynamics;
|
|
-
|
in
June 2008, we acquired all the intellectual property and assets of Protech
Centerform. Protech Centerform is a provider of casing
centralization service; and
|
|
-
|
in
May 2008, we acquired all intellectual property, assets, and existing
business of Knowledge Systems Inc. (KSI). KSI is a
leading provider of combined geopressure and geomechanical analysis
software and services; and
|
|
-
|
directing
our capital spending primarily toward non-North America operations for
service equipment additions and infrastructure. During the second quarter
of 2008, we increased our capital spending forecast to provide for
equipment placements on coming offshore rigs and to meet the growing
demand of our customers in the emerging shale plays in North
America. Capital spending for 2008 is expected to be
approximately $1.9 billion to $2.0
billion.
|
Our
operating performance is described in more detail in “Business Environment and
Results of Operations.”
Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) investigations
The
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is conducting a formal investigation
into whether improper payments were made to government officials in
Nigeria. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is also conducting a related
criminal investigation. See Note 8 to our condensed consolidated
financial statements for further information.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
We ended
the second quarter of 2008 with cash and equivalents of $1.9 billion compared to
$1.8 billion at December 31, 2007.
Significant
sources of cash
Cash
flows from operating activities contributed $985 million to cash in the first
six months of 2008. Growth in revenue and operating income in the
first half of 2008 compared to the first half of 2007 is attributable to higher
customer demand and increased service intensity due to a trend toward
exploration and exploitation of more complex reservoirs.
During
the first six months of 2008, we sold approximately $388 million of marketable
securities, consisting of auction-rate securities and variable-rate demand
notes.
Further available sources of
cash. We have an unsecured $1.2 billion five-year revolving
credit facility to provide commercial paper support, general working capital,
and credit for other corporate purposes. There were no cash drawings
under the facility as of June 30, 2008.
We
entered into an
unsecured, $2.5 billion, 364-day revolving credit facility in July 2008 in order
to ensure we will have sufficient cash available to pay off 100% of our
convertible notes. When added to our pre-existing unsecured, five-year,
revolving credit facility, this provides $3.7 billion of committed bank credit
to support any commercial paper we subsequently issue. We expect to
refinance all or a portion of any commercial paper issued or any other
borrowings under these credit facilities through the issuance of long-term
senior notes.
Significant
uses of cash
Capital
expenditures were $837 million in the first six months of 2008, with increased
focus toward building infrastructure and adding service equipment in support of
our expanding operations outside of North America. Capital
expenditures were predominantly made in the drilling services, production
enhancement, cementing, and wireline and perforating product service
lines.
During
the first six months of 2008, we repurchased approximately 10 million shares of
our common stock under our share repurchase program at a cost of approximately
$360 million at an average price of $37.26 per share.
We paid
$158 million in dividends to our shareholders in the first six months of
2008.
Future uses of
cash. We have approximately $2.0 billion remaining available
under our share repurchase authorization, which may be used for open market
purchases or to settle the conversion premium over the face amount of our 3.125%
convertible senior notes.
Capital
spending for 2008 is expected to be approximately $1.9 billion to $2.0
billion. The capital expenditures plan for 2008 is primarily directed
toward our drilling services, production enhancement, cementing, and wireline
and perforating product service lines. We will continue to explore
opportunities for acquisitions that will enhance or augment our current
portfolio of products and services, including those with unique technologies or
distribution networks in areas where we do not already have large
operations. Further, as market conditions change, we will continue to
evaluate the allocation of our cash between acquisitions and stock
buybacks.
Our
3.125% convertible senior notes due July 2023 became redeemable at our option on
July 15, 2008. If we choose to redeem the notes prior to their
maturity or if the holders choose to convert the notes, we must settle the
principal amount of the notes, which totaled $1.2 billion at June 30, 2008, plus
any applicable accrued interest in cash. We have the option to settle
any amounts due in excess of the principal, which has ranged between $1.6
billion to $2.0 billion since June 30, 2008, by delivering shares of our
common stock, cash, or a combination of common stock and cash.
Subject
to Board of Directors approval, we expect to pay dividends of approximately $80
million per quarter for the remainder of 2008.
We are
currently evaluating possible acquisitions that may result in additional
borrowings and a significant use of cash.
While the
timing is not necessarily under our control, any potential settlements entered
into with the SEC or DOJ related to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
investigations may lead to cash payments relating to the indemnity provided to
KBR and for any matters deemed to relate to us directly. See Notes 2
and 8 to our condensed consolidated financial statements for more
information.
Other
factors affecting liquidity
Letters of
credit. In the normal course of business, we have agreements
with banks under which approximately $2.3 billion of letters of credit, surety
bonds, or bank guarantees were outstanding as of June 30, 2008, including $1.0
billion that relate to KBR. These KBR letters of credit, surety
bonds, or bank guarantees are being guaranteed by us in favor of KBR’s customers
and lenders. KBR has agreed to compensate us for these guarantees and
indemnify us if we are required to perform under any of these
guarantees. Some of the outstanding letters of credit have triggering
events that would entitle a bank to require cash collateralization.
Credit
ratings. The credit ratings for our long-term debt are A2 with
Moody’s Investors Service and A with Standard & Poor’s. The
credit ratings on our short-term debt are P-1 with Moody’s Investors Service and
A-1 with Standard & Poor’s.
BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
We
operate in approximately 70 countries throughout the world to provide a
comprehensive range of discrete and integrated services and products to the
energy industry. The majority of our consolidated revenue is derived
from the sale of services and products to major, national, and independent oil
and gas companies worldwide. We serve the upstream oil and natural
gas industry throughout the lifecycle of the reservoir: from locating
hydrocarbons and managing geological data, to drilling and formation evaluation,
well construction and completion, and optimizing production throughout the life
of the field. Our two business segments are the Completion and
Production segment and the Drilling and Evaluation segment. The
industries we serve are highly competitive with many substantial competitors in
each segment. In the first six months of 2008, based upon the
location of the services provided and products sold, 42% of our consolidated
revenue was from the United States. In the first six months of 2007,
45% of our consolidated revenue was from the United States. No other
country accounted for more than 10% of our revenue during these
periods.
Operations
in some countries may be adversely affected by unsettled political conditions,
acts of terrorism, civil unrest, force majeure, war or other armed conflict,
expropriation or other governmental actions, inflation, exchange control
problems, and highly inflationary currencies. We believe the
geographic diversification of our business activities reduces the risk that loss
of operations in any one country would be material to our consolidated results
of operations.
Activity
levels within our business segments are significantly impacted by spending on
upstream exploration, development, and production programs by major, national,
and independent oil and natural gas companies. Also impacting our
activity is the status of the global economy, which impacts oil and natural gas
consumption.
Some of
the more significant barometers of current and future spending levels of oil and
natural gas companies are oil and natural gas prices, the world economy, and
global stability, which together drive worldwide drilling
activity. Our financial performance is significantly affected by oil
and natural gas prices and worldwide rig activity, which are summarized in the
following tables.
