collateralized the term loan with the revolving credit facility and all other existing debt the Company owes to Fifth Third Bank.
In the Credit Agreement, we agreed to certain covenants, including (i) maintenance of a ratio of debt to adjusted EBITDA for the preceding 12 months of not more than 3.5 to 1 (or, if measured as of December 31 of any fiscal year, 4.0 to 1), (ii) maintenance of a ratio of adjusted EBITDA for the preceding twelve months to aggregate cash payments of interest expense and scheduled payment of principal in the preceding 12 months of not less than 1.20 to 1, and (iii) a limitation on capital expenditures of $4,000,000 in any fiscal year.
On October 19, 2010, we entered into a Promissory Note (the “Note”) with Fifth Third Bank in the amount of $1,320,240 for the purpose of purchasing equipment. The interest rate is equal to five and 20/100 percent (5.20%) per annum; provided, however, that (A) such interest rate is based on an interest rate swap rate for a term approximating the weighted average life of the Note as quoted in the Bloomberg SWAP Rate report as of the date of the Note and (B) such interest rate may be adjusted by Fifth Third Bank based upon a corresponding increase in the interest rate swap rate quoted in such Release as in effect on the date of the advance. Principal and interest is payable monthly in consecutive equal installments of $30,511 with the first such payment commencing November 15, 2010, and the final unpaid principal amount due, together with all accrued and unpaid interest, charges, fees, or other advances, if any, to be paid on October 15, 2014. As security for the Note, we provided Fifth Third Bank a first priority security interest in the equipment purchased with the proceeds.
As of September 30, 2010, we were in compliance with all restrictive covenants related to our debt.
We expect that existing cash flow from operations and available credit under our restructured credit facilities and other alternative financing will be sufficient to meet our cash needs for the next year and beyond. As of September 30, 2010, we had $842,344 committed for the purchase and installation of sensor sorter units, which was paid in full on October 19, 2010 with proceeds from the Note discussed above.
The following table presents, for the years indicated, the percentage relationship that certain captioned items in our Consolidated Statements of Operations bear to total revenues and other pertinent data:
Nine months ended September 30, 2010 compared to nine months ended September 30, 2009
Total revenue increased $100,190,517 or 70.0% to $243,534,228 in 2010 compared to $143,343,711 in 2009. Recycling revenue increased $101,063,935 or 74.3% to $237,093,814 in 2010 compared to $136,029,879 in 2009. This is primarily due to the improvements and expansions of our Grade Lane facilities made in late 2009 and the increased production from the shredder, which began production in July 2009, along with a 3.3% increase in volume of stainless steel materials shipments, a 122.4% increase in volume of ferrous materials shipments, a 16.1% increase in volume of other nonferrous materials shipments, and an average increase in cost of commodities shipped of 53.4%. Waste Services revenue decreased $873,418 or 11.9% to $6,440,414 in 2010 compared to $7,313,832 in 2009 primarily due to the year-over-year decrease in customer locations, as well as a $153,004 decrease in rental revenue, partially offset by a $147,702 increase in equipment and parts sales and service and repairs revenue.
Total cost of goods sold increased $93,348,562 or 75.1% to $222,128,133 in 2010 compared to $128,694,392 in 2009. Recycling cost of goods sold increased $93,297,738 or 75.4% to $217,023,116 in 2010 compared to $123,725,378 in 2009. This is primarily due to the increases in volume of shipments and commodity prices noted above. Waste Services cost of goods sold increased $136,002 or 2.7% to $5,105,016 in 2010 compared to $4,969,014 in 2009 primarily due to an increase of $118,295 in cost of equipment and parts sales, service and repairs, hauling, and commissions.
