================================================================================
United States
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K/A
[X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
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 001-12138
PDV AMERICA, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
DELAWARE 51-0297556
(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
incorporation or organization)
ONE WARREN PLACE, 6100 SOUTH YALE AVENUE, TULSA, OKLAHOMA 74136
(Address of principal executive office) (Zip Code)
(918) 495-4000
(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)
N.A.
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last
report)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class Name of each Exchange on which registered
- ----------------------------- -----------------------------------------
7 7/8% SENIOR NOTES, DUE 2003 NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC.
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: NONE
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 [ ]
The registrant meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction (I)(1)(a)
and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore omitting (i) the information otherwise
required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K relating to a list of subsidiaries of the
registrant as permitted by General Instruction (I)(2)(b), (ii) certain
information otherwise required by Item 10 of Form 10-K relating to Directors and
Executive Officers as permitted by General Instruction (I)(2)(c) and (iii)
certain information otherwise required by Item 11 of Form 10-K relating to
executive compensation as permitted by General Instruction (I)(2)(c).
Disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K:
NOT APPLICABLE
Aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common stock
held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 28, 2002: NONE
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as
defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act): Yes [ ] No [X]
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's
classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
COMMON STOCK, $1.00 PAR VALUE 1,000
- ----------------------------- ----------------------------------
(Class) (outstanding at February 28, 2003)
================================================================================
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: None
PDV AMERICA, INC.
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
FACTORS AFFECTING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS.......................................................... 1
PART I.
Items 1. and 2. Business and Properties............................................................... 2
Item 3. Legal Proceedings....................................................................... 17
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders..................................... 18
PART II.
Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters................... 19
Item 6. Selected Financial Data................................................................. 19
Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations................................................................... 20
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.............................. 35
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data............................................. 40
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure.............................................................................. 40
PART III.
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant...................................... 41
Item 11. Executive Compensation.................................................................. 41
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.......................... 41
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.......................................... 42
Item 14. Controls and Procedures................................................................. 44
PART IV.
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statements and Reports on Form 8-K.................................. 45
FACTORS AFFECTING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Report contains "forward looking statements" within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Specifically, all statements under
the caption "Items 1 and 2 - Business and Properties" and "Item 7 - Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations"
pertaining to capital expenditures and investments related to environmental
compliance, strategic planning, purchasing patterns of refined products and
capital resources available to the Companies (as defined herein) are forward
looking statements. In addition, when used in this document, the words
"anticipate," "estimate," "project," "believe" and similar expressions are used
to identify forward looking statements.
Those forward looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties
that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward looking
statements. Those risks and uncertainties include changes in the availability
and cost of crude oil, feedstocks, blending components and refined products;
changes in prices or demand for the Companies' products as a result of
competitive actions or economic factors; changes in environmental and other
regulatory requirements, which may affect operations, operating costs and
capital expenditure requirements; costs and uncertainties associated with
technological change and implementation; inflation; and continued access to
capital markets and commercial bank financing on favorable terms. In addition,
the Companies purchase a significant portion of their crude oil requirements
from Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (as defined herein), their ultimate parent
corporation, under long-term supply agreements, and could be adversely affected
by social, economic and political conditions in Venezuela. (See Exhibit 99.4 to
the Form 8-K filed by PDV America, Inc. on February 25, 2003 for additional
information concerning risk factors).
Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward
looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Report. PDV America
and its subsidiaries undertake no obligation to publicly release any revision to
these forward looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the
date of this Report.
1
PART I
ITEMS 1. AND 2. BUSINESS AND PROPERTIES
OVERVIEW
PDV America, Inc. ("PDV America" and together with its subsidiaries,
the "Companies") was incorporated in 1986 in the State of Delaware and,
effective April 2, 1997, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of PDV Holding, Inc. ("PDV
Holding"). PDV America's ultimate parent is Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A.
("PDVSA", which may also be used herein to refer to one or more of its
subsidiaries), the national oil company of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
PDV America, through its wholly-owned operating subsidiary, CITGO Petroleum
Corporation ("CITGO"), is engaged in the refining, marketing and transportation
of petroleum products including gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, petrochemicals,
lubricants, asphalt and refined waxes, mainly within the continental United
States east of the Rocky Mountains. The Companies operate as a single segment.
(See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America in Item 15a).
PDV America does not have an Internet address and thus is not able to
make copies of its annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q
or current reports on Form 8-K available in that manner. It expects to become a
non-reporting SEC registrant following the August 1, 2003 final principal
payment on its outstanding 7-7/8% senior notes. Copies of its annual reports on
Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any
amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 can be obtained from the SEC's web site
at www.sec.gov and from PDV America free of charge, by contacting PDV America at
(918) 495-4000.
PDV America's transportation fuel customers include primarily CITGO
branded independent wholesale marketers, major convenience store chains and
airlines located mainly east of the Rocky Mountains. Asphalt is generally
marketed to independent paving contractors on the East and Gulf Coasts and in
the Midwest of the United States. Lubricants are sold principally in the United
States to independent marketers, mass marketers and industrial customers. CITGO
sells lubricants, gasoline, and distillates in various Latin American markets.
Petrochemical feedstocks and industrial products are sold to various
manufacturers and industrial companies throughout the United States. Petroleum
coke is sold primarily in international markets.
On January 1, 2002, PDV America made a contribution to the capital of
CITGO of all of the common stock of PDV America's wholly owned subsidiary, VPHI
Midwest, Inc. ("VPHI"). This transaction had no effect on the consolidated
financial statements of PDV America.
COMPETITIVE NATURE OF THE PETROLEUM REFINING BUSINESS
The petroleum refining industry is cyclical and highly volatile,
reflecting capital intensity with high fixed and low variable costs. Petroleum
industry operations and profitability are influenced by a large number of
factors, over some of which individual petroleum refining and marketing
companies have little control. Governmental regulations and policies,
particularly in the areas of taxation, energy and the environment, have a
significant impact on how companies conduct their operations and formulate their
products. Demand for crude oil and its products is largely driven by the
condition of local and worldwide economies, although weather patterns and
taxation relative to other energy sources also play significant parts.
Generally, U.S. refiners compete for sales on the basis of price, brand image
and, in some areas, product quality.
2
REFINING
PDV America's aggregate net interest in rated crude oil refining
capacity is 865 thousand barrels per day ("MBPD"). The following table shows the
capacity of each refinery in which PDV America holds an interest and PDV
America's share of such capacity as of December 31, 2002.
PDV AMERICA REFINING CAPACITY
TOTAL NET
RATED PDV AMERICA SOLOMON
CRUDE OWNERSHIP PROCESS
PDV AMERICA REFINING IN REFINING COMPLEXITY
OWNER INTEREST CAPACITY CAPACITY RATING
-------------- ----------- -------- ------------ ----------
(%) (MBPD) (MBPD)
LOCATION
Lake Charles, LA CITGO 100 320 320 17.7
Corpus Christi, TX CITGO 100 157 157 16.3
Lemont, IL CITGO 100 167 167 11.7
Paulsboro, NJ CITGO 100 84 84 -
Savannah, GA CITGO 100 28 28 -
Houston, TX LYONDELL-CITGO 41 265 109 15.0
----- ---
Total Rated Crude Refining Capacity 1,021 865
===== ===
The Lake Charles, Corpus Christi and Lemont refineries and the Houston
refinery each have the capability to process large volumes of heavy crude oil
into a flexible slate of refined products. They have Solomon Process Complexity
Ratings of 17.7, 16.3, 11.7 and 15.0, respectively, as compared to an average of
13.9 for U.S. refineries in the most recently available Solomon Associates, Inc.
survey. The rating is an industry measure of a refinery's ability to produce
higher value products, with a higher rating indicating a greater capability to
produce such products.
3
The following table shows PDV America's aggregate interest in refining
capacity, refinery input, and product yield for the three years ended December
31, 2002.
PDV AMERICA REFINERY PRODUCTION (1)
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
-----------------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000
------------- ------------- --------------
(MBPD, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE INDICATED)
RATED REFINING CRUDE CAPACITY AT YEAR END 865 865 865
Refinery Input
Crude oil 674 84% 737 83% 791 83%
Other feedstocks 131 16% 150 17% 157 17%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 805 100% 887 100% 948 100%
=== === === === === ===
Product Yield
Light fuels
Gasoline 379 46% 375 42% 419 44%
Jet fuel 76 9% 76 8% 79 8%
Diesel/#2 fuel 153 19% 172 19% 182 19%
Asphalt 16 2% 44 6% 47 5%
Petrochemicals and industrial products 194 24% 228 25% 230 24%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 818 100% 895 100% 957 100%
=== === === === === ===
UTILIZATION OF RATED CRUDE REFINING CAPACITY 78% 85% 91%
- -----------
(1) Includes 41.25% of the Houston refinery production.
CITGO produces its light fuels and petrochemicals primarily through its
Lake Charles, Corpus Christi and Lemont refineries. Asphalt refining operations
are carried out through CITGO's Paulsboro and Savannah refineries. CITGO
purchases refined products from its joint venture refinery in Houston.
4
Lake Charles, Louisiana Refinery. This refinery has a rated refining
capacity of 320 MBPD and is capable of processing large volumes of heavy crude
oil into a flexible slate of refined products, including significant quantities
of high-octane unleaded gasoline and reformulated gasoline.
The following table shows the rated refining capacity, refinery input
and product yield at the Lake Charles refinery for the three years ended
December 31, 2002.