This
table shows the average oil and natural gas prices for West Texas Intermediate
(WTI) and United Kingdom Brent crude oil, and Henry Hub natural
gas:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Year
Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
December
31
|
|
Average Oil Prices
(dollars per barrel)
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
West
Texas Intermediate
|
|
$ |
123.42 |
|
|
$ |
64.59 |
|
|
$ |
71.91 |
|
United
Kingdom Brent
|
|
|
120.90 |
|
|
|
68.63 |
|
|
|
72.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average United States Gas
Prices (dollars per million British
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thermal units, or
mmBtu)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Henry
Hub
|
|
$ |
11.14 |
|
|
$ |
7.65 |
|
|
$ |
6.97 |
|
The
quarterly and year-to-date average rig counts based on the Baker Hughes
Incorporated rig count information were as follows:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Land
vs. Offshore
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
United
States:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
1,799 |
|
|
|
1,679 |
|
|
|
1,755 |
|
|
|
1,665 |
|
Offshore
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Total
|
|
|
1,865 |
|
|
|
1,756 |
|
|
|
1,818 |
|
|
|
1,745 |
|
Canada:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
Offshore
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Total
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
International
(excluding Canada):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
776 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
769 |
|
|
|
705 |
|
Offshore
|
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
292 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
Total
|
|
|
1,084 |
|
|
|
1,002 |
|
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
|
992 |
|
Worldwide
total
|
|
|
3,118 |
|
|
|
2,897 |
|
|
|
3,221 |
|
|
|
3,073 |
|
Land
total
|
|
|
2,743 |
|
|
|
2,525 |
|
|
|
2,861 |
|
|
|
2,703 |
|
Offshore
total
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
370 |
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
June
30
|
|
Oil
vs. Natural Gas
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
United
States:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
|
|
373 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
Natural Gas
|
|
|
1,492 |
|
|
|
1,472 |
|
|
|
1,466 |
|
|
|
1,466 |
|
Total
|
|
|
1,865 |
|
|
|
1,756 |
|
|
|
1,818 |
|
|
|
1,745 |
|
Canada:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
Natural Gas
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
206 |
|
Total
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
International
(excluding Canada):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
|
|
842 |
|
|
|
781 |
|
|
|
822 |
|
|
|
772 |
|
Natural Gas
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
Total
|
|
|
1,084 |
|
|
|
1,002 |
|
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
|
992 |
|
Worldwide
total
|
|
|
3,118 |
|
|
|
2,897 |
|
|
|
3,221 |
|
|
|
3,073 |
|
Oil
total
|
|
|
1,296 |
|
|
|
1,130 |
|
|
|
1,321 |
|
|
|
1,181 |
|
Natural
Gas total
|
|
|
1,822 |
|
|
|
1,767 |
|
|
|
1,900 |
|
|
|
1,892 |
|
Our
customers’ cash flows, in many instances, depend upon the revenue they generate
from the sale of oil and natural gas. Higher oil and natural gas
prices usually translate into higher exploration and production
budgets. Higher prices also improve the economic attractiveness of
unconventional reservoirs. This promotes additional investment by our
customers. The opposite is true for lower oil and natural gas
prices.
WTI oil
spot prices averaged $72 per barrel in 2007 and are expected to increase to an
average of $127 per barrel in 2008, according to the Energy Information
Administration (EIA). From mid-December 2007 through June 2008, the
WTI crude oil price increased $42 per barrel from an average of $90 per barrel
to an average of $132 per barrel as a result of rising world oil consumption and
low surplus production capacity. We expect that oil prices will
remain at levels sufficient to sustain, and likely grow, our customers’ current
levels of spending due to a combination of the following factors:
|
-
|
continued
growth in worldwide petroleum demand, barring any significant demand
reduction due to higher commodity
prices;
|
|
-
|
projected
production growth in non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
(non-OPEC) supplies is not expected to accommodate world wide demand
growth;
|
|
-
|
OPEC’s
commitment to control production;
|
|
-
|
modest
increases in OPEC’s current and forecasted production capacity;
and
|
|
-
|
geopolitical
tensions in major oil-exporting
nations.
|
According
to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) July 2008 “Oil Market Report,” the
outlook for world oil demand remains strong, with Asia, the Middle East, and
Latin America accounting for nearly all of the expected demand growth in
2008. Excess oil production capacity is expected to remain
constrained with OPEC producers’ continuing reluctance to supply additional
crude oil to the market. This constraint, along with a strong refined
product market, a weaker dollar, and geopolitical tensions, is expected to keep
supplies tight. Thus, any unexpected supply disruption or change in
demand could lead to fluctuating prices. The IEA forecasts world
petroleum demand growth in 2008 to increase 2% over 2007.
North America
operations. Volatility in natural gas prices has the potential
to impact our customers' drilling and production activities, particularly in
North America. During 2007, we experienced a significant decline in
activity from 2006 levels in our North America operations, especially in
Canada. This decline caused us to move equipment and personnel from
Canada to other areas in 2007. Canada has now recovered from its
decline, and all indications point to stronger than anticipated activity in the
second half of 2008. With continued strong natural gas fundamentals,
our customers have reevaluated and appear to be increasing their North American
capital programs for the remainder of 2008 and 2009. In July 2008,
the EIA noted that the Henry Hub spot price averaged $7.17 per thousand cubic
feet (mcf) in 2007 and was projected to increase to an average of $11.86 per mcf
in 2008.
We
experienced increased pricing pressure from our customers in the North American
market in 2007 and in the first quarter of 2008, particularly in Canada and in
our United States well stimulation operations. However, more
recently, pricing declines in the transactional market are easing in areas where
activity is increasing and where job and basin complexity favors our
differentiated fracturing technologies. In addition, except for some
weakness in cementing, we believe prices for all other product lines have
stabilized. We continue to experience cost inflation for fuel and
materials, which is putting additional downward pressure on operating
margins. Recently, we have negotiated fuel surcharges with many of
our customers, and we expect to see the impact of these negotiations starting in
the third quarter of 2008. We have also begun discussions regarding
material cost recoveries with our customers. We believe the improved
outlook for all our businesses enhances our ability to modestly increase prices
to help cover cost inflation. We also see unconventional drilling
activity, such as emerging shale plays, increasing in the second half of 2008,
which could create additional demand for our services.
Focus on international
growth. Consistent with our strategy to grow our operations
outside of North America, we expect to continue to invest capital and increase
manufacturing capacity to bring new tools online to serve the high demand for
our services. As our customers award larger tranches of work, pricing
competition in the international arena has intensified. However, we
expect this to be offset partially with continued expansion of our margins
driven by introduction of new technologies, consistency of execution, and fixed
cost leverage. Following is a brief discussion of some of our current
initiatives:
|
-
|
in
order to continue to supply our customers with leading-edge services and
products, we have increased our technology spending and are making our
research and development efforts more geographically
diverse. To that end, we opened a technology center in India in
2007, and we opened another in Singapore in the first quarter of
2008;
|
|
-
|
we
have expanded our manufacturing capability and capacity to meet the
increasing demands for our services and products and to support our
planned growth. In 2007 and 2008, we opened four new regional
manufacturing facilities in Asia and Latin America. These new
centers will enable us to be more responsive to our international
customers while, building regional supply networks that support local
economies;
|
|
-
|
as
our workforce becomes more global, the need for regional training centers
increases. As a result, we have expanded our number of regional
training centers to meet this need. We now have 12 training
centers worldwide that integrate new workers and advance the technical
skills of our workforce; and
|
|
-
|
expanding
our business with national oil companies, including preparing for a shift
to more demand for our integrated project management services;
and
|
|
-
|
part
of our growth strategy includes acquisitions that will enhance or augment
our current portfolio of products and services, including those with
unique technologies or distribution networks in areas where we do not
already have large operations;
|
|
-
|
in
June 2008, we entered into a definitive agreement with Shell Technology
Ventures Fund 1 B.V. to acquire its 49% equity interest in
WellDynamics. Upon completion of the transaction in July 2008,
we now own 100% of WellDynamics. WellDynamics is the world’s
leading provider of intelligent well completion
technology;
|
|
-
|
in
June 2008, we acquired all the intellectual property and assets of Protech
Centerform in Houston, Ravenna, Italy, and Aberdeen,
Scotland. Protech Centerform is a provider of casing
centralization service; and
|
|
-
|
in
May 2008, we acquired all intellectual property, assets, and existing
business of KSI, a leading provider of combined geopressure and
geomechanical analysis software and
services.