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $2,893,332 or 37.3% to $10,649,352 in 2010 compared to $7,756,020 in 2009. As a percentage of revenue, selling, general and administrative expenses were 4.4% in 2010 compared to 5.4% in 2009. The primary drivers of the increase in total expenses are an increase in stock bonus and bonus expense of $1,917,895, an increase in labor/management-related expenses (labor and associated taxes, consulting, management fees, employment fees and employee training, and insurance benefits) of $424,629, an increase in legal fees, insurance expense, compliance and reporting expenses, bank charges, and property taxes of $266,534, an increase in operating supplies and computer software and equipment of $176,044, an increase in repairs/maintenance and fuel/lubricants expenses of $103,077, and amortization expense of $67,500, partially offset by a decrease in lease/rent, accounting, and bad debt expenses of $136,330.
Other expense increased $37,447 to other expense of $701,601 in 2010 compared to other expense of $664,154 in 2009. This was primarily due to an increase in interest expense of $319,694, partially offset by an increase in the gain on sale of assets of $202,932 and an increase in other income of $83,296.
Income tax provision increased $1,530,399 to $4,022,057 in 2010 compared to $2,491,658 in 2009. The effective tax rate in 2010 and 2009 was 40.0% based on federal and state statutory rates.
Three months ended September 30, 2010 compared to three months ended September 30, 2009
Total revenue decreased $3,419,174 or 4.3% to $76,550,300 in 2010 compared to $79,969,474 in 2009. Recycling revenue decreased $3,588,967 or 4.6% to $74,289,020 in 2010 compared to $77,877,987 in 2009. This is primarily due to a decrease in stainless steel shipments of 35.9%, partially offset by an increase in ferrous shipments of 66.3%, an increase in nonferrous shipments of 4.6%, and an average increase in cost of commodities shipped of 32.7%. Waste Services revenue increased $169,793 or 8.1% to $2,261,280 in 2010 compared to $2,091,487 in 2009 primarily due to a $236,894 increase in cardboard revenue due to increased cardboard prices. This increase was partially offset by a $79,953 decrease in management fee revenue, and a $61,069 decrease in rental revenue.
23
Total cost of goods sold decreased $4,274,704 or 5.8% to $69,181,327 in 2010 compared to $73,456,031 in 2009. Recycling cost of goods sold decreased $4,981,943 or 6.9% to $67,312,108 in 2010 compared to $72,294,051 in 2009. This is primarily due to the decrease in volume of shipments noted above, partially offset by the increase in commodity prices noted above. Waste Services cost of goods sold increased $707,238 or 60.9% to $1,869,218 in 2010 compared to $1,161,980 in 2009 primarily due to a decrease of $462,027 in bankruptcy-related write offs in 2010 compared to 2009 and the increase in cardboard prices.
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $1,277,583 or 49.0% to $3,884,059 in 2010 compared to $2,606,476 in 2009. As a percentage of revenue, selling, general and administrative expenses were 5.1% in 2010 compared to 3.3% in 2009. The primary drivers of the increase in total expense are increases in stock bonus and bonus expense of $1,021,892, labor/management-related expenses (labor and associated taxes, consulting, management fees, employment fees and employee training, and insurance benefits) of $116,808, operating supplies, computer software and equipment, and fuel and lubricants of $106,813, and amortization expense of $67,500, partially offset by decreases in repairs and maintenance and accounting of $32,609.
Other expense decreased $24,398 to other expense of $280,546 in 2010 compared to other expense of $304,944 in 2009 primarily due to an increase in other income of $46,519, partially offset by a decrease in gain on sale of assets of $20,244.
Income tax provision decreased $159,062 to $1,281,747 in 2010 compared to $1,440,809 in 2009. The effective tax rate in 2010 and 2009 was 40.0% based on federal and state statutory rates.
Financial condition at September 30, 2010 compared to December 31, 2009
Cash and cash equivalents increased $1,355,643 to $2,068,705 as of September 30, 2010 compared to $713,062 as of December 31, 2009.
Intangibles increased from $0 to $6,712,500 due to the purchase of the Venture Metals, LLC customer list and trade name, and the non-compete agreement with Venture and its owners, totaling $6,780,000. This increase was reduced by $67,500 due to amortization.