LAKE CHARLES REFINERY PRODUCTION
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
----------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000
------------- ---------- ----------
(MBPD, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE INDICATED)
RATED REFINING CRUDE CAPACITY AT YEAR END 320 320 320
Refinery Input
Crude oil 320 92% 317 90% 319 87%
Other feedstocks 28 8% 37 10% 48 13%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 348 100% 354 100% 367 100%
=== === === === === ===
Product Yield
Light fuels
Gasoline 184 51% 175 48% 187 50%
Jet fuel 68 19% 67 19% 70 19%
Diesel/#2 fuel 45 13% 62 17% 58 15%
Petrochemicals and industrial products 60 17% 57 16% 59 16%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 357 100% 361 100% 374 100%
=== === === === === ===
Utilization of Rated Crude Refining Capacity 100% 99% 100%
The Lake Charles refinery's Gulf Coast location provides it with access
to crude oil deliveries from multiple sources; imported crude oil and feedstock
supplies are delivered by ship directly to the Lake Charles refinery, while
domestic crude oil supplies are delivered by pipeline and barge. In addition,
the refinery is connected by pipelines to the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port and to
terminal facilities in the Houston area through which it can receive crude oil
deliveries. For delivery of refined products, the refinery is connected through
the Lake Charles Pipeline directly to the Colonial and Explorer Pipelines, which
are the major refined product pipelines supplying the northeast and midwest
regions of the United States, respectively. The refinery also uses adjacent
terminals and docks, which provide access for ocean tankers and barges to load
refined products for shipment.
The Lake Charles refinery's main petrochemical products are propylene
and benzene. Industrial products include sulphur, residual fuels and petroleum
coke.
The Lake Charles refinery complex also includes a lubricants refinery
which produces high quality oils and waxes, and is one of the few in the
industry designed as a stand-alone lubricants refinery.
Corpus Christi, Texas Refinery. The Corpus Christi refinery processes
heavy crude oil into a flexible slate of refined products. This refinery complex
consists of the East and West Plants, located within five miles of each other.
The following table shows rated refining capacity, refinery input and
product yield at the Corpus Christi refinery for the three years ended December
31, 2002.
5
CORPUS CHRISTI REFINERY PRODUCTION
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
--------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000
----------- ---------- -----------
(MBPD, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE INDICATED)
RATED REFINING CRUDE CAPACITY AT YEAR END 157 157 150
Refinery Input
Crude oil 154 73% 154 71% 149 70%
Other feedstocks 57 27% 64 29% 65 30%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 211 100% 218 100% 214 100%
=== === === === === ===
Product Yield
Light fuels
Gasoline 93 44% 90 42% 95 46%
Diesel/#2 fuel 59 28% 57 26% 58 27%
Petrochemicals and industrial products 58 28% 69 32% 58 27%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 210 100% 216 100% 211 100%
=== === === === === ===
Utilization of Rated Crude Refining Capacity 98% 98% 99%
CITGO operates the West Plant under a sublease agreement (the
"Sublease") from Union Pacific Corporation ("Union Pacific"). The basic term of
the Sublease ends on January 1, 2004, but CITGO may renew the Sublease for
successive renewal terms through January 31, 2011. CITGO has the right to
purchase the West Plant from Union Pacific at the end of the basic term, the end
of any renewal term, or on January 31, 2011 at a nominal price. (See
Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America - Note 15 in Item 15a).
The Corpus Christi refinery's main petrochemical products include
cumene, cyclohexane, and aromatics (including benzene, toluene and xylene).
Cumene is used to make phenol, which is a chemical used in the manufacture of
plastic and building materials.
6
Lemont, Illinois Refinery. The Lemont refinery processes primarily
heavy Canadian crude oil into a flexible slate of refined products.
The following table shows the rated refining capacity, refinery input
and product yield at the Lemont refinery for the three years ended December 31,
2002.
LEMONT REFINERY PRODUCTION
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
-------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000
----------- ---------- ----------
(MBPD, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE INDICATED)
RATED REFINING CRUDE CAPACITY AT YEAR END 167 167 167
Refinery Input
Crude oil 69 73% 98 78% 153 89%
Other feedstocks 25 27% 28 22% 18 11%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 94 100% 126 100% 171 100%
=== === === === === ===
Product Yield
Light fuels
Gasoline 54 59% 68 56% 89 52%
Jet Fuel - 0% - 0% 1 1%
Diesel/#2 fuel 16 17% 24 20% 40 23%
Petrochemicals and industrial products 22 24% 30 24% 41 24%
--- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 92 100% 122 100% 171 100%
=== === === === === ===
Utilization of Rated Refining Crude Capacity 41% 59% 92%
Petrochemical products at the Lemont refinery include benzene, toluene
and xylene, plus a range of ten different aliphatic solvents.
On August 14, 2001, a fire occurred at the crude oil distillation unit
of the Lemont refinery. The crude unit was destroyed and the refinery's other
processing units were temporarily taken out of production. A new crude unit was
operational in May 2002. See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America
for further information.
7
LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP. Subsidiaries of CITGO and Lyondell Chemical
Company ("Lyondell") are partners in LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP
("LYONDELL-CITGO"), which owns and operates a 265 MBPD refinery previously owned
by Lyondell and located on the ship channel in Houston, Texas. At December 31,
2002, CITGO's investment in LYONDELL-CITGO was $518 million. In addition, at
December 31, 2002, CITGO held a note receivable from LYONDELL-CITGO in the
approximate amount of $35 million. (See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV
America -- Note 4 in Item 15a). A substantial amount of the crude oil processed
by this refinery is supplied by PDVSA under a long-term crude oil supply
agreement that expires in the year 2017. For the year ended December 31, 2002,
LYONDELL-CITGO constituted a significant investment for CITGO in a
50-percent-or-less-owned person under SEC regulations. See separate financial
statements for LYONDELL-CITGO in Item 15a.
PDVSA has invoked its contractual right to declare a force majeure
under the supply agreement with LYONDELL-CITGO at certain points in each of
2002, 2001, 2000, 1999 and 1998 for varying periods of time for various reasons.
As a result of these declarations, PDVSA was relieved of its obligation to
deliver crude oil under the supply agreement and LYONDELL-CITGO had to purchase
crude oil from alternate sources, which resulted in increased volatility to
operating margins. (See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America -- Note
4 in Item 15a and Financial Statements of LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP - Note 11
in Item 15a).
CRUDE OIL AND REFINED PRODUCT PURCHASES
CITGO owns no crude oil reserves or production facilities, and must
therefore rely on purchases of crude oil and feedstocks for its refinery
operations. Crude oil is CITGO's primary raw material. CITGO buys and sells
crude oil to facilitate procurement and delivery of a desired type or grade of
crude oil to a desired location to supply our refineries, not as an independent
business activity to generate profit. CITGO believes that reflecting the net
result of this activity in cost of sales is an appropriate reflection of the
nature of these transactions as efforts undertaken to acquire raw material. In
addition, because CITGO's refinery operations do not produce sufficient refined
products to meet the demands of its marketers, CITGO purchases refined products,
primarily gasoline, from other refiners, including a number of affiliated
companies. (See "Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions").
Crude Oil Purchases. The following chart shows CITGO's net purchases of
crude oil for the three years ended December 31, 2002:
CITGO CRUDE OIL PURCHASES
LAKE CHARLES, LA CORPUS CHRISTI, TX LEMONT, IL PAULSBORO, NJ SAVANNAH, GA
------------------ ------------------ ------------------ ------------------ ------------------
2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
(MBPD) (MBPD) (MBPD) (MBPD) (MBPD)
SUPPLIERS
PDVSA 125 136 104 126 138 143 11 13 14 36 39 47 22 22 22
Other sources 190 185 214 29 10 8 62 78 140 7 3 - - - -
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Total 315 321 318 155 148 151 73 91 154 43 42 47 22 22 22
=== === === === === === === === === === === === === === ===
8
CITGO's largest single supplier of crude oil is PDVSA. CITGO has
entered into long-term crude oil supply agreements with PDVSA with respect to
the crude oil requirements for each of CITGO's Lake Charles, Corpus Christi,
Paulsboro and Savannah refineries. The following table shows the base and
incremental volumes of crude oil contracted for delivery and the volumes of
crude oil actually delivered under these contracts in the three years ended
December 31, 2002.
CITGO CRUDE OIL SUPPLY CONTRACTS WITH PDVSA
VOLUMES OF
CRUDE OIL PURCHASED
CONTRACT CRUDE FOR THE YEAR ENDED
OIL VOLUME DECEMBER 31, CONTRACT
----------------------- -------------------- EXPIRATION
BASE INCREMENTAL (1) 2002 2001 2000 DATE
---- --------------- ---- ---- ---- ----------
(MBPD) (MBPD) (YEAR)
LOCATION
Lake Charles, LA (2) 120 70 109 117 110 2006
Corpus Christi, TX (2) 130 - 114 126 118 2012
Paulsboro, NJ (2) 30 - 27 26 28 2010
Savannah, GA (2) 12 - 12 12 12 2013
- --------------
(1) The supply agreement for the Lake Charles refinery gives PDVSA the right to
sell to CITGO incremental volumes up to the maximum amount specified in the
table, subject to certain restrictions relating to the type of crude oil to
be supplied, refining capacity and other operational considerations at the
refinery.
(2) Volumes purchased as shown on this table do not equal purchases from PDVSA
(shown in the previous table) as a result of transfers between refineries
of contract crude purchases included here and spot purchases from PDVSA
which are included in the previous table.