|
Recent
contract wins positioning us to grow our international operations over the
coming years include:
|
-
|
a
contract to manage the drilling and completion of 58 onshore wells in the
southern region of Mexico;
|
|
-
|
a
contract to perform workover and sidetrack services in the United
Kingdom;
|
|
-
|
a
contract to provide completion equipment and services, tubing conveyed
perforating services and SmartWell® completion technology for numerous oil
and natural gas fields on the Norwegian continental shelf. The
contract also allows for the provision of other products and
services;
|
|
-
|
a
three-year contract to provide directional drilling,
logging-while-drilling, cementing, wireline and perforating, coiled
tubing, and stimulation services in support of the offshore portion of the
Manifa mega-project in Saudi Arabia;
and
|
|
-
|
a
three-year contract to provide a range of completion equipment for onshore
oil and gas wells in Abu Dhabi.
|
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS IN 2008 COMPARED TO 2007
Three
Months Ended June 30, 2008 Compared with Three Months Ended June 30,
2007
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUE:
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Change
|
|
Completion
and Production
|
|
$ |
2,437 |
|
|
$ |
2,066 |
|
|
$ |
371 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
Drilling
and Evaluation
|
|
|
2,050 |
|
|
|
1,669 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Total
revenue
|
|
$ |
4,487 |
|
|
$ |
3,735 |
|
|
$ |
752 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
By
geographic region:
|
|
Completion
and Production:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$ |
1,270 |
|
|
$ |
1,160 |
|
|
$ |
110 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
Latin America
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Total
|
|
|
2,437 |
|
|
|
2,066 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Drilling
and Evaluation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
586 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
571 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Total
|
|
|
2,050 |
|
|
|
1,669 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Total
revenue by region:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
1,990 |
|
|
|
1,746 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
597 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
1,116 |
|
|
|
926 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
784 |
|
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING
INCOME (LOSS):
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
Completion
and Production
|
|
$ |
561 |
|
|
$ |
555 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
Drilling
and Evaluation
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Corporate
and other
|
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
(820 |
) |
Total
operating income
|
|
$ |
949 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
56 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
By
geographic region:
|
|
Completion
and Production:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$ |
312 |
|
|
$ |
360 |
|
|
$ |
(48 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
)% |
Latin America
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Total
|
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Drilling
and Evaluation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Total
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Total
operating income by region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(excluding Corporate and
other):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
506 |
|
|
|
473 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
Note
1
|
–
|
All
periods presented reflect the new segment structure effective in the third
quarter of 2007.
|
The
increase in consolidated revenue in the second quarter of 2008 compared to the
second quarter of 2007 was attributable to higher worldwide activity,
particularly in the United States, Europe, and Latin
America. International revenue was 58% of consolidated revenue in the
second quarter of 2008 and 55% of consolidated revenue in the second quarter of
2007.
The
increase in consolidated operating income was primarily due to improved demand
from increased rig activity and improved pricing and asset
utilization. Operating income for the second quarter of 2008 included
a combined $25 million gain related to the sale of two investments in the United
States and was adversely impacted by a $30 million charge related to a drill
bits patent dispute settlement.
Following
is a discussion of our results of operations by reportable segment.
Completion and Production
revenue increase compared to the second quarter of 2007 was derived from all
regions. Europe/Africa/CIS revenue grew 23% from increased completion
tool sales and activity in West Africa and Norway and higher production
enhancement activity throughout the region. Production enhancement
services also benefited in the second quarter of 2008 from the acquisition of
PSL Energy Services Limited. Middle East/Asia revenue grew 34%
compared to the second quarter of 2007 from higher production enhancement
activity, increased completion tool sales and service activity in the region,
and increased demand for cementing products and services in the Middle East and
Australia. North America revenue grew 9% from improved demand for
production enhancement services due to increased rig count in the United States
and Canada and higher vessel utilization in the Gulf of Mexico. The
cementing revenue comparison was also favorable, benefiting from higher demand
related to growing rig count and new customers in the United
States. Latin America revenue grew 34% as a result of higher customer
demand, new contracts, and more favorable pricing for cementing products and
services throughout the region. Production enhancement activity
increased throughout the region, and Mexico benefited from improved vessel
utilization. International revenue was 49% of total segment revenue
in the second quarter of 2008 and 45% of total segment revenue in the second
quarter of 2007.
Completion
and Production segment operating income remained relatively flat compared to the
second quarter of 2007, with improved international results offsetting declines
in the United States. Europe/Africa/CIS operating income grew 39%,
benefiting from increased production enhancement activity, reduced costs, and
increased sales and higher profit margins for completion tools in
Africa. Middle East/Asia operating income increased 19%, primarily
due to increased performance and improved asset utilization within the
production enhancement product service line and increased sales and service
revenue for completion tools throughout the region. North America
operating income decreased 13% due to pricing declines and cost increases in the
United States for production enhancement, partially offset by improved
completion tools sales and services. Latin America operating income
increased 22%, with improved cementing and production enhancement performance
throughout the region.
Drilling and Evaluation
revenue increase for the second quarter of 2008 compared to the second quarter
of 2007 was derived from all four regions in all product service
lines. Europe/Africa/CIS revenue increased 18% from increased
drilling services activity throughout the region and higher customer demand and
better pricing for wireline and perforating and fluid services in
Africa. Middle East/Asia revenue grew 22%, primarily due to increased
drilling services activity in Asia and increased fluid and wireline and
perforating services activity in the Middle East. North America
revenue increased 23% from higher activity across all segment product service
lines primarily due to increased rig count. Latin America revenue
increased 32% as a result of increased demand and new contracts for drilling,
wireline and perforating, and project management
services. International revenue was 67% of total segment revenue in
both the second quarter of 2008 and in the second quarter of 2007.
The
increase in segment operating income compared to the second quarter of 2007 was
led by improved results across all product service lines in North
America. North America operating income increased 72%, benefiting
from increased drilling activity from higher rig count. North America
results also reflect the $25 million gain related to the sale of two investments
in the United States. Europe/Africa/CIS operating income grew 6%,
primarily from higher activity and beneficial pricing for fluids and wireline
and perforating services in Africa. Middle East/Asia operating income
grew 27%, primarily due to increased fluid services results and drill bit sales
in the Middle East, as well as improved wireline results and increased customer
demand for drilling services in Asia. Latin America operating income
increased 49% with additional deployments of equipment resulting in increased
wireline and perforating and drilling services activity. Landmark
software and consulting services also contributed to the improved
results.
Corporate and other expenses
were $92 million in the second quarter of 2008 compared to $10 million in the
second quarter of 2007. The second quarter of 2008 included a $30
million charge related to a drill bits patent dispute settlement and increased
costs related to acquisition evaluation activity. The second quarter
of 2007 included a $49 million gain on the sale of our remaining interest in
Dresser, Ltd.
NONOPERATING
ITEMS
Interest income decreased $27
million in the second quarter of 2008 compared to the second quarter of 2007 due
to lower interest rates.
Provision for income taxes on
continuing operations in the second quarter of 2008 of $288 million resulted in
an effective tax rate of 31% compared to an effective tax rate on continuing
operations of 32% in the second quarter of 2007.