Net cash used in operating activities of $11,394,483 for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 is primarily due to increases in accounts receivable, inventories and other assets, partially offset by increases in accounts payable and income tax payable. The increases in accounts receivable and accounts payable are due to a combination of increased shipments, purchases, and commodity prices.
We used net cash in investing activities of $2,095,097 for the nine months ended September 30, 2010. We used $456,073 for road and building improvements. We purchased recycling and rental fleet equipment, shredder system equipment, and shear parts for a total of $1,274,495. The rental fleet equipment consists of solid waste handling and recycling equipment such as compactors, containers and balers. It is our intention to continue to pursue this market. Additionally, we spent $113,576 on accounting software and computer equipment. We also purchased vehicles for $26,657. We received $351,109 from sales of our rental fleet compactors, balers, containers, and trucks. We paid deposits of $605,711 on machinery and equipment.
Net cash from financing activities of $14,845,223 for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 is due to the new debt from Fifth Third Bank of $48,800,000, partially offset by payments of $33,499,373 to pay off the BB&T debt, and payments on other debt and capital lease obligations of $434,606 and $20,798, respectively.
Accounts receivable trade increased $27,658,043 to $36,170,369 as of September 30, 2010 compared to
24
$8,512,326 as of December 31, 2009. This change is due to a combination of increased shipments due to the shredder operations being fully functional in 2010 and an increase in commodity prices.
Inventories consist principally of stainless steel, ferrous and nonferrous scrap materials and waste equipment machinery held for resale. We value inventory at the lower of cost or market. Inventory increased $4,446,027 or 16.8% to $30,872,638 as of September 30, 2010 compared to $26,426,611 as of December 31, 2009. The primary reason for the increase was that the average cost of commodities shipped out of inventory year-to-date was higher than the average cost of commodities purchased year-to-date and the volume of purchases were higher than the volume of shipments for the year and quarter.
Inventory aging for the period ended September 30, 2010 (Days Outstanding):
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Description | | 1-30 | | 31-60 | | 61-90 | | Over 90 | | Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Stainless steel alloys | | $ | 14,762,378 | | $ | 7,268,233 | | $ | 399,353 | | $ | 1,087,128 | | $ | 23,517,092 | |
Ferrous materials | | | 1,883,301 | | | 161,575 | | | 27,114 | | | 2,518,029 | | | 4,590,019 | |
Non-ferrous materials | | | 1,366,410 | | | 85,117 | | | 12,934 | | | 76,244 | | | 1,540,705 | |
Waste equipment machinery | | | 18,189 | | | 10,850 | | | — | | | 54,950 | | | 83,989 | |
Other | | | 21,971 | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 21,971 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total inventories for sale | | | 18,052,249 | | | 7,525,775 | | | 439,401 | | | 3,736,351 | | | 29,753,776 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shredder replacement parts | | | 1,118,862 | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 1,118,862 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 19,171,111 | | $ | 7,525,775 | | $ | 439,401 | | $ | 3,736,351 | | $ | 30,872,638 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Inventory aging for the period ended December 31, 2009 (Days Outstanding): | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Description | | 1-30 | | 31-60 | | 61-90 | | Over 90 | | Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Stainless steel alloys | | $ | 11,738,653 | | $ | 2,564,183 | | $ | 5,170,224 | | $ | 2,075,954 | | $ | 21,549,014 | |
Ferrous materials | | | 1,513,849 | | | 47,151 | | | 19,834 | | | 6,641 | | | 1,587,475 | |
Non-ferrous materials | | | 1,801,125 | | | 243,708 | | | 47,545 | | | 126,759 | | | 2,219,137 | |
Waste equipment machinery | | | 9,670 | | | — | | | — | | | 92,362 | | | 102,032 | |
Other | | | 89,122 | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 89,122 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total inventories for sale | | | 15,152,419 | | | 2,855,042 | | | 5,237,603 | | | 2,301,716 | | | 25,546,780 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shredder replacement parts | | | 879,831 | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 879,831 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 16,032,250 | | $ | 2,855,042 | | $ | 5,237,603 | | $ | 2,301,716 | | $ | 26,426,611 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Accounts payable trade increased $10,023,047 or 214.0% to $14,707,433 as of September 30, 2010 compared to $4,684,386 as of December 31, 2009, primarily due to a 62.8% increase in commodity prices.