These crude oil supply agreements require PDVSA to supply minimum
quantities of crude oil and other feedstocks to CITGO for a fixed period. The
supply agreements differ somewhat for each refinery but generally incorporate
formula prices based on the market value of a slate of refined products deemed
to be produced from each particular grade of crude oil or feedstock, less (i)
specified deemed refining costs; (ii) specified actual costs, including
transportation charges, actual cost of natural gas and electricity, import
duties and taxes; and (iii) a deemed margin, which varies according to the grade
of crude oil or feedstock delivered. Under each supply agreement, deemed margins
and deemed costs are adjusted periodically by a formula primarily based on the
rate of inflation. Because deemed operating costs and the slate of refined
products deemed to be produced for a given barrel of crude oil or other
feedstock do not necessarily reflect the actual costs and yields in any period,
the actual refining margin earned by CITGO under the various supply agreements
will vary depending on, among other things, the efficiency with which CITGO
conducts its operations during such period.
The price we pay for crude oil purchased under these crude oil supply
agreements is not directly related to the market price of any other crude oil.
However, the intention of the pricing mechanism in the crude supply agreements
was to reflect market pricing over long periods of time, but there may be
periods in which the price paid for crude oil purchased under those agreements
may be higher or lower than the price that might have been paid in the spot
market. Internal estimates indicate that the pricing mechanism is working as
intended to reflect market prices over long periods of time.
These crude supply agreements contain force majeure provisions which
excuse the performance by either party of its obligations under the agreement
under specified circumstances. As a result of Venezuela and other countries
following production quotas established by the Organization of the
9
Petroleum Exporting Countries, PDVSA invoked the force majeure provisions and
reduced the volume of crude oil supplied under the contracts in April 1998, in
February 1999 through October 2000 and in February 2001 through March 2003. In
one instance PDVSA noted operational and technical problems as the reason for
the declaration. As a result of these declarations of force majeure, CITGO was
required to obtain crude oil from alternative sources, which resulted in
increased volatility in its operating margins. In 2002, 2001 and 2000, the
increased cost of crude oil purchased due to these declarations of force majeure
was $42 million, $6 million and $5 million, respectively. CITGO was notified
that effective March 6, 2003, PDVSA ended its most recent declaration of force
majeure under the crude oil supply agreements. (See Consolidated Financial
Statements of PDV America - Note 2 in Item 15a for a description of events that
led to further disruption of supplies in December 2002).
The supply agreements provide that if the supplier does not supply
CITGO with the volume of crude oil and feedstock required under that agreement
and that failure is not excused by force majeure, then the supplier must pay
CITGO the deemed margin, in the case of the Lake Charles supply agreement, and
the deemed margin and the applicable fixed cost, in the case of the Corpus
Christi supply agreement, for the amount of crude oil and feedstock not
supplied. During 2000, 2001 and 2002, PDVSA did not deliver the feedstock
naphtha pursuant to certain contracts and has made or will make contractually
specified payments in lieu thereof. PDVSA paid CITGO approximately $2 million
for naphtha not delivered under the supply agreements during each of 2000 and
2001. CITGO expects to receive approximately $3 million from PDVSA for naphtha
not delivered under the supply agreements during 2002.
Refined Product Purchases. The marketing and sale of refined petroleum
products represents CITGO's revenue generating activity. The demand for those
products in CITGO's market areas exceeds the capacity of its refineries to
produce them so it purchases significant quantities of refined products from
affiliated and non-affiliated suppliers. CITGO must have the right refined
products in the right locations and in the right quantities in order to satisfy
customer supply arrangements and market requirements. Thus, it purchases and
sells refined products of various grades in various locations from other
suppliers. Sales of refined products are reported as revenue upon transfer of
title to the buyer. Purchases of refined product are treated as acquisitions, a
component of cost of sales, upon transfer of title to CITGO.
CITGO is required to purchase refined products to supplement the
production of the Lake Charles, Corpus Christi and Lemont refineries in order to
meet demand of CITGO's marketing network and to resolve logistical issues. The
following table shows CITGO's purchases of refined products for the three years
ended December 31, 2002.
CITGO REFINED PRODUCT PURCHASES
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
-----------------------
2002 2001 2000
---- ---- ----
(MBPD)
LIGHT FUELS
Gasoline 689 640 616
Jet fuel 61 74 81
Diesel/#2 fuel 239 264 264
--- --- ---
Total 989 978 961
=== === ===
As of December 31, 2002, CITGO purchased substantially all of the
gasoline, diesel/#2 fuel, and jet fuel produced at the LYONDELL-CITGO refinery
under a contract which extends through the year 2017. LYONDELL-CITGO was a major
supplier in 2002 providing CITGO with 114 MBPD of gasoline,
10
84 MBPD of diesel/#2 fuel, and 18 MBPD of jet fuel. See "--Refining--LYONDELL-
CITGO Refining LP".
In October 1998, PDVSA V.I., Inc., an affiliate of PDVSA, acquired a
50% equity interest in HOVENSA, L.L.C. ("HOVENSA"), a joint venture that owns
and operates a refinery in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. Under the related
product sales agreement, CITGO acquired approximately 100 MBPD of refined
products from the refinery during 2002, approximately one-half of which was
gasoline.
MARKETING
CITGO's major products are light fuels (including gasoline, jet fuel,
and diesel fuel), industrial products and petrochemicals, asphalt, lubricants
and waxes. The following table shows revenues and volumes of each of these
product categories for the three years ended December 31, 2002.
CITGO REFINED PRODUCT SALES REVENUES AND VOLUMES
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
--------------------------------- ------------------------------
2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000
--------- --------- --------- ------ ------ ------
($ IN MILLIONS) (GALLONS IN MILLIONS)
LIGHT FUELS
Gasoline $ 11,758 $ 11,316 $ 12,447 15,026 13,585 13,648
Jet fuel 1,402 1,660 2,065 2,003 2,190 2,367
Diesel/#2 fuel 3,462 3,984 4,750 5,031 5,429 5,565
ASPHALT 597 502 546 902 946 812
PETROCHEMICALS AND INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS 1,485 1,490 1,763 2,190 2,297 2,404
LUBRICANTS AND WAXES 561 536 552 261 240 279
--------- --------- --------- ------ ------ ------
Total $ 19,265 $ 19,488 $ 22,123 25,413 24,687 25,075
========= ========= ========= ====== ====== ======
Light Fuels. Gasoline sales accounted for 61% of CITGO's refined
product sales in 2002, 58% in 2001, and 56% in 2000. CITGO markets CITGO branded
gasoline through approximately 13,000 independently owned and operated CITGO
branded retail outlets located throughout the United States, primarily east of
the Rocky Mountains. CITGO purchases gasoline to supply its marketing network,
as the gasoline production from the Lake Charles, Corpus Christi and Lemont
refineries was only equivalent to approximately 54%, 55% and 62% of the volume
of CITGO branded gasoline sold in 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. See
"--Crude Oil and Refined Product Purchases -- Refined Product Purchases".
The following table includes wholesale fuel sales.
Year Ended December 31,
------------------------
2002 2001 2000
------ ------ ------
(Gallons in millions)
Wholesale fuel sales 13,758 13,500 13,441
CITGO's strategy is to enhance the value of the CITGO brand by
delivering quality products and services to the consumer through a large network
of independently owned and operated CITGO branded retail locations. This
enhancement is accomplished through a commitment to quality, dependability and
excellent customer service to its independent marketers, which constitute
CITGO's primary distribution channel.
11
Sales to independent branded marketers typically are made under
contracts that range from three to seven years. Sales to 7-Eleven(TM)
convenience stores are made under a contract that extends through the year 2006.
Under this contract, CITGO arranges all transportation and delivery of motor
fuels and handles all product ordering. CITGO also acts as processing agent for
the purpose of facilitating and implementing orders and purchases from
third-party suppliers. CITGO receives a processing fee for such services.
CITGO markets jet fuel directly to airline customers at 20 airports,
including such major hub cities as Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth and
Miami.
CITGO's delivery of light fuels to its customers is accomplished in
part through 55 refined product terminals located throughout CITGO's primary
market territory. Of these terminals, 44 are wholly-owned by CITGO and 11 are
jointly owned. Twelve of CITGO's product terminals have waterborne docking
facilities, which greatly enhance the flexibility of CITGO's logistical system.
Refined product terminals owned or operated by CITGO provide a total storage
capacity of approximately 22 million barrels. Also, CITGO has active exchange
relationships with over 300 other refined product terminals, providing
flexibility and timely response capability to meet distribution needs.
Petrochemicals and Industrial Products. CITGO sells petrochemicals in
bulk to a variety of U.S. manufacturers as raw material for finished goods. The
majority of CITGO's cumene production is sold to Mount Vernon Phenol Plant
Partnership, a joint venture phenol production plant in which CITGO is a
partner. The phenol plant produces phenol and acetone for sale primarily to the
principal partner in the phenol plant for the production of plastics. Sulphur is
sold to the U.S. and international fertilizer industries; cycle oils are sold
for feedstock processing and blending; natural gas liquids are sold to the U.S.
fuel and petrochemical industry; petroleum coke is sold primarily in
international markets, through TCP Petcoke Corporation, a joint venture, for use
as kiln and boiler fuel; and residual fuel blendstocks are sold to a variety of
fuel oil blenders.
Asphalt. CITGO asphalt is generally marketed to independent paving
contractors on the East and Gulf Coasts and in the Midwest of the United States
for use in the construction and resurfacing of roadways. CITGO delivers asphalt
through three wholly-owned terminals and twenty-three leased terminals. Demand
for asphalt peaks in the summer months.
Lubricants and Waxes. CITGO markets many different types, grades and
container sizes of lubricants and wax products, with the bulk of sales
consisting of automotive oil and lubricants and industrial lubricants. Other
major lubricant products include 2-cycle engine oil and automatic transmission
fluid.
INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS
CITGO, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, CITGO International Latin
America, Inc. ("CILA"), is introducing the PDVSA and CITGO brands into various
Latin American markets which will include wholesale and retail sales of
lubricants, gasoline and distillates. Operations are in Puerto Rico, Mexico,
Ecuador, Chile and Brazil. However, CILA is reviewing and may revise its plans
for these and other countries in Latin America.
PIPELINE OPERATIONS
CITGO owns and operates a crude oil pipeline and three products
pipeline systems. CITGO also has equity interests in three crude oil pipeline
companies and six refined product pipeline companies. CITGO's pipeline interests
provide it with access to substantial refinery feedstocks and reliable
transportation to refined product markets, as well as cash flows from dividends.
One of the refined product pipelines in which CITGO has an interest, Colonial
Pipeline, is the largest refined product
12
pipeline in the United States, transporting refined products from the Gulf
Coast to the mid-Atlantic and eastern seaboard states. CITGO has a 15.8 percent
ownership interest in Colonial Pipeline.
EMPLOYEES
CITGO and its subsidiaries have a total of approximately 4,300
employees, approximately 1,500 of whom are covered by union contracts. Most of
the union employees are employed in refining operations. The remaining union
employees are located primarily at a lubricant plant and various refined product
terminals.
ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY
Environment
The Companies are subject to the federal Clean Air Act ("CAA") which
includes the New Source Review ("NSR") program as well as the Title V air
permitting program; the federal Clean Water Act which includes the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System program; the Toxic Substances Control
Act; and the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and their equivalent
state programs. The Companies are required to obtain permits under all of these
programs and have approximately 1,000 permits. These permits have terms which
vary from one to ten years after which they are subject to renewal. The
Companies believe they are in compliance with the terms of these permits.
In June 1999, CITGO and numerous other industrial companies received
notice from the U.S. EPA that the U.S. EPA believes that CITGO and these other
companies have contributed to contamination in the Calcasieu Estuary, in the
proximity of Lake Charles, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana and are Potentially
Responsible Parties ("PRPs") under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA"). The U.S. EPA made a demand for
payment of its past investigation costs from CITGO and other PRPs and is
conducting a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study ("RI/FS") under its CERCLA
authority. CITGO and other PRPs may be potentially responsible for the costs of
the RI/FS, subsequent remedial actions and natural resource damages. CITGO
disagrees with the U.S. EPA's allegations and intends to contest this matter.
CITGO does not have any additional CERCLA matters.
The U.S. refining industry is required to comply with increasingly
stringent product specifications under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments for
reformulated gasoline and low sulphur gasoline and diesel fuel that have
necessitated additional capital and operating expenditures, and altered
significantly the U.S. refining industry and the return realized on refinery
investments. Also, regulatory interpretations by the U.S. EPA regarding
"modifications" to refinery equipment under the NSR provisions of the CAA have
created uncertainty about the extent to which additional capital and operating
expenditures will be required and administrative penalties imposed.
Federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations may require
the Companies to take additional compliance actions and also actions to
remediate the effects on the environment of prior disposal or release of
petroleum, hazardous substances and other waste and/or pay for natural resource
damages. Maintaining compliance with environmental laws and regulations could
require significant capital expenditures and additional operating costs. Also,
numerous other factors affect the Companies' plans with respect to environmental
compliance and related expenditures. See "Forward Looking Statements."
The Companies' accounting policy establishes environmental reserves as
probable site restoration and remediation obligations become reasonably capable
of estimation. The Companies believe the amounts provided in their consolidated
financial statements, as prescribed by generally accepted
13
accounting principles, are adequate in light of probable and estimable
liabilities and obligations. However, there can be no assurance that the actual
amounts required to discharge alleged liabilities and obligations and to comply
with applicable laws and regulations will not exceed amounts provided for or
will not have a material adverse affect on the Companies' consolidated results
of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
In 1992, an agreement was reached between CITGO and the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality ("LDEQ") to cease usage of certain surface
impoundments at the Lake Charles refinery by 1994. A mutually acceptable closure
plan was filed with the LDEQ in 1993. CITGO and the former owner of the refinery
are participating in the closure and sharing the related costs based on
estimated contributions of waste and ownership periods. The remediation
commenced in December 1993. In 1997, CITGO presented a proposal to the LDEQ
revising the 1993 closure plan. In 1998 and 2000, CITGO submitted further
revisions as requested by the LDEQ. The LDEQ issued an administrative order in
June 2002 that addressed the requirements and schedule for proceeding to develop
and implement the corrective action or closure plan for these surface
impoundments and related waste units. Compliance with the terms of the
administrative order has begun. CITGO has incurred remediation costs to date
related to these surface impoundments of approximately $23 million. Based on
currently available information and proposed remedial approach, CITGO currently
anticipates closure and post -closure costs related to these surface
impoundments and related solid waste management units to range from $14 million
to $21 million.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ("TCEQ"), formerly known
as the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission, conducted a two-day
multi-media investigation of the Corpus Christi Refinery during 2002 and has
issued a Notice of Enforcement to CITGO which identifies 31 items of alleged
violations of Texas environmental regulations. CITGO anticipates that penalties
will be proposed with respect to these matters, but no amounts have yet been
specified.
In January and July 2001, CITGO received Notices of Violation ("NOVs")
from the U.S. EPA alleging violations of the Federal Clean Air Act. The NOVs are
an outgrowth of an industry-wide and multi-industry U.S. EPA enforcement
initiative alleging that many refineries and electric utilities modified air
emission sources without obtaining permits or installing new control equipment
under the NSR provisions of the Clean Air Act. The NOVs followed inspections and
formal Information Requests regarding CITGO's Lake Charles, Louisiana, Corpus
Christi, Texas and the Lemont, Illinois refineries. Since mid-2002, CITGO has
been engaged in global settlement negotiations with the United States. The
settlement negotiations have focused on different levels of air pollutant
emission reductions and the merits of various types of control equipment to
achieve those reductions. No settlement agreement, or agreement in principal,
has been reached. Based primarily on the costs of control equipment reported by
the United States and other petroleum companies and the types and number of
emission control devices that have been agreed to in previous petroleum
companies' NSR settlements with the United States, CITGO estimates that the
capital costs of a settlement with the United States could range from $130
million to $200 million. Any such capital costs would be incurred over a period
of years, anticipated to be from 2003 to 2008. Also, this cost estimate range,
while based on current information and judgment, is dependent on a number of
subjective factors, including the types of control devices installed, the
emission limitations set for the units, the year the technology may be
installed, and possible future operational changes. CITGO also may be subject to
possible penalties. If settlement discussions fail, CITGO is prepared to contest
the NOVs. If CITGO is found to have violated the provisions cited in the NOVs,
CITGO estimates the capital expenditures and penalties that might result could
range up to $290 million to be incurred over a period of years.
In June 1999, an NOV was issued by the U.S. EPA alleging violations of
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants regulations
covering benzene emissions from wastewater treatment operations at the Lemont,
Illinois refinery. CITGO is in settlement discussions with the U.S.
14
EPA. CITGO believes this matter will be consolidated with the matters described
in the previous paragraph.
In June 2002, a Consolidated Compliance Order and Notice of Potential
Penalty was issued by the LDEQ alleging violations of the Louisiana air quality
regulations at the Lake Charles, Louisiana refinery. CITGO is in settlement
discussions with the LDEQ.
Various regulatory authorities have the right to conduct, and from time
to time do conduct, environmental compliance audits of the Companies' facilities
and operations. Those audits have the potential to reveal matters that those
authorities believe represent non-compliance in one or more respects with
regulatory requirements and for which those authorities may seek corrective
actions and/or penalties in an administrative or judicial proceeding. Other than
matters described above, based upon current information, the Companies are not
aware that any such audits or their findings have resulted in the filing of such
a proceeding or are the subject of a threatened filing with respect to such a
proceeding, nor do the Companies believe that any such audit or their findings
will have a material adverse effect on their future business and operating
results.
Conditions which require additional expenditures may exist with respect
to various sites of the Companies including, but not limited to, the Companies'
operating refinery complexes, former refinery sites, service stations and crude
oil and petroleum product storage terminals. Based on currently available
information, the Companies cannot determine the amount of any such future
expenditures.
Increasingly stringent environmental regulatory provisions and
obligations periodically require additional capital expenditures. During 2002,
CITGO spent approximately $148 million for environmental and regulatory capital
improvements in its operations. Management currently estimates that CITGO will
spend approximately $1.3 billion for environmental and regulatory capital
projects over the five-year period 2003-2007.
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
------ ------ ----- ----- ------
(IN MILLIONS)
Tier 2 gasoline (1) $ 231 $ 125 $ 82 $ 10 $ -
Ultra low sulfur diesel (2) 3 33 179 155 175
Other environmental (3) 35 51 81 92 54
------ ------ ----- ----- ------
Total regulatory/environmental $ 269 $ 209 $ 342 $ 257 $ 229
====== ====== ===== ===== ======
- ----------
(1) In February 2000, the EPA promulgated the Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission
Standards Final Rule for all passenger vehicles, establishing standards for
sulfur content in gasoline. These regulations mandate that the average
sulfur content of gasoline for highway use produced at any refinery not
exceed 30 parts per million during any calendar year by January 1, 2006,
with a phase-in beginning January 1, 2004. In order to comply with these
regulations, CITGO will install additional hydroprocessing facilities at
its refineries. (Hydroprocessing facilities remove sulfur from oil by means
of a chemical reaction which occurs when the oil is mixed with hydrogen,
heated and processed over a catalyst.)
(2) Spending on Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel ("ULSD") assumes the EPA will require
ULSD for on-road diesel in 2006 and ULSD for off-road diesel use in 2008.