Income (loss) from discontinued
operations, net of income tax in the second quarter of 2008 included a
$117 million charge reflecting the impact of our most recent assumptions
regarding the resolution of the FCPA investigations and Barracuda-Caratinga bolt
arbitration matter related to the indemnities and guarantees provided to KBR
during the separation process. The second quarter of 2007 included a
$933 million net gain on the separation of KBR, which included the estimated
fair value of the indemnities provided to KBR, Inc.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS IN 2008 COMPARED TO 2007
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2008 Compared with Six Months Ended June 30,
2007
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUE:
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Change
|
|
Completion
and Production
|
|
$ |
4,628 |
|
|
$ |
3,910 |
|
|
$ |
718 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
Drilling
and Evaluation
|
|
|
3,888 |
|
|
|
3,247 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Total
revenue
|
|
$ |
8,516 |
|
|
$ |
7,157 |
|
|
$ |
1,359 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
By
geographic region:
|
|
Completion
and Production:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$ |
2,439 |
|
|
$ |
2,222 |
|
|
$ |
217 |
|
|
|
10 |
% |
Latin America
|
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
978 |
|
|
|
820 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Total
|
|
|
4,628 |
|
|
|
3,910 |
|
|
|
718 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Drilling
and Evaluation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
1,413 |
|
|
|
1,196 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
1,096 |
|
|
|
889 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
668 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Total
|
|
|
3,888 |
|
|
|
3,247 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Total
revenue by region:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
3,852 |
|
|
|
3,418 |
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
1,106 |
|
|
|
852 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
2,074 |
|
|
|
1,709 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
1,484 |
|
|
|
1,178 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING
INCOME (LOSS):
|
|
June
30
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Millions
of dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
Completion
and Production
|
|
$ |
1,090 |
|
|
$ |
1,032 |
|
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Drilling
and Evaluation
|
|
|
864 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Corporate
and other
|
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(159 |
) |
Total
operating income
|
|
$ |
1,796 |
|
|
$ |
1,681 |
|
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
By
geographic region:
|
|
Completion
and Production:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$ |
629 |
|
|
$ |
682 |
|
|
$ |
(53 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
)% |
Latin America
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Total
|
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Drilling
and Evaluation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
368 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total
|
|
|
864 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Total
operating income by region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(excluding Corporate and
other):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
997 |
|
|
|
962 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Latin America
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Europe/Africa/CIS
|
|
|
392 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Middle
East/Asia
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
Note
1
|
–
|
All
periods presented reflect the new segment structure effective in the third
quarter of 2007.
|
The
increase in consolidated revenue in the first six months of 2008 compared to the
first six months of 2007 spanned all four regions and was attributable to higher
worldwide activity, particularly in the United States, Europe, and Latin
America. International revenue was 58% of consolidated revenue in the
first six months of 2008 and 55% of consolidated revenue in the first six months
of 2007.
The
increase in consolidated operating income in the first six months of 2008
compared to the first six months of 2007 was primarily due to a 39% increase in
Latin America and an 18% increase in the eastern hemisphere and stemmed from
increased customer activity, new contracts, and improved
pricing. Operating income in the first six months of 2008 was
impacted by a $35 million gain on the sale of a joint venture interest in the
United States and a combined $25 million gain related to the sale of two
investments in the United States. Operating income in the first half
of 2008 was adversely impacted by a $23 million impairment charge related to an
oil and gas property in Bangladesh and a $30 million charge related to a drill
bits patent dispute settlement. Operating income in the first six
months of 2007 was impacted by a $49 million gain on the sale of our remaining
interest in Dresser, Ltd.
Following
is a discussion of our results of operations by reportable
segments.
Completion and Production
increase in revenue compared to the first six months of 2007 was derived from
all regions. Europe/Africa/CIS revenue grew 19% primarily from
increased production enhancement services activity, largely related to the
acquisition of PSL Energy Services Limited. Additionally, completion
tools revenue benefited from increased sales and service in
Africa. Middle East/Asia revenue grew 39% from increased completion
tools sales and deliveries and new contracts for production enhancement services
in the region. Increased demand for cementing products and services
in the Middle East and Australia also contributed to the
increase. North America revenue grew 10% from improved demand for
production enhancement services due to increased rig count in the United States
and Canada. The region also benefited from higher demand for
cementing products and services in the United States, largely driven by
increased capacity and rig count. Latin America revenue grew 40% as a
result of higher activity for all product service lines, particularly in
Mexico. Higher demand for production enhancement services and new
cementing contracts with more favorable pricing were large contributors to the
increase in revenue. International revenue was 50% of total segment
revenue in the first six months of 2008 and 46% in the first six months of
2007.
The
increase in segment operating income in the first six months of 2008 compared to
the first six months of 2007 spanned all regions except North
America. Europe/Africa/CIS operating income increased 21% from
increased completion tools sales and services and production enhancement
activity in Africa. Middle East/Asia operating income increased 36%
primarily due to increased sales and service revenue from completion tools and
increased production enhancement activity in the region. North
America operating income decreased 8% due to pricing declines and cost increases
in the United States for production enhancement, partially offset by improved
completion tools sales and services and a $35 million gain on the sale of a
joint venture interest in the United States. Latin America operating
income increased 44% with improved cementing and production enhancement
performance primarily in Mexico and Brazil.
Drilling and Evaluation
revenue increase compared to the first six months of 2007 was derived from all
regions. Europe/Africa/CIS revenue grew 23% from increased drilling
services activity, higher customer demand, and better pricing for fluid and
wireline and perforating services throughout the region. Middle
East/Asia revenue grew 16% primarily due to increased fluid services activity
throughout the region and higher customer demand for drilling services in
Asia. North America revenue grew 18% from higher activity across all
product service lines in the United States primarily due to increased rig
count. The region also benefited from higher activity for fluid
services in Canada. Latin America revenue grew 22% as a result of
increased customer demand for drilling services, increased activity and new
contracts for wireline and perforating services, and increased Landmark service
sales. International revenue was 67% of total segment revenue in the
first six months of 2008 and in the first six months of 2007.
The
increase in segment operating income in the first six months of 2008 compared to
the first six months of 2007 was derived from all regions led by growth in Latin
America and the United States. Europe/Africa/CIS operating income
increased 17% benefiting from increased drilling services activity and higher
customer demand for wireline and perforating services in Europe and
Africa. Higher demand for Landmark software sales and consulting
services in Europe also contributed to the increase. Middle East/Asia
operating income grew 5% primarily due to increased fluid services results in
the region as well as higher demand for drilling services and improved wireline
and perforating services in Asia. Operating income was impacted by a
$23 million impairment charge related to an oil and gas property in Bangladesh
in the first quarter of 2008. North America operating income
increased 31% from increased activity for all product service lines in the
United States. This region’s results also reflect $25 million of
gains related to the sale of two investments in the United States in the second
quarter of 2008. Latin America operating income increased 33%
primarily due to increased activity in drilling services and wireline and
perforating services.
Corporate and other expenses
were $158 million in the first six months of 2008 compared to $61 million in the
first six months of 2007. The first six months of 2008 included a $30
million charge related to a drill bits patent dispute settlement, higher legal
costs, and increased corporate development costs. The first six
months of 2007 were impacted by a $49 million gain on the sale of our remaining
interest in Dresser, Ltd.
NONOPERATING
ITEMS
Interest income decreased $45
million in the first six months of 2008 compared to the first six months of 2007
due to lower interest-rate driven income and divestment of our marketable
securities.
Provision for income taxes
from continuing operations of $526 million in the first six months of 2008
resulted in an effective tax rate of 30% compared to an effective tax rate of
33% in the first six months of 2007. The lower effective tax rate in
the first six months of 2008 was driven by growth in international operations,
which generally are subject to lower income tax rates than our United States
operations, by favorable settlements with foreign tax jurisdictions, and by the
ability to recognize additional foreign tax credits that have been
substantiated.
Minority interest in net income of
subsidiaries increased $9 million compared to the first six months of
2007, primarily due to increased earnings from joint venture interests in
Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.
Income (loss) from discontinued
operations, net of income tax in the first six months of 2008 included a
$117 million charge reflecting the impact of our most recent assumptions
regarding the resolution of the FCPA investigations and Barracuda-Caratinga bolt
arbitration matter related to the indemnities and guarantees provided to KBR
during the separation process. The first six months of 2007 included
a $933 million net gain on the separation of KBR, which included the estimated
fair value of the indemnities and guarantees provided to KBR and our 81% share
of KBR’s $28 million in net income in the first quarter of
2007.