Working capital increased $37,252,394 to $48,571,079 as of September 30, 2010 compared to $11,318,685 as of December 31, 2009. The increase was primarily driven by the $27.7 million increase in accounts receivable, the $4.4 million increase in inventory, the debt restructuring, which reclassified $16.0 million in current
25
maturities to long-term debt, and the $1.4 million increase in cash. These increases were partially offset by the $10.0 million increase in accounts payable, and the $1.7 million increase in income taxes payable.
Contractual Obligations
The following table provides information with respect to our known contractual obligations for the quarter ended September 30, 2010.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Obligation Description | | Total | | Less than 1 year | | 1-3 years | | 3-5 years | | More than 5 years | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Long-Term Debt Obligations | | $ | 49,060,391 | | $ | 1,517,900 | | $ | 7,542,491 | | $ | 40,000,000 | | $ | — | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Operating Lease Obligations (1) | | | 1,445,148 | | | 650,148 | | | 795,000 | | | — | | | — | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 50,505,539 | | $ | 2,168,048 | | $ | 8,337,491 | | $ | 40,000,000 | | $ | — | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
(1) We lease the Louisville, Kentucky facility from K&R, LLC, the sole member of which is Harry Kletter, our chief executive officer, under an operating lease expiring December 2012. We have monthly rental payments of $48,500 through December 2012. In the event of a change of control, the monthly payments become $62,500. We have subleased the Lexington property to an unaffiliated third party for a term commencing March 1, 2007 and ending December 31, 2012 for $4,500 per month. We currently lease this property from an unrelated party for $4,500 per month; the lease terminates December 31, 2012. If for any reason the sub-lessee defaults, we remain liable for the remainder of the lease payments through December 31, 2012.
We also lease a management services operations facility and various pieces of equipment in Dallas, Texas for which monthly payments of $969 are due through September 2011.
Long-term debt, including the current portions thereof, increased $14,866,021 to $49,060,391 as of September 30, 2010 compared to $34,194,370 as of December 31, 2009.
Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In 2008 the FASB issued authoritative guidance on disclosures about derivative instruments and hedging activities and updated this guidance in February 2010 through guidance entitled “Technical Corrections to Various Topics”. The guidance amends and expands the disclosure requirements in the previously issued guidance on accounting for derivative instruments and hedging activities and was effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, the year beginning January 1, 2009 for us. The February 2010 update was effective for the first reporting period beginning after issuance, the year ending December 31, 2009 for us. We have included the required disclosures in Note 4 of our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
In May 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on subsequent events, but this guidance was amended by new authoritative guidance issued in February, 2010. The original guidance required the disclosure of the date through which an entity has evaluated subsequent events and the basis for that date—that is, whether that date represents the date the financial statements were issued or were available to be issued. The new guidance removes the requirement for an SEC filer to disclose a date in both issued and revised financial statements. This amendment removes potential conflicts with SEC requirements. The original guidance became effective for interim and annual periods ending after June 15, 2009, the quarter ending June 30, 2009 for us, and the amendment became effective upon issuance of the final update in February, 2010.
26
The FASB issued authoritative guidance on accounting for transfers of financial assets in June 2009 with an update issued in December 2009. This guidance is effective for reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009, the year ending December 31, 2010 for us. This new guidance limits the circumstances in which a financial asset may be de-recognized when the transferor has not transferred the entire financial asset or has continuing involvement with the transferred asset. The concept of a qualifying special-purpose entity, which had previously facilitated sale accounting for certain asset transfers, is removed by this new guidance. The adoption of this new guidance did not impact our financial position or results of operations.