The ULSD program will require CITGO to make additional capital investments
at its refineries. The estimates shown here are based on the installation
of traditional hydroprocessing facilities. These regulations are not final
and spending could be reduced if certain alternative regulatory schemes
proposed by EPA are adopted. CITGO continues to evaluate new technological
innovations which may reduce the required investment.
(3) Other environmental spending assumes $162.9 million in spending to comply
with New Source Review standards under the Clean Air Act.
15
These estimates may vary due to a variety of factors. See "Item 7 --
Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations -- Liquidity and Capital Resources". See also "Factors Affecting
Forward Looking Statements".
Safety
Due to the nature of petroleum refining and distribution, the Companies
are subject to stringent federal and state occupational health and safety laws
and regulations. The Companies maintain comprehensive safety, training and
maintenance programs.
16
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Various lawsuits and claims arising in the ordinary course of business
are pending against the Companies. The Companies record accruals for potential
losses when, in management's opinion, such losses are probable and reasonably
estimable. If known lawsuits and claims were to be determined in a manner
adverse to the Companies, and in amounts greater than the Companies' accruals,
then such determinations could have a material adverse effect on the Companies'
results of operations in a given reporting period. The most significant lawsuits
and claims are discussed below.
A class action lawsuit brought by four former marketers of the UNO-VEN
Company ("UNO-VEN") in U.S. District Court in Wisconsin against UNO-VEN alleging
improper termination of the UNO-VEN Marketer Sales Agreement under the Petroleum
Marketing Practices Act in connection with PDVMR's 1997 acquisition of Unocal's
interest in UNO-VEN has resulted in the judge granting the Companies' motion for
summary judgment. The plaintiffs appealed the summary judgment and the Seventh
Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals has affirmed the judgment. The time for an
appeal to the U.S. Supreme court has expired, and therefore, this action is
concluded.
The Companies have settled a lawsuit against PDVMR and CITGO in
Illinois state court which claimed damages as a result of PDVMR invoicing a
partnership in which it is a partner, and an affiliate of the other partner of
the partnership, allegedly excessive charges for electricity utilized by these
entities' facilities located adjacent to the Lemont, Illinois refinery. The
electricity supplier to the refinery is seeking recovery from the Companies of
alleged underpayments for electricity. The Companies have denied all allegations
and are pursuing their defenses.
In May 1997, a fire occurred at CITGO's Corpus Christi refinery.
Approximately seventeen related lawsuits were filed in federal and state courts
in Corpus Christi, Texas against CITGO on behalf of a number of individuals,
currently estimated to be approximately 5,000, alleging property damages,
personal injury and punitive damages. In September 2002, CITGO reached an
agreement to settle substantially all of the claims related to this incident for
an amount that will not have a material financial impact on the Companies.
In September 2002, a state District Court in Corpus Christi, Texas has
ordered CITGO to pay property owners and their attorneys approximately $6
million based on alleged settlement of class action property damage claims as a
result of alleged air, soil and groundwater contamination from emissions
released from CITGO's Corpus Christi, Texas refinery. CITGO has appealed the
ruling to Texas Court of Appeals.
Litigation is pending in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana
against CITGO by a number of current and former refinery employees and
applicants asserting claims of racial discrimination in connection with CITGO's
employment practices. A trial involving two plaintiffs resulted in verdicts for
CITGO. The Court granted CITGO summary judgment with respect to another group of
plaintiffs' claims, which rulings were appealed and affirmed by the Fifth
Circuit Court of Appeals. Trials of the remaining cases are set to begin in
December 2003. CITGO does not expect that the ultimate resolution of these cases
will have an adverse material effect on its financial condition or results of
operations.
CITGO is one of several refinery defendants to state and federal
lawsuits in New York and state actions in Illinois and California alleging
contamination of water supplies by methyl tertiary butyl ether ("MTBE"), a
component of gasoline. Plaintiffs claim that MTBE is a defective product and
that refiners failed to adequately warn customers and the public about risks
associated with the use of MTBE in gasoline. These actions allege that MTBE
poses public health risks and seek testing, damages and remediation of the
alleged contamination. Plaintiffs filed putative class action lawsuits in
federal courts in Illinois, California, Florida and New York. CITGO was named as
a defendant in all but the California case. The federal cases were all
consolidated in a Multidistrict Litigation case in the United States
17
District Court for the Southern District of New York ("MDL"). In July 2002, the
court in the MDL case denied plaintiffs' motion for class certification. The
California plaintiffs in the MDL action then dismissed their federal lawsuit and
refiled in state court in California. CITGO does not expect that the resolution
of the MDL and California lawsuits will have a material impact on CITGO's
financial condition or results of operations. In August 2002, a New York state
court judge handling two separate but related individual MTBE lawsuits dismissed
plaintiffs' product liability claims, leaving only traditional nuisance and
trespass claims for leakage from underground storage tanks at gasoline stations
near plaintiffs' water wells. Subsequently, a putative class action involving
the same leaking underground storage tanks has been filed. CITGO anticipates
filing a motion to dismiss the product liability claims and will also oppose
class certification. Also, in late October 2002, The County of Suffolk, New
York, and the Suffolk County Water Authority filed suit in state court, claiming
MTBE contamination of that county's water supply. The Illinois state action has
been brought on behalf of a class of contaminated well owners in Illinois and a
second class of all well owners within a defined distance of leaking underground
storage tanks. The judge in the Illinois state court action is expected to hear
plaintiffs' motion for class certification in that case sometime within the next
year.
In August 1999, the U.S. Department of Commerce rejected a petition
filed by a group of independent oil producers to apply antidumping measures and
countervailing duties against imports of crude oil from Venezuela, Iraq, Mexico
and Saudi Arabia. The petitioners appealed this decision before the U.S. Court
of International Trade based in New York. On September 19, 2000, the Court of
International Trade remanded the case to the Department of Commerce with
instructions to reconsider its August 1999 decision. The Department of Commerce
was required to make a revised decision as to whether or not to initiate an
investigation within 60 days. The Department of Commerce appealed to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which dismissed the appeal as
premature on July 31, 2001. The Department of Commerce issued its revised
decision, which again rejected the petition, in August 2001. The revised
decision was affirmed by the Court of International Trade on December 17, 2002.
The independent oil producers may or may not appeal the Court of International
Trade's decision.
Approximately 140 lawsuits are currently pending in state and federal
courts, primarily in Louisiana and Texas arising from asbestos related illness,
in which CITGO is a named defendant. The cases were brought by former employees
and contractor employees seeking damages for asbestos related illnesses
allegedly resulting from exposure at refineries owned or operated by CITGO in
Lake Charles, Louisiana, Corpus Christi, Texas and Lemont, Illinois. In many of
these cases, there are multiple defendants. In some cases, CITGO is indemnified
by or has the right to seek indemnification for losses and expenses that it may
incur from prior owners of the refineries or employers of the claimants. CITGO
does not believe that the resolution of the cases will have an adverse material
effect on its financial condition or results of operations.
See also "ITEMS 1. and 2. Business and Properties -- Environment and
Safety" for information regarding various enforcement actions.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
Not Applicable.
18
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
PDV America's common stock is not publicly traded. All of PDV America's
common stock is held by PDV Holding, Inc. In 2002, PDV America did not declare
or pay any dividends.
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table sets forth certain selected historical consolidated
financial and operating data of PDV America as of the end of and for each of the
five years in the period ended December 31, 2002. The following table should be
read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of PDV America as
of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and for each of the three years in the period
ended December 31, 2002, included in "Item 8. Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data".
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
-----------------------------------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000 1999 1998
-------- -------- -------- ------- --------
(DOLLARS IN MILLIONS)
INCOME STATEMENT DATA
Net sales and sales to affiliates $ 19,358 $ 19,601 $ 22,157 $13,334 $ 10,960
Equity in earnings of affiliates 101 109 59 22 82
Other income (including insurance recoveries) 387 (2) (24) (27) (9)
Net revenues 19,913 19,774 22,269 13,413 11,107
Income before cumulative effect of change
in accounting principle 198 410 336 142 231
Net income 198 423 336 142 231
Other comprehensive income (loss) (22) (1) 1 (3) -
Comprehensive income 175 422 337 139 231
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges (1) 3.10 x 5.55 x 4.37 x 2.44 x 2.97 x
BALANCE SHEET DATA
Total assets $ 7,797 $ 7,352 $ 7,635 $ 7,746 $ 7,075
Long-term debt (excluding current portion)(2) 1,134 1,850 1,586 2,096 2,174
Total debt (3) 1,847 1,978 1,697 2,442 2,273
Shareholder's equity 2,879 2,704 2,789 2,718 2,601
- -----------------
(1) For the purpose of calculating the ratio of earnings to fixed charges,
"earnings" consist of income before income taxes and cumulative effect of
accounting changes plus fixed charges (excluding capitalized interest),
amortization of previously capitalized interest and certain adjustments to
equity in income of affiliates. "Fixed charges" include interest expense,
capitalized interest, amortization of debt issuance costs and a portion of
operating lease rent expense deemed to be representative of interest.
(2) Includes long-term debt to third parties and capital lease obligations.
(3) Includes short-term bank loans, current portion of capital lease
obligations and long-term debt, long-term debt and capital lease
obligations.
19
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW
The following discussion of the financial condition and results of
operations of PDV America should be read in conjunction with the consolidated
financial statements of PDV America included elsewhere herein.