ENVIRONMENTAL
MATTERS
We are
subject to numerous environmental, legal, and regulatory requirements related to
our operations worldwide. In the United States, these laws and
regulations include, among others:
|
-
|
the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act;
|
|
-
|
the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act;
|
|
-
|
the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act;
and
|
|
-
|
the
Toxic Substances Control Act.
|
In
addition to the federal laws and regulations, states and other countries where
we do business often have numerous environmental, legal, and regulatory
requirements by which we must abide. We evaluate and address the
environmental impact of our operations by assessing and remediating contaminated
properties in order to avoid future liabilities and comply with environmental,
legal, and regulatory requirements. On occasion, we are involved in
specific environmental litigation and claims, including the remediation of
properties we own or have operated, as well as efforts to meet or correct
compliance-related matters. Our Health, Safety and Environment group
has several programs in place to maintain environmental leadership and to
prevent the occurrence of environmental contamination.
We do not
expect costs related to these remediation requirements to have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or our results of
operations. Our accrued liabilities for environmental matters were
$68 million as of June 30, 2008 and $72 million as of December 31,
2007. Our total liability related to environmental matters covers
numerous properties.
We have
subsidiaries that have been named as potentially responsible parties along with
other third parties for 9 federal and state superfund sites for which we have
established a liability. As of June 30, 2008, those 9 sites accounted
for approximately $10 million of our total $68 million liability. For
any particular federal or state superfund site, since our estimated liability is
typically within a range and our accrued liability may be the amount on the low
end of that range, our actual liability could eventually be well in excess of
the amount accrued. Despite attempts to resolve these superfund
matters, the relevant regulatory agency may at any time bring suit against us
for amounts in excess of the amount accrued. With respect to some
superfund sites, we have been named a potentially responsible party by a
regulatory agency; however, in each of those cases, we do not believe we have
any material liability. We also could be subject to third-party
claims with respect to environmental matters for which we have been named as a
potentially responsible party.
NEW
ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
In June
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Staff Position
(FSP) Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) 03-6-1, “Determining Whether Instruments
Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities.”
This FSP provides 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
both basic and diluted earnings per share. We will adopt the provisions
of FSP EITF 03-6-1 on January 1, 2009, which will require us to restate prior
periods’ basic and diluted earnings per share to include outstanding unvested
restricted common shares in the weighted average shares outstanding
calculation. We estimate that, had we calculated earnings per share under
these new provisions during the six months ended June 30, 2008, basic and
diluted earnings per share would have decreased by approximately $0.01 for both
continuing operations and net income per share.
In May
2008, the FASB issued FSP Accounting Principles Board (APB) 14-1, “Accounting
for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be Settled in Cash upon Conversion
(Including Partial Cash Settlement).” This FSP clarifies that
convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion,
including partial cash settlement, are not addressed by paragraph 12 of APB
Opinion No. 14, “Accounting for Convertible Debt and Debt Issued with Stock
Purchase Warrants.” Additionally, this FSP specifies that issuers of
such instruments should separately account for the liability and equity
components in a manner that will reflect the entity’s nonconvertible debt
borrowing rate when interest cost is recognized in subsequent
periods. This FSP is effective for financial statements issued for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and interim periods within those
fiscal years. We will adopt the provisions of FSP APB 14-1 on January
1, 2009 and will be required to retroactively apply its provisions, which means
we will restate our consolidated financial statements for prior
periods. We have not yet determined the impact of this FSP on our
consolidated financial statements, which may be material, as it will depend on
the timing of any redemptions by us or conversions by the
bondholders.
In March
2008, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No.
161, “Disclosure about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities – An
Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133.” SFAS No. 161 requires more
disclosures about an entity’s derivative and hedging activities in order to
improve the transparency of financial reporting. SFAS No. 161 is
effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods
beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application
encouraged. This Statement encourages, but does not require,
comparative disclosures for earlier periods at initial adoption. We
will adopt the provisions of SFAS No. 161 on January 1, 2009, which we do not
expect will have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements,” which
is intended to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements
by defining fair value, establishing a framework for measuring fair value, and
expanding disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157
applies to other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value
measurements and is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007 and interim periods within those fiscal
years. In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (FSP)
FAS 157-1, “Application of FASB Statement No. 157 to FASB Statement
No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements That Address Fair Value
Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or Measurement under Statement
13,” which removes certain leasing transactions from the scope of SFAS
No. 157, and FSP FAS 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement
No. 157,” which defers the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for one year
for certain nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, except those that
are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a
recurring basis. On January 1, 2008, we adopted without material
impact on our consolidated financial statements the provisions of SFAS No. 157
related to financial assets and liabilities and to nonfinancial assets and
liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis. Beginning
January 1, 2009, we will adopt the provisions for nonfinancial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities that are not required or permitted to be measured at
fair value on a recurring basis, which include those measured at fair value in
goodwill impairment testing, indefinite-lived intangible assets measured at fair
value for impairment assessment, nonfinancial long-lived assets measured at fair
value for impairment assessment, asset retirement obligations initially measured
at fair value, and those initially measured at fair value in a business
combination. We do not expect the provisions of SFAS No. 157 related
to these items to have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
FORWARD-LOOKING
INFORMATION
The
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides safe harbor provisions
for forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is based
on projections and estimates, not historical information. Some
statements in this Form 10-Q are forward-looking and use words like “may,” “may
not,” “believes,” “do not believe,” “expects,” “do not expect,” “anticipates,”
“do not anticipate,” and other expressions. We may also provide oral
or written forward-looking information in other materials we release to the
public. Forward-looking information involves risk and uncertainties
and reflects our best judgment based on current information. Our
results of operations can be affected by inaccurate assumptions we make or by
known or unknown risks and uncertainties. In addition, other factors
may affect the accuracy of our forward-looking information. As a
result, no forward-looking information can be guaranteed. Actual
events and the results of operations may vary materially.
We do not
assume any responsibility to publicly update any of our forward-looking
statements regardless of whether factors change as a result of new information,
future events, or for any other reason. You should review any
additional disclosures we make in our press releases and Forms 10-K, 10-Q, and
8-K filed with or furnished to the SEC. We also suggest that you
listen to our quarterly earnings release conference calls with financial
analysts.
While it
is not possible to identify all factors, we continue to face many risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from our forward-looking
statements and potentially materially and adversely affect our financial
condition and results of operations.
The risk
factors discussed below update the risk factors previously disclosed in our 2007
annual report on Form 10-K.
RISK
FACTORS
Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act Investigations
The SEC
is conducting a formal investigation into whether improper payments were made to
government officials in Nigeria through the use of agents or subcontractors in
connection with the construction and subsequent expansion by TSKJ of a
multibillion dollar natural gas liquefaction complex and related facilities at
Bonny Island in Rivers State, Nigeria. The DOJ is also conducting a
related criminal investigation. The SEC has also issued subpoenas
seeking information, which we and KBR are furnishing, regarding current and
former agents used in connection with multiple projects, including current and
prior projects, over the past 20 years located both in and outside of Nigeria in
which the Halliburton energy services business, KBR or affiliates, subsidiaries
or joint ventures of Halliburton or KBR, are or were participants. In
September 2006 and October 2007, the SEC and the DOJ, respectively, each
requested that we enter into an agreement to extend the statute of limitations
with respect to its investigation. We have entered into tolling
agreements with the SEC and the DOJ.
TSKJ is a
private limited liability company registered in Madeira, Portugal whose members
are Technip SA of France, Snamprogetti Netherlands B.V. (a subsidiary of Saipem
SpA of Italy), JGC Corporation of Japan, and Kellogg Brown & Root LLC (a
subsidiary of KBR), each of which had an approximate 25% interest in the
venture. TSKJ and other similarly owned entities entered into various
contracts to build and expand the liquefied natural gas project for Nigeria LNG
Limited, which is owned by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Shell
Gas B.V., Cleag Limited (an affiliate of Total), and Agip International B.V. (an
affiliate of ENI SpA of Italy).