The FASB issued authoritative guidance on accounting for variable interest entities (VIE) in June 2009 with an update issued in December 2009. This guidance is effective for reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009, the year ending December 2010 for us. This guidance changes the process for how an enterprise determines which party consolidates a VIE, to a primarily qualitative analysis. The party that consolidates the VIE (the primary beneficiary) is defined as the party with (1) the power to direct activities of the VIE that most significantly affect the VIE’s economic performance and (2) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE. Upon adoption, reporting enterprises must reconsider their conclusions on whether an entity should be consolidated and should a change result, the effect on net assets will be recorded as a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings. The adoption of this new guidance did not impact our financial position or results of operations.
ITEM 3: QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
Fluctuating commodity prices affect market risk in our recycling segment. We mitigate this risk by selling our product on a monthly contract basis. Each month we negotiate selling prices for all commodities. Based on these monthly agreements, we determine purchase prices based on a margin needed to cover processing and administrative expenses.
We are exposed to commodity price risk, mainly associated with variations in the market price for ferrous and nonferrous metal, and other commodities. The timing and magnitude of industry cycles are difficult to predict and are impacted by general economic conditions. We respond to changes in recycled metal selling prices by adjusting purchase prices on a timely basis and by turning rather than holding inventory in expectation of higher prices. However, financial results may be negatively impacted where selling prices fall more quickly than purchase price adjustments can be made or when levels of inventory have an anticipated net realizable value that is below average cost.
We are exposed to interest rate risk on our floating rate borrowings. On July 30, 2010, we entered into a Credit Agreement (the “Credit Agreement”) with Fifth Third Bank pursuant to which Fifth Third Bank agreed to provide us a revolving credit facility in the amount of $40,000,000 for the purpose of replacing the existing $20,000,000 senior revolving credit facility with Branch Banking and Trust Company (“BB&T”) and for payment of the $5,000,000 note payable to BB&T (collectively, the “Prior Obligations”). Proceeds of the new revolving credit facility in the amount of $33,355,003 were used to repay the outstanding principal balance of the Prior Obligations. We used additional proceeds of the revolving credit facility to pay closing costs and for funding temporary fluctuations in accounts receivable of most of our customers and inventory. In addition, we entered into a term loan agreement with Fifth Third Bank in the amount of $8,800,000 for the purpose of replacing the $6,000,000 note payable secured by our shredder system, the $3,000,000 note payable secured by our rental fleet equipment, and the $609,900 note payable secured by our crane. Based on our average anticipated borrowings under our credit agreements in fiscal 2010, a hypothetical increase or decrease in the LIBOR rate by 1% would increase or decrease interest expense on our variable borrowings by 1% of the outstanding balance, with a corresponding change in cash flows.
27
We entered into three interest rate swap agreements swapping variable rates for fixed rates. The first swap agreement covers approximately $5.3 million in debt and commenced April 7, 2009 and matures on April 7, 2014. The second swap agreement covers approximately $2.4 million in debt and commenced October 15, 2008 and matures on May 7, 2013. The third swap agreement covers approximately $522,000 in debt and commenced October 22, 2008 and matures on October 22, 2013. The three swap agreements fix our interest rate at approximately 5.8%. At September 30, 2010, we recorded the estimated fair value of the liability related to the three swaps as approximately $781,000. Accounting rules require us to recognize all derivatives on the balance sheet at estimated fair value. We have designated these agreements as a cash flow hedge. These swap agreements were not affected by the debt restructuring with Fifth Third Bank. We maintain a cash account on deposit with BB&T which serves as collateral for the swap agreements.