Petroleum refining industry operations and profitability are influenced
by a large number of factors, some of which individual petroleum refining and
marketing companies cannot control. Governmental regulations and policies,
particularly in the areas of taxation, energy and the environment (as to which,
see "ITEMS 1. and 2. Business and Properties - Environment and Safety"), have a
significant impact on petroleum activities, regulating how companies conduct
their operations and formulate their products. Demand for crude oil and refined
products is largely driven by the condition of local and worldwide economies,
although weather patterns and taxation relative to other energy sources also
play a significant part. PDV America's consolidated operating results are
affected by these industry-specific factors and by company-specific factors,
such as the success of marketing programs and refinery operations.
The earnings and cash flows of companies engaged in the refining and
marketing business in the United States are primarily dependent upon producing
and selling quantities of refined products at margins sufficient to cover fixed
and variable costs. The refining and marketing business is characterized by high
fixed costs resulting from the significant capital outlays associated with
refineries, terminals and related facilities. This business is also
characterized by substantial fluctuations in variable costs, particularly costs
of crude oil, feedstocks and blending components, and in the prices realized for
refined products. Crude oil and refined products are commodities whose price
levels are determined by market forces beyond the control of the Companies.
In general, prices for refined products are significantly influenced by
the price of crude oil, feedstocks and blending components. Although an increase
or decrease in the price for crude oil, feedstocks and blending components
generally results in a corresponding increase or decrease in prices for refined
products, generally there is a lag in the realization of the corresponding
increase or decrease in prices for refined products. The effect of changes in
crude oil prices on PDV America's consolidated operating results therefore
depends in part on how quickly refined product prices adjust to reflect these
changes. Although the pricing formulas under CITGO's crude supply agreements
with PDVSA are designed to provide a measure of stability to CITGO's refining
margins, CITGO receives only approximately 50% of its crude oil requirements
under these agreements. Therefore, a substantial or prolonged increase in crude
oil prices without a corresponding increase in refined product prices, or a
substantial or prolonged decrease in refined product prices without a
corresponding decrease in crude oil prices, or a substantial or prolonged
decrease in demand for refined products could have a significant negative effect
on PDV America's earnings and cash flows.
As noted above, CITGO purchases a significant amount of its crude oil
requirements for its Lake Charles, Corpus Christi, Paulsboro and Savannah
refineries from PDVSA under long-term supply agreements (expiring in the years
2006 through 2013). This supply represented approximately 50% of the crude oil
processed in those refineries in the year ended December 31, 2002. These crude
supply agreements contain force majeure provisions which entitle PDVSA to reduce
the quantity of crude oil and feedstocks delivered under the crude supply
agreements under specified circumstances. For the years 2001 and 2002, PDVSA
deliveries of crude oil to CITGO were less than contractual base volumes due to
PDVSA's declaration of force majeure pursuant to all of the long-term crude oil
supply contracts related to CITGO's refineries. Therefore, CITGO was required to
obtain alternative sources of crude oil, which resulted in lower operating
margins.
20
A nation-wide work stoppage by opponents of the government of Venezuela
began on December 2, 2002, and disrupted most activity in that country,
including the operations of PDVSA. CITGO continued to be able to locate and
purchase 100% of our crude oil requirements in December 2002 and January and
February 2003, albeit at higher prices than under CITGO's supply contracts with
PDVSA, to maintain normal operations at its refineries and to meet its refined
products commitments to its customers. The reduction in supply and purchase of
crude oil from alternative sources had the effect of increasing CITGO's crude
oil cost and decreasing CITGO's gross margin and profit margin from what it
would have been if the crude oil was received under CITGO's long-term crude oil
supply contracts with PDVSA. CITGO received only 43% of its contracted crude oil
from PDVSA under the supply contracts in December 2002. As a result, CITGO
estimates that crude oil costs for the month of December 2002 were $20 million
higher than what would have otherwise been the case. In February 2003, CITGO
received approximately 100% of its contracted crude oil volumes under those
agreements. In addition, in February CITGO scheduled the purchase of
approximately 2.5 million barrels of crude oil from PDVSA at market prices;
these volumes were delivered in early March. CITGO has received confirmation
from PDVSA that they expect to deliver the full contract volume during March
2003 under the crude oil supply agreements. Finally, CITGO was notified that
effective March 6, 2003, PDVSA ended its declaration of force majeure under the
crude oil supply agreements.
CITGO also purchases significant volumes of refined products to
supplement the production from its refineries to meet marketing demands and to
resolve logistical issues. CITGO's earnings and cash flows are also affected by
the cyclical nature of petrochemical prices. As a result of the factors
described above, the earnings and cash flows of CITGO may experience substantial
fluctuations. Inflation was not a significant factor in the operations of CITGO
during the three years ended December 31, 2002.
The cost and available coverage level of property damage and business
interruption insurance to the Companies is driven, in part, by company specific
and industry factors. It is also affected by national and international events.
The present environment for the Companies is one characterized by increased cost
of coverage, higher deductibles, and some restrictions in coverage terms. This
has the potential effect of lower profitability in the near term.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with Accounting
Principles Generally Accepted in the United States of America requires that
management apply accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that
affect results of operations and the reported amounts of assets and liabilities.
The following areas are those that management believes are important to the
financial statements and which require significant judgment and estimation
because of inherent uncertainty.
Environmental Expenditures. The costs to comply with environmental
regulations are significant. Environmental expenditures incurred currently that
relate to present or future revenues are expensed or capitalized as appropriate.
Expenditures that relate to an existing condition caused by past operations and
that do not contribute to current or future revenue generation are expensed. The
Companies constantly monitor their compliance with environmental regulations and
responds promptly to issues raised by regulatory agencies. Liabilities are
recorded when environmental assessments and/or cleanups are probable and the
costs can be reasonably estimated. Environmental liabilities are not discounted
to their present value and are recorded without consideration of potential
recoveries from third parties. Subsequent adjustments to estimates, to the
extent required, may be made as more refined information becomes available.
Commodity and Interest Rate Derivatives. The Companies enter into
petroleum futures contracts, options and other over-the-counter commodity
derivatives, primarily to reduce their inventory purchase and product sale
exposure to market risk. In the normal course of business, the Companies also
enter into certain petroleum commodity forward purchase and sale contracts,
which qualify as derivatives. The
21
Companies also enter into various interest rate swap agreements to manage their
risk related to interest rate changes on their debt. Effective January 1, 2001,
fair values of derivatives are recorded in other current assets or other current
liabilities, as applicable, and changes in the fair value of derivatives not
designated in hedging relationships are recorded in income. Effective January 1,
2001, the Companies' policy is to elect hedge accounting only under limited
circumstances involving derivatives with initial terms of 90 days or greater and
notional amounts of $25 million or greater. The Companies will continue to
review their accounting treatment of derivatives and may elect hedge accounting
under certain circumstances in the future.
Litigation and Injury Claims. Various lawsuits and claims arising in
the ordinary course of business are pending against the Companies. The status of
these lawsuits and claims are continually reviewed by external and internal
legal counsel. These reviews provide the basis for which the Companies determine
whether or not to record accruals for potential losses. Accruals for losses are
recorded when, in management's opinion, such losses are probable and reasonably
estimable. If known lawsuits and claims were to be determined in a manner
adverse to the Companies, and in amounts greater than the Companies' accruals,
then such determinations could have a material adverse effect on the Companies'
results of operations in a given reporting period.
Health Care Costs. The cost of providing health care to current
employees and retired employees continues to increase at a significant rate.
Historically, the Companies have absorbed the majority of these cost increases
which reduce profitability and increase the Companies' liability. There is no
indication that the trend in health care costs will be reversed in future
periods. The Companies' liability for such health care costs is based on
actuarial calculations that could be subject to significant revision as the
underlying assumptions regarding future health care costs and interest rates
change.
Pensions. The Companies' pension cost and liability are based on
actuarial calculations, which are dependent on assumptions concerning discount
rates, expected rates of return on plan assets, employee turnover, estimated
retirement dates, salary levels at retirement and mortality rates. In addition,
differences between actual experience and the assumptions also affect the
actuarial calculations. While management believes that the assumptions used are
appropriate, differences in actual experience or changes in assumptions may
significantly affect the Companies' future pension cost and liability.
22
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE THREE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
The following table summarizes PDV America's sales revenues and
volumes.
PDV AMERICA SALES REVENUES AND VOLUMES
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
--------------------------------- ------------------------------
2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000
--------- --------- --------- ------ ------ ------
(IN MILLIONS) (GALLONS IN MILLIONS)
Gasoline $ 11,758 $ 11,316 $ 12,447 15,026 13,585 13,648
Jet fuel 1,402 1,660 2,065 2,003 2,190 2,367
Diesel / #2 fuel 3,462 3,984 4,750 5,031 5,429 5,565
Asphalt 597 502 546 902 946 812
Petrochemicals and industrial products 1,485 1,490 1,763 2,190 2,297 2,404
Lubricants and waxes 561 536 552 261 240 279
--------- --------- --------- ------ ------ ------
Total refined product sales $ 19,265 $ 19,488 $ 22,123 25,413 24,687 25,075
Other sales 93 113 34 - - -
--------- --------- --------- ------ ------ ------
Total sales $ 19,358 $ 19,601 $ 22,157 25,413 24,687 25,075
========= ========= ========= ====== ====== ======
The following table summarizes PDV America's cost of sales and
operating expenses.
PDV AMERICA COST OF SALES AND OPERATING EXPENSES
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
2002 2001 2000
--------- --------- ---------
($ IN MILLIONS)
Crude oil $ 5,098 $ 4,898 $ 6,784
Refined products 11,077 10,686 11,638
Intermediate feedstocks 1,489 1,496 1,573
Refining and manufacturing costs 1,233 1,113 1,058
Other operating costs and expenses and inventory changes 314 542 317
--------- --------- ---------
Total cost of sales and operating expenses $ 19,211 $ 18,735 $ 21,370
========= ========= =========
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -- 2002 COMPARED TO 2001
Sales revenues and volumes. Sales decreased $243 million, representing
a 1% decrease from 2001 to 2002. This was due to a decrease in average sales
price of 4% offset by an increase in sales volume of 3%. (See PDV America Sales
Revenues and Volumes table above.)