The SEC
and the DOJ have been reviewing these matters in light of the requirements of
the FCPA. In addition to performing our own investigation, we have
been cooperating with the SEC and the DOJ investigations and with other
investigations in France, Nigeria, and Switzerland regarding the Bonny Island
project. The government of Nigeria gave notice in 2004 to the French
magistrate of a civil claim as an injured party in the French
investigation. The Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom is also
conducting an investigation relating to the Bonny Island project. Our
Board of Directors has appointed a committee of independent directors to oversee
and direct the FCPA investigations.
The
matters under investigation relating to the Bonny Island project cover an
extended period of time (in some cases significantly before our 1998 acquisition
of Dresser Industries and continuing through the current time
period). We have produced documents to the SEC and the DOJ from the
files of numerous officers and employees of Halliburton and KBR, including
current and former executives of Halliburton and KBR, both voluntarily and
pursuant to company subpoenas from the SEC and a grand jury, and we are making
our employees and we understand KBR is making its employees available to the SEC
and the DOJ for interviews. In addition, the SEC has issued a
subpoena to A. Jack Stanley, who formerly served as a consultant and chairman of
Kellogg Brown & Root LLC, and to others, including certain of our and KBR’s
current or former executive officers or employees, and at least one
subcontractor of KBR. We further understand that the DOJ has made
requests for information abroad, and we understand that other partners in TSKJ
have provided information to the DOJ and the SEC with respect to the
investigations, either voluntarily or under subpoenas.
The SEC
and DOJ investigations include an examination of whether TSKJ’s engagements of
Tri-Star Investments as an agent and a Japanese trading company as a
subcontractor to provide services to TSKJ were utilized to make improper
payments to Nigerian government officials. In connection with the
Bonny Island project, TSKJ entered into a series of agency agreements, including
with Tri-Star Investments, of which Jeffrey Tesler is a principal, commencing in
1995 and a series of subcontracts with a Japanese trading company commencing in
1996. We understand that a French magistrate has officially placed
Mr. Tesler under investigation for corruption of a foreign public
official. In Nigeria, a legislative committee of the National
Assembly and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, which is organized as
part of the executive branch of the government, are or were also investigating
these matters. Our representatives have met with the French
magistrate and Nigerian officials. In October 2004, representatives
of TSKJ voluntarily testified before the Nigerian legislative
committee.
TSKJ
suspended the receipt of services from and payments to Tri-Star Investments and
the Japanese trading company and has considered instituting legal proceedings to
declare all agency agreements with Tri-Star Investments terminated and to
recover all amounts previously paid under those agreements. In
February 2005, TSKJ notified the Attorney General of Nigeria that TSKJ would not
oppose the Attorney General’s efforts to have sums of money held on deposit in
accounts of Tri-Star Investments in banks in Switzerland transferred to Nigeria
and to have the legal ownership of such sums determined in the Nigerian
courts.
As a
result of these investigations, information has been uncovered suggesting that,
commencing at least 10 years ago, members of TSKJ planned payments to Nigerian
officials. We have reason to believe that, based on the ongoing
investigations, payments may have been made by agents of TSKJ to Nigerian
officials. The government has recently confirmed that it has evidence
of such payments. The government has also recently advised
Halliburton and KBR that it has evidence of payments to Nigerian officials by
another agent in connection with a separate KBR-managed project in Nigeria
called the Shell EA project and possibly evidence of payments in connection with
other projects in Nigeria, potentially including energy services
projects. In addition, information uncovered in the summer of 2006
suggests that, prior to 1998, plans may have been made by employees of The M.W.
Kellogg Company (a predecessor of a KBR subsidiary) to make payments to
government officials in connection with the pursuit of a number of other
projects in countries outside of Nigeria. We are reviewing a number
of more recently discovered documents related to KBR’s activities in countries
outside of Nigeria with respect to agents for projects after
1998. Certain activities discussed in this paragraph involve current
or former employees or persons who were or are consultants to KBR, and our
investigation is continuing.
In June
2004, all relationships with Mr. Stanley and another consultant and former
employee of M.W. Kellogg Limited were terminated. The terminations
occurred because of Code of Business Conduct violations that allegedly involved
the receipt of improper personal benefits from Mr. Tesler in connection with
TSKJ’s construction of the Bonny Island project.
In 2006
and 2007, we or KBR suspended the services of two agents in and outside of
Nigeria, including the agent in connection with the Shell EA project and another
agent who, until such suspension, had worked for KBR outside of Nigeria on
several current projects and on numerous older projects going back to the early
1980s. Such suspensions have occurred when possible improper conduct
has been discovered or alleged or when we and KBR have been unable to confirm
the agent’s compliance with applicable law and the Code of Business
Conduct.
The SEC
and DOJ are also investigating and have issued subpoenas concerning TSKJ's use
of an immigration services provider, apparently managed by a Nigerian
immigration official, to which approximately $1.8 million in payments in excess
of costs of visas were allegedly made between approximately 1997 and the
termination of the provider in December 2004. We understand that TSKJ
terminated the immigration services provider after a KBR employee discovered the
issue. We reported this matter to the United States government in
2007. The SEC has indicated that it believes documents concerning
this immigration service provider may have been responsive to earlier
subpoenas. The SEC has issued a subpoena requesting documents among
other things concerning any payment of anything of value to Nigerian government
officials. In response to such subpoena, we have produced and
continue to produce additional documents regarding KBR and Halliburton’s energy
services business use of immigration and customs service providers, which may
result in further inquiries. Furthermore, as a result of these
matters, we have expanded our own investigation to consider any matters raised
by energy services activities in Nigeria.
From time
to time, we and KBR have engaged in discussions with the SEC and the DOJ
regarding a settlement of these matters. There can be no assurance
that a settlement will be reached or, if a settlement is reached, that the terms
of any settlement would not have a material adverse effect on us.
If
violations of the FCPA were found, a person or entity found in violation could
be subject to fines, civil penalties of up to $500,000 per violation, equitable
remedies, including disgorgement (if applicable) generally of profits, including
prejudgment interest on such profits, causally connected to the violation, and
injunctive relief. Criminal penalties could range up to the greater
of $2 million per violation or twice the gross pecuniary gain or loss from the
violation, which could be substantially greater than $2 million per
violation. It is possible that both the SEC and the DOJ could assert
that there have been multiple violations, which could lead to multiple
fines. The amount of any fines or monetary penalties that could be
assessed would depend on, among other factors, the findings regarding the
amount, timing, nature, and scope of any improper payments, whether any such
payments were authorized by or made with knowledge of us, KBR or our or KBR’s
affiliates, the amount of gross pecuniary gain or loss involved, and the level
of cooperation provided the government authorities during the
investigations. The government has expressed concern regarding the
level of our cooperation. Agreed dispositions of these types of
violations also frequently result in an acknowledgement of wrongdoing by the
entity and the appointment of a monitor on terms negotiated with the SEC and the
DOJ to review and monitor current and future business practices, including the
retention of agents, with the goal of assuring compliance with the
FCPA.
These
investigations could also result in third-party claims against us, which may
include claims for special, indirect, derivative or consequential damages,
damage to our business or reputation, loss of, or adverse effect on, cash flow,
assets, goodwill, results of operations, business prospects, profits or business
value or claims by directors, officers, employees, affiliates, advisors,
attorneys, agents, debt holders, or other interest holders or constituents of us
or our current or former subsidiaries. In addition, we could incur
costs and expenses for any monitor required by or agreed to with a governmental
authority to review our continued compliance with FCPA law.