We are exposed to market risk from changes in interest rates in the normal course of business. Our interest income and expense are most sensitive to changes in the general level of U.S. interest rates and the LIBOR rate. In order to manage this exposure, we use a combination of debt instruments, including the use of derivatives in the form of interest rate swap agreements. We do not enter into any derivatives for trading purposes. The use of the interest rate swap agreement is intended to convert the variable rate to a fixed rate.
ITEM 4: CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a) Disclosure controls and procedures.
ISA’s management, including ISA’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, have evaluated the effectiveness of our “disclosure controls and procedures,” as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Based upon their evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of September 30, 2010, ISA’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective for the purpose of ensuring that the information required to be disclosed in the reports that ISA files under the Exchange Act with the Securities and Exchange Commission (1) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specific in the SEC’s rules and forms, and (2) is accumulated and communicated to ISA’s management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding the required disclosure.
(b) Changes to internal control over financial reporting
There were no changes in ISA’s internal control over financial reporting during the three months ended September 30, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to affect ISA’s internal control over financial reporting.
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.Legal Proceedings
Lennox Industries, Inc. v. Industrial Services of America, Inc., case No. CV-2007-004 is pending in the Circuit Court of Arkansas County, at Stuttgart, Arkansas. Lennox Industries, Inc. (hereafter “Lennox”) has reduced its legal theories against ISA in a Second Amended Complaint. It now alleges breach of contract, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty arising from ISA’s alleged miscategorization of Lennox’s scrap metal and mismanagement of the scrap metal recycling operations at three Lennox plants during the contract period April 18, 2001 through November 2005.
We filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in October 2009, which the court denied in February 2010. Discovery by the parties is still ongoing. There are currently no dates set for either a mediation or a jury trial, however, one or both of these developments will likely occur in early to mid-2011. ISA is vigorously defending
28
all of Lennox’s claims. It is our position that the claims are legally and factually without merit.
Item 1A.Risk Factors
We have had no material changes from the risk factors reported in our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 22, 2010.
Item 2.Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
On July 1, 2010, we issued 300,000 shares of stock in exchange for the Venture Metals, LLC (“Venture”) customer list and name, Venture’s execution of a non-compete agreement, and Venture’s agreement to cause Mr. Jones and Mr. Valentine to provide the company with non-compete agreements. The issuance of shares to Venture was exempt under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
On November 15, 2005, our Board of Directors authorized a program to repurchase up to 300,000 shares of our common stock at current market prices. No shares were repurchased in 2010 or 2009. In 2008, we repurchased 83,411 shares. In 2007, we repurchased 60,000 shares. In 2006, we repurchased 8,264 shares, and in 2005 we repurchased 15,000 shares.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Period | | Total Number of Shares Purchased | | Average Price Paid per Share | | Total Number of Shares Purchased as part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs | | Maximum Number of Shares that may yet be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Mar-08 | | | 29,630 | | $ | 5.5215 | | | 112,893 | | | 187,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Jun-08 | | | 14,781 | | $ | 7.6113 | | | 127,674 | | | 172,326 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Sept-08 | | | 39,000 | | $ | 6.5268 | | | 166,674 | | | 133,326 | |
Item 3.Defaults upon Senior Securities
None.
Item 4.Removed and Reserved
Item 5.Other Information
None.
Item 6.Exhibits
See exhibit index.
29
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| | |
| | INDUSTRIAL SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC. |
| | |
Date: November 10, 2010 | | /s/ Harry Kletter |
| |
|
| | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
| | (Principal Executive and Financial Officer) |
| | |
Date: November 10, 2010 | | /s/ Alan Schroering |
| |
|
| | Chief Financial Officer |
30
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
| | |
Exhibit Number | | Description of Exhibits |
| |
|
| | |
31.1 | | Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of Harry Kletter for the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010. |
| | |
31.2 | | Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of Alan Schroering for the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010. |
| | |
32.1 | | Section 1350 Certification of Harry Kletter and Alan Schroering for the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010. |
31