Equity in earnings of affiliates. Equity in earnings of affiliates
decreased by approximately $8 million, or 7% from $109 million in 2001 to $101
million in 2002. An increase in earnings of $4 million attributable to
LYONDELL-CITGO was more than offset by a $12 million reduction in earnings from
PDV America's other investments. For the year ended December 31, 2002,
LYONDELL-CITGO constituted a significant investment for CITGO in a
50-percent-or-less-owned person under SEC regulations. See separate financial
statements for LYONDELL-CITGO in Item 15a.
23
Insurance recoveries. The insurance recoveries of $407 million and $53
million included in the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively,
relate primarily to a fire which occurred on August 14, 2001 at the Lemont
refinery. These recoveries are, in part, reimbursements for expenses incurred in
2002 and 2001 to mitigate the effect of the fire on the Companies' earnings. The
Companies expect to recover additional amounts related to this event subject to
final settlement negotiations.
Other income (expense), net. Other income (expense) increased $36
million, or 65% from $(55) million in 2001 to $(19) million in 2002. The
increase is due primarily to the fact that during 2001, the Companies recorded
property losses and related expenses totaling $54 million in other income
(expense) related to fires at the Lemont refinery and the Lake Charles refinery.
Cost of sales and operating expenses. Cost of sales and operating
expenses increased by $476 million, or 3%, from 2001 to 2002. (See PDV America
Cost of Sales and Operating Expenses table above.)
The Companies purchase refined products to supplement the production
from their refineries to meet marketing demands and resolve logistical issues.
The refined product purchases represented 58% of cost of sales for 2002 and 57%
for 2001. These refined product purchases included purchases from LYONDELL-CITGO
and HOVENSA. The Companies estimate that margins on purchased products, on
average, are lower than margins on produced products due to the fact that the
Companies can only receive the marketing portion of the total margin received on
the produced refined products. However, purchased products are not segregated
from the Companies produced products and margins may vary due to market
conditions and other factors beyond the Companies' control. As such, it is
difficult to measure the effects on profitability of changes in volumes of
purchased products. In the near term, other than normal refinery turnaround
maintenance, the Companies do not anticipate operational actions or market
conditions which might cause a material change in anticipated purchased product
requirements; however, there could be events beyond the control of the Companies
which impact the volume of refined products purchased. (See also "Factors
Affecting Forward Looking Statements".)
As a result of purchases of crude oil supplies from alternate sources
due to PDVSA's invocation of the force majeure provisions in its crude oil
supply contracts, the Companies estimate that their cost of crude oil purchased
in 2002 increased by $42 million from what would have otherwise been the case.
Gross margin. The gross margin for 2002 was $147 million, or 0.8% of
net sales, compared to $867 million, or 4.4% of net sales, for 2001. The gross
margin decreased from 3.5 cents per gallon in 2001 to 0.6 cents per gallon in
2002 as a result of general market conditions and factors relating specifically
to the Companies including operating problems, weather related shut downs and
crude oil supply disruptions under contracts with PDVSA.
Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and
administrative expenses decreased $8 million, or 3% in 2002, primarily as a
result of a decrease in compensation offset in part by increases in marketing
expenses.
Interest Expense. Interest expense decreased $2 million, or 2% in 2002,
primarily due to the decline in interest rates on CITGO's variable rate debt.
Income taxes. PDV America's provision for income taxes in 2002 was $102
million, representing an effective tax rate of 34%. In 2001, PDV America's
provision for income taxes was $214 million, representing an effective tax rate
of 34%.
24
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -- 2001 COMPARED TO 2000
Sales revenues and volumes. Sales decreased $2.6 billion, representing
a 12% decrease from 2000 to 2001. This was due to a decrease in average sales
price of 11% and a decrease in sales volume of 2%. (See PDV America Sales
Revenues and Volumes table above.)
Equity in earnings of affiliates. Equity in earnings of affiliates
increased by approximately $50 million, or 85% from $59 million in 2000 to $109
million in 2001. The increase was primarily due to the change in the earnings of
LYONDELL-CITGO, CITGO's share of which increased $33 million, from $41 million
in 2000 to $74 million in 2001. LYONDELL-CITGO's increased earnings in 2001 are
primarily due to higher refining margins offset by the impact of lower crude
processing rates due to an unplanned production unit outage and a major
turnaround, and higher natural gas costs in the first quarter of 2001. The
earnings for 2000 were impacted by a major planned turnaround which occurred
during the second quarter of 2000.
Cost of sales and operating expenses. Cost of sales and operating
expenses decreased by $2.6 billion, or 12%, from 2000 to 2001. (See PDV America
Cost of Sales and Operating Expenses table above.)
The Companies purchase refined products to supplement the production
from their refineries to meet marketing demands and resolve logistical issues.
The refined product purchases represented 57% and 54% of cost of sales for the
years 2001 and 2000. These refined product purchases included purchases from
LYONDELL-CITGO and HOVENSA. The Companies estimate that margins on purchased
products, on average, are lower than margins on produced products due to the
fact that the Companies can only receive the marketing portion of the total
margin received on the produced refined products. However, purchased products
are not segregated from the Companies produced products and margins may vary due
to market conditions and other factors beyond the Companies' control. As such,
it is difficult to measure the effects on profitability of changes in volumes of
purchased products. In the near term, other than normal refinery turnaround
maintenance, the Companies do not anticipate operational actions or market
conditions which might cause a material change in anticipated purchased product
requirements; however, there could be events beyond the control of the Companies
that impact the volume of refined products purchased. (See also "Factors
Affecting Forward Looking Statements".)
As a result of purchases of crude oil supplies from alternate sources
due to PDVSA's invocation of the force majeure provisions in its crude oil
supply contracts, the Companies estimate that their cost of crude oil purchased
in 2001 increased by $6 million from what would have otherwise been the case.
Gross margin. The gross margin for 2001 was $867 million, or 4.4% of
net sales, compared to $787 million, or 3.5% of net sales, for 2000. The gross
margin increased from 3.1 cents per gallon in 2000 to 3.5 cents per gallon in
2001 as a result of general market conditions.
Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and
administrative expenses increased $66 million, or 29% in 2001, primarily as a
result of an increase in incentive compensation, promotion expenses, and the
start-up expenses related to an international operation in 2001.
Interest Expense. Interest expense decreased $28 million, or 20% in
2001, primarily due to lower interest rates and lower average debt outstanding
during 2001, which was driven, in large part, by a $250 million senior note
payment made in August 2000.
Income taxes. PDV America's provision for income taxes in 2001 was $214
million, representing an effective tax rate of 34%. In 2000, PDV America's
provision for income taxes was $183 million, representing an effective tax rate
of 35%.
25
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Consolidated net cash provided by operating activities totaled
approximately $844 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. Operating cash
flows were derived primarily from net income of $198 million, depreciation and
amortization of $301 million and changes in working capital of $256 million. The
change in working capital is primarily the result of increases in payables to
affiliates and trade payables and a decrease in prepaid taxes offset, in part,
by an increase in prepaid turnaround maintenance charges.
Net cash used in investing activities in 2002 totaled $789 million
consisting primarily of capital expenditures of $712 million. These capital
expenditures include $220 million in spending to rebuild the crude distillation
unit of the Lemont refinery due to a fire on August 14, 2001. The crude unit was
destroyed and the refinery's other processing units were temporarily taken out
of production. The new crude unit was operational in May 2002. Capital
expenditures also include $148 million in spending, primarily at the Lake
Charles and Lemont refineries, to meet regulatory requirements, $116 million in
spending for maintenance capital projects, primarily at the Lake Charles
refinery, and $228 million in strategic capital expenditures, primarily at the
Lake Charles, Corpus Christi and Lemont refineries.
Net cash used in financing activities totaled $131 million for the year
2002, consisting primarily of the payment of $112 million on revolving bank
loans, the payment of $25 million on master shelf agreement notes, the payment
of $31 million on taxable bonds, the payment of capital lease obligations of $20
million and the net repayments of other debt of $20 million. These payments were
offset in part by $9 million in proceeds from loans from affiliates and $69
million in proceeds from tax-exempt bonds.
As of December 31, 2002, PDV America and its subsidiaries had an
aggregate of $1.8 billion of indebtedness outstanding that matures on various
dates through the year 2032. As of December 31, 2002, the Companies' contractual
commitments to make principal payments on this indebtedness were $690 million,
$47 million and $161 million for 2003, 2004 and 2005, respectively.
In August 1993, PDV America issued $1 billion principal amount of
Senior Notes with interest rates ranging from 7.25 percent to 7.875 percent with
due dates ranging from 1998 to 2003. Interest on these notes is payable
semiannually, commencing February 1994. The Senior Notes represent senior
unsecured indebtedness of PDV America, and are structurally subordinated to the
liabilities of PDV America's subsidiaries. The Senior Notes are guaranteed by
PDVSA and Propernyn B.V., a Dutch limited liability company whose ultimate
parent is PDVSA. In August 1998, PDV America repaid the $250 million 7.25%
Senior Notes due August 1, 1998 with the proceeds received from the maturity of
$250 million of Mirror Notes due from PDVSA on July 31, 1998. On August 1, 2000,
PDV America repaid $250 million 7.75% Senior Notes due August 1, 2000 with
proceeds from the maturity of $250 million of Mirror Notes due from PDVSA on
July 31, 2000. At December 31, 2002, the outstanding balance of $499.7 million,
due on August 1, 2003, is included in current portion of long-term debt.