As of
June 30, 2008, we are unable to estimate an amount of probable loss or a range
of possible loss related to these matters as it relates to us
directly. Therefore, we have not recorded any amounts as it relates
to us directly, other than for the indemnities provided to KBR, in connection
with these matters in our condensed consolidated financial
statements. We provided indemnification in favor of KBR under the
master separation agreement for certain contingent liabilities, including our
indemnification of KBR and any of its greater than 50%-owned subsidiaries as of
November 20, 2006, the date of the master separation agreement, for fines or
other monetary penalties or direct monetary damages, including disgorgement, as
a result of a claim made or assessed by a governmental authority in the United
States, the United Kingdom, France, Nigeria, Switzerland, and/or Algeria, or a
settlement thereof, related to alleged or actual violations occurring prior to
November 20, 2006 of the FCPA or particular, analogous applicable foreign
statutes, laws, rules, and regulations in connection with investigations pending
as of that date, including with respect to the construction and subsequent
expansion by TSKJ of a natural gas liquefaction complex and related facilities
at Bonny Island in Rivers State, Nigeria. As noted previously, our
estimation of the value of the indemnity regarding FCPA matters is recorded as a
liability in our condensed consolidated financial statements as of June 30, 2008
and December 31, 2007. See Note 2 to our condensed consolidated
financial statements for additional information.
Our
indemnification obligation to KBR does not include losses resulting from
third-party claims against KBR, including claims for special, indirect,
derivative or consequential damages, nor does our indemnification apply to
damage to KBR’s business or reputation, loss of, or adverse effect on, cash
flow, assets, goodwill, results of operations, business prospects, profits or
business value or claims by directors, officers, employees, affiliates,
advisors, attorneys, agents, debt holders, or other interest holders or
constituents of KBR or KBR’s current or former subsidiaries.
In
consideration of our agreement to indemnify KBR for the liabilities referred to
above, KBR has agreed that we will at all times, in our sole discretion, have
and maintain control over the investigation, defense and/or settlement of these
FCPA matters until such time, if any, that KBR exercises its right to assume
control of the investigation, defense and/or settlement of the FCPA matters as
it relates to KBR. KBR has also agreed, at our expense, to assist
with our full cooperation with any governmental authority in our investigation
of these FCPA matters and our investigation, defense and/or settlement of any
claim made by a governmental authority or court relating to these FCPA matters,
in each case even if KBR assumes control of these FCPA matters as it relates to
KBR. If KBR takes control over the investigation, defense, and/or
settlement of FCPA matters, refuses a settlement of FCPA matters negotiated by
us, enters into a settlement of FCPA matters without our consent, or materially
breaches its obligation to cooperate with respect to our investigation, defense,
and/or settlement of FCPA matters, we may terminate the indemnity.
Barracuda-Caratinga
Arbitration
We also
provided indemnification in favor of KBR under the master separation agreement
for all out-of-pocket cash costs and expenses (except for legal fees and other
expenses of the arbitration so long as KBR controls and directs it), or cash
settlements or cash arbitration awards in lieu thereof, KBR may incur after
November 20, 2006 as a result of the replacement of certain subsea flowline
bolts installed in connection with the Barracuda-Caratinga
project. Under the master separation agreement, KBR currently
controls the defense, counterclaim, and settlement of the subsea flowline bolts
matter. As a condition of our indemnity, for any settlement to be
binding upon us, KBR must secure our prior written consent to such settlement’s
terms. We have the right to terminate the indemnity in the event KBR
enters into any settlement without our prior written consent. Our
estimation of the value of the indemnity regarding the Barracuda-Caratinga
arbitration is recorded as a liability in our condensed consolidated financial
statements as of June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007. See Note
2 to our condensed consolidated financial statements for additional information
regarding the KBR indemnification.
At
Petrobras’ direction, KBR replaced certain bolts located on the subsea flowlines
that failed through mid-November 2005, and KBR has informed us that additional
bolts have failed thereafter, which were replaced by Petrobras. These
failed bolts were identified by Petrobras when it conducted inspections of the
bolts. A key issue in the arbitration is which party is responsible
for the designation of the material to be used for the bolts. We
understand that KBR believes that an instruction to use the particular bolts was
issued by Petrobras, and as such, KBR believes the cost resulting from any
replacement is not KBR’s responsibility. We understand Petrobras
disagrees. We understand KBR believes several possible solutions may
exist, including replacement of the bolts. Estimates indicate that
costs of these various solutions range up to $148 million. In March
2006, Petrobras commenced arbitration against KBR claiming $220 million plus
interest for the cost of monitoring and replacing the defective bolts and all
related costs and expenses of the arbitration, including the cost of attorneys’
fees. We understand KBR is vigorously defending and pursuing recovery
of the costs incurred to date through the arbitration process and to that end
has submitted a counterclaim in the arbitration seeking the recovery of $22
million. The arbitration panel held an evidentiary hearing during the
week of March 31, 2008 and took evidence and arguments under
advisement.
Impairment
of Oil and Gas Properties
At June
30, 2008, we had interests in oil and gas properties totaling $103 million, net
of accumulated depletion, which we account for under the successful efforts
method. The majority of this amount is related to one property in
Bangladesh in which we have a 25% nonoperating interest. These oil
and gas properties are assessed for impairment whenever changes in facts and
circumstances indicate that the properties’ carrying amounts may not be
recoverable. The expected future cash flows used for impairment
reviews and related fair-value calculations are based on judgmental assessments
of future production volumes, prices, and costs, considering all available
information at the date of review.
A
downward trend in estimates of production volumes or prices or an upward trend
in costs could result in an impairment of our oil and gas properties, which in
turn could have a material and adverse effect on our results of
operations.
Long-Term,
Fixed-Price Contracts
Much of
the world’s oil and gas reserves are controlled by national or state-owned oil
companies (NOCs). Several of the NOCs are among our top 20
customers. Increasingly, NOCs are turning to oilfield services companies
like us to provide the services, technologies, and expertise needed to develop
their reserves. Reserve estimation is a subjective process that involves
estimating location and volumes based on a variety of assumptions and variables
that cannot be directly measured. As such, the NOCs may provide us with
inaccurate information in relation to their reserves that may result in cost
overruns, delays, and project losses. In addition, NOCs often operate in
countries with unsettled political conditions, war, civil unrest, or other types
of community issues. These types of issues may also result in similar cost
overruns, losses, and contract delays. NOCs also often require integrated,
long-term, fixed-price contracts that could require us to provide integrated
project management services outside our normal discrete business to act as
project managers as well as service providers. Providing services on
an integrated basis may require us to assume additional risks associated with
cost over-runs, operating cost inflation, labor availability and productivity,
supplier and contractor pricing and performance, and potential claims for
liquidated damages. For example, we generally rely on third-party
subcontractors and equipment providers to assist us with the completion of our
contracts. To the extent that we cannot engage subcontractors or acquire
equipment or materials, our ability to complete a project in a timely fashion or
at a profit may be impaired. If the amount we are required to pay for
these goods and services exceeds the amount we have estimated in bidding for
fixed-price work, we could experience losses in the performance of these
contracts. These delays and additional costs may be substantial, and we
may be required to compensate the NOCs for these delays. This may reduce
the profit to be realized or result in a loss on a project.
Item
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk
We are
exposed to financial instrument market risk from changes in foreign currency
exchange rates, interest rates, and, to a limited extent, commodity
prices. We selectively manage these exposures through the use of
derivative instruments to mitigate our market risk from these
exposures. The objective of our risk management is to protect our
cash flows related to sales or purchases of goods or services from market
fluctuations in currency rates. Our use of derivative instruments
includes the following types of market risk:
|
-
|
volatility
of the currency rates;
|
|
-
|
time
horizon of the derivative
instruments;
|
|
-
|
the
type of derivative instruments
used.
|
We do not
use derivative instruments for trading purposes. We do not consider
any of these risk management activities to be material.
Item
4. Controls and Procedures
In
accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15, we
carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of
the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, our
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of June 30, 2008 to provide
reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in our reports
filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized,
and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange
Commission’s rules and forms. Our disclosure controls and procedures
include controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to
be disclosed in reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is accumulated
and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding
required disclosure.
There has
been no change in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the three months ended June 30, 2008 that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
Information
related to various commitments and contingencies is described in “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” in
“Forward-Looking Information” and “Risk Factors,” and in Notes 2 and 8 to the
condensed consolidated financial statements.
Item
1(a). Risk Factors
Information
related to risk factors is described in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations” under “Forward-Looking
Information” and “Risk Factors.”
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds
Following
is a summary of our repurchases of our common stock during the three-month
period ended June 30, 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
Purchased
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as
Part of Publicly
|
|
|
|
Total
Number of
|
|
|
Average
Price
|
|
|
Announced
Plans
|
|
Period
|
|
Shares
Purchased (a)
|
|
|
Paid
per Share
|
|
|
or
Programs (b)
|
|
April
1-30
|
|
|
183,758 |
|
|
$ |
44.18 |
|
|
|
– |
|
May
1-31
|
|
|
5,268 |
|
|
$ |
43.72 |
|
|
|
– |
|
June
1-30
|
|
|
99,252 |
|
|
$ |
48.96 |
|
|
|
– |
|
Total
|
|
|
288,278 |
|
|
$ |
45.82 |
|
|
|
– |
|
(a)
|
All
of the shares purchased during the three-month period ended June 30, 2008
were acquired from employees in connection with the settlement of income
tax and related benefit withholding obligations arising from vesting in
restricted stock grants. These shares were not part of a
publicly announced program to purchase common
shares.
|
(b)
|
In
July 2007, our Board of Directors approved an additional increase to our
existing common share repurchase program of up to $2.0 billion, bringing
the entire authorization to $5.0 billion. This additional
authorization may be used for open market share purchases or to settle the
conversion premium on our 3.125% convertible senior notes, should they be
redeemed. From the inception of this program, we have
repurchased approximately 89 million shares of our common stock for
approximately $3.0 billion at an average price of $34.28 per
share. These numbers include the repurchases of approximately
10 million shares of our common stock for approximately $360 million at an
average price of $37.26 per share during the first six months of
2008. As of June 30, 2008, approximately $2.0 billion remained
available under this program.
|
Item
3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None.
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
At our
Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on May 21, 2008, stockholders were asked to
consider and act upon:
|
(1)
|
the
election of Directors for the ensuing
year;
|
|
(2)
|
a
proposal to ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP as independent accountants
to examine the financial statements and books and records of Halliburton
for the year 2008;
|
|
(3)
|
a
proposal to reapprove material terms of performance goals under the 1993
Stock and Incentive Plan;
|
|
(4)
|
a
stockholder proposal regarding a human rights
policy;
|
|
(5)
|
a
stockholder proposal regarding political contributions;
and
|
|
(6)
|
a
stockholder proposal regarding human rights board
committee.
|
The
following table sets out, for each matter where applicable, the number of votes
cast for, against, or withheld, as well as the number of abstentions and broker
non-votes.
|
(1)
|
Election
of Directors:
|
Name
of Nominee
|
|
Votes
For
|
|
|
Votes
Against
|
|
|
Votes
Abstain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alan
M. Bennett
|
|
|
723,883,531 |
|
|
|
8,099,364 |
|
|
|
8,131,880 |
|
James
R. Boyd
|
|
|
727,049,749 |
|
|
|
4,968,657 |
|
|
|
8,096,369 |
|
Milton
Carroll
|
|
|
726,971,790 |
|
|
|
5,028,041 |
|
|
|
8,114,944 |
|
Kenneth
T. Derr
|
|
|
726,773,660 |
|
|
|
5,253,459 |
|
|
|
8,087,656 |
|
S.
Malcolm Gillis
|
|
|
711,592,896 |
|
|
|
20,100,365 |
|
|
|
8,421,514 |
|
James
T. Hackett
|
|
|
692,943,782 |
|
|
|
38,797,361 |
|
|
|
8,373,631 |
|
David
J. Lesar
|
|
|
723,651,335 |
|
|
|
8,320,804 |
|
|
|
8,142,636 |
|
J.
Landis Martin
|
|
|
725,800,221 |
|
|
|
6,186,775 |
|
|
|
8,127,778 |
|
Jay
A. Precourt
|
|
|
726,831,163 |
|
|
|
5,164,285 |
|
|
|
8,119,326 |
|
Debra
L. Reed
|
|
|
725,561,111 |
|
|
|
6,220,476 |
|
|
|
8,333,188 |
|
|
(2)
|
Proposal
for ratification of the selection of
auditors:
|
Number
of Votes For
|
|
|
726,736,322 |
|
Number
of Votes Against
|
|
|
5,785,845 |
|
Number
of Votes Abstain
|
|
|
7,592,609 |
|
|
(3)
|
Proposal
to reapprove material terms of performance goals under 1993 Stock and
Incentive Plan:
|
Number
of Votes For
|
|
|
709,911,093 |
|
Number
of Votes Against
|
|
|
20,902,191 |
|
Number
of Votes Abstain
|
|
|
9,301,491 |
|
|
(4)
|
Stockholder
proposal regarding a human rights
policy:
|
Number
of Votes For
|
|
|
153,831,231 |
|
Number
of Votes Against
|
|
|
355,149,135 |
|
Number
of Votes Abstain
|
|
|
100,675,513 |
|
Number
of Broker Non-Votes
|
|
|
130,458,897 |
|
|
(5)
|
Stockholder
proposal regarding political
contributions:
|
Number
of Votes For
|
|
|
164,436,764 |
|
Number
of Votes Against
|
|
|
347,853,152 |
|
Number
of Votes Abstain
|
|
|
97,365,963 |
|
Number
of Broker Non-Votes
|
|
|
130,458,897 |
|
|
(6)
|
Stockholder
proposal regarding a human rights board
committee:
|
Number
of Votes For
|
|
|
34,113,322 |
|
Number
of Votes Against
|
|
|
494,629,405 |
|
Number
of Votes Abstain
|
|
|
80,913,153 |
|
Number
of Broker Non-Votes
|
|
|
130,458,896 |
|
Item
5. Other Information
|
a)
|
On
July 23, 2008, we entered into a Revolving Bridge Facility Credit
Agreement among Halliburton, as Borrower, the Banks party thereto, and
Citibank, N.A., as Agent. The Credit Agreement is for the purpose of
refinancing our 3.125% Convertible Senior Notes due July 15, 2023,
backstopping commercial paper, and general corporate purposes and expires
on July 22, 2009. The Revolving Bridge Facility Credit Agreement is
attached to this report as Exhibit
10.1.
|
Item
6. Exhibits
|
|
* 10.1
|
Revolving
Bridge Facility Credit Agreement among Halliburton, as Borrower, the Banks
party thereto, and Citibank, N.A., as Agent
|
|
|
* 31.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of
2002.
|
|
|
|
|
* 31.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of
2002.
|
|
|
|
|
** 32.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of
2002.
|
|
|
|
|
** 32.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of
2002.
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Filed
with this Form 10-Q
|
**
|
Furnished
with this Form 10-Q
|
SIGNATURES
As
required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has authorized
this report to be signed on behalf of the registrant by the undersigned
authorized individuals.
HALLIBURTON
COMPANY
/s/ Mark
A. McCollum
|
/s/ Evelyn
M. Angelle
|
Mark
A. McCollum
|
Evelyn
M. Angelle
|
Executive
Vice President and
|
Vice
President, Corporate Controller, and
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
Principal
Accounting Officer
|
Date: July 25, 2008