As of December 31, 2002, CITGO's bank credit facilities consisted of a
$260 million, three year, revolving bank loan, a $260 million, 364-day,
revolving bank loan, and a $25 million, 364-day, revolving bank loan, all of
which are unsecured and have various borrowing maturities. At December 31, 2002,
$279 million was outstanding under these credit agreements. As of December 31,
2002, CITGO's other principal indebtedness consisted of (i) $200 million in
senior notes issued in 1996, (ii) $235 million in senior notes issued pursuant
to a master shelf agreement with an insurance company, (iii) $45 million in
private placement senior notes issued in 1991, (iv) $426 million in obligations
related to tax exempt bonds issued by various governmental units, and (v) $115
million in obligations related to taxable bonds issued by various governmental
units. (See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America - Notes 10 and 11
in Item 15a.)
26
The Companies' various debt instruments require maintenance of a
specified minimum net worth and impose restrictions on their ability to:
- incur additional debt unless it meets specified interest coverage and
debt to capitalization ratios;
- place liens on its property, subject to specified exceptions;
- sell assets, subject to specified exceptions;
- make restricted payments, including dividends, repurchases of capital
stock and specified investments; and
- Merge, consolidate or transfer assets.
Upon the occurrence of a change of control of CITGO, as defined in the Indenture
governing CITGO's 11-3/8% Senior Notes due February 1, 2011, the holders of
those notes have the right to require CITGO to repurchase them at a price equal
to 101% of the principal amount thereof plus accrued interest. In addition,
CITGO's bank credit agreements provide that, unless lenders holding two-thirds
of the commitments thereunder otherwise agree, a change in control of CITGO, as
defined in those agreements, will constitute a default under those credit
agreements.
The Companies are in compliance with their obligations under their debt
financing arrangements at December 31, 2002.
Capital expenditure projected amounts for 2003 and 2004 through 2007
are as follows:
PDV AMERICA ESTIMATED CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - 2003 THROUGH 2007
2004-
2003 2007
PROJECTED (1) PROJECTED
------------- ---------
(IN MILLIONS)
Strategic $ 88 $ 535
Maintenance 91 502
Regulatory / Environmental 269 1,037
------- ---------
Total $ 448 $ 2,074
======= =========
- -----------
(1) Reflects reduction in 2003 projected capital expenditures discussed
below. These estimates may change as future regulatory events unfold.
See "Factors Affecting Forward Looking Statements."
Estimated capital expenditures necessary to comply with the Clean Air
Act and other environmental laws and regulations are summarized below. See
"Factors Affecting Forward Looking Statements."
27
BEYOND
2003 2004 2005 2006 2006
------ ------- ------- ------- -------
(IN MILLIONS)
Tier 2 gasoline (1) $ 231 $ 125 $ 82 $ 10 $ -
Ultra low sulfur diesel (2) 3 33 179 155 249
Other environmental (3) 35 51 81 92 81
------ ------- ------- ------- -------
Total regulatory/environmental $ 269 $ 209 $ 342 $ 257 $ 330
====== ======= ======= ======= =======
- ----------------
(1) In February 2000, the EPA promulgated the Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission
Standards Final Rule for all passenger vehicles, establishing standards for
sulfur content in gasoline. These regulations mandate that the average
sulfur content of gasoline for highway use produced at any refinery not
exceed 30 parts per million during any calendar year by January 1, 2006,
with a phase-in beginning January 1, 2004. In order to comply with these
regulations, CITGO will install additional hydroprocessing facilities at
its refineries. (Hydroprocessing facilities remove sulfur from oil by means
of a chemical reaction which occurs when the oil is mixed with hydrogen,
heated and processed over a catalyst.)
(2) Spending on Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel ("ULSD") assumes the EPA will require
ULSD for on-road diesel in 2006 and ULSD for off-road diesel use in 2008.
The ULSD program will require CITGO to make additional capital investments
at its refineries. The estimates shown here are based on the installation
of traditional hydroprocessing facilities. These regulations are not final
and spending could be reduced if certain alternative regulatory schemes
proposed by EPA are adopted. CITGO continues to evaluate new technological
innovations which may reduce the required investment.
(3) Other environmental spending assumes $162.9 million in spending to comply
with New Source Review standards under the Clean Air Act.
Internally generated cash flow, together with borrowings available
under the Companies' credit facilities, are expected to be sufficient to fund
these capital expenditures. In addition, the Companies have taken steps to
reduce their capital expenditures in 2003 by approximately $250 million and will
reassess the economics of the postponed projects at a later date. Finally, the
Companies are continuing to review the timing and amount of scheduled
expenditures under their planned capital spending programs, including regulatory
and environmental projects in the near term.
The Companies believe that they will have sufficient capital resources
to carry out planned capital spending programs, including regulatory and
environmental projects in the near term, and to meet currently anticipated
future obligations and other planned expenditures as they arise. The Companies
periodically evaluate other sources of capital in the marketplace and
anticipates that long-term capital requirements will be satisfied with current
capital resources and future financing arrangements, including the issuance of
debt securities. The Companies' ability to obtain such financing will depend on
numerous factors, including market conditions and the perceived creditworthiness
of the Companies at that time. See also "Factors Affecting Forward Looking
Statements."
PDV America and its subsidiaries form a part of the PDV Holding
consolidated Federal income tax return. The Companies have a tax allocation
agreement with PDV Holding, which is designed to provide PDV Holding with
sufficient cash to pay its consolidated income tax liabilities. (See
Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America -- Note 1 and Note 5 in Item
15a).
The sources of the Companies' liquidity changed recently as a result of
events that have occurred in Venezuela. Those events affected a portion of the
crude oil supplies that CITGO received from PDVSA, requiring it to replace those
supplies from other sources at higher prices and on payment terms generally less
favorable than the terms under CITGO's supply agreements with PDVSA. However,
PDVSA allowed extended payment terms during this period. CITGO received
approximately 43% and 91% of CITGO's contracted crude oil volumes from PDVSA
during December and January, respectively. In February 2003, CITGO received
approximately 100% of CITGO's contracted crude oil volumes under those
agreements. In addition, CITGO was able to purchase approximately 2.5 million
barrels of crude
28
oil from PDVSA during February at market prices. Finally, CITGO received
confirmation from PDVSA that they expect to deliver the full contract volume
during March 2003 under the crude oil supply agreements. During this supply
disruption, CITGO was successful in covering any shortfall with spot market
purchases, but those purchases generally required payment 15 days sooner than
would be the case for comparable deliveries under CITGO's supply agreements with
PDVSA. This shortening of CITGO's payment cycle has increased its cash needs and
reduced its liquidity. Also, a number of trade creditors have sought to tighten
credit payment terms on purchases that CITGO makes from them. That tightening
would further increase its cash needs and further reduce its liquidity.
In addition, all three major rating agencies lowered CITGO's and PDV
America's credit ratings based upon, among other things, concerns regarding the
supply disruption. One of the downgrades caused a termination event under
CITGO's existing accounts receivables sale facility, which ultimately led to the
repurchase of $125 million in accounts receivable and the cancellation of the
facility on January 31, 2003. That facility had a maximum size of $225 million,
of which $125 million was used at the time of cancellation. In the ordinary
course of business CITGO maintains uncommitted short-term lines of credit with
several commercial banks. Effective following the debt ratings downgrade, these
uncommitted lines of credit are not currently available. CITGO's committed
revolving credit facilities remain available.
Letter of credit providers for $76 million of CITGO's outstanding
letters of credit have indicated that they will not renew such letters of
credit. These letters of credit support approximately $75 million of tax-exempt
bond issues that were issued previously for CITGO's benefit. In March 2003,
CITGO repurchased these tax-exempt revenue bonds. CITGO expects that it will
seek to reissue these tax-exempt bonds with replacement letters of credit in
support if it is able to obtain such letters of credit from other financial
institutions or, alternatively, it will seek to replace these tax-exempt bonds
with new tax-exempt bonds that will not require letter of credit support. CITGO
has an additional $231 million of letters of credit outstanding that back or
support other bond issues that it has issued through governmental entities,
which are subject to renewal during 2003. CITGO has not received any notice from
the issuers of these additional letters of credit indicating an intention not to
renew. However, CITGO cannot be certain that any of its letters of credit will
be renewed, that it will be successful in obtaining replacements if they are not
renewed, that any replacement letters of credit will be on terms as advantageous
as those it currently holds or that it will be able to arrange for replacement
tax-exempt bonds that will not require letter of credit support. To the extent
that issuers of these letters of credit do not renew, CITGO is not successful in
obtaining replacements if they are not renewed, or that CITGO is not successful
in arranging for replacement tax-exempt bonds that will not require letter of
credit support, this will increase CITGO's cash needs and reduce its liquidity.
CITGO believes that it has and will continue to have sufficient liquidity to
accommodate any of these potential outcomes.
In August 2002, two affiliates entered into agreements to advance
excess cash to CITGO from time to time under demand notes. These notes provide
for maximum amounts of $10 million from PDV Texas, Inc. and $10 million from PDV
Holding. If a demand were to be made under these notes, it would further tighten
CITGO's liquidity. At December 31, 2002, the outstanding amounts under these
notes were $5 million and $4 million, respectively. On February 27, 2003, CITGO
repaid $5 million to PDV Texas, Inc. and $4 million to PDV Holding.
Operating cash flow represents a primary source for meeting CITGO's
liquidity requirements; however, the termination of its accounts receivable sale
facility, the possibility of additional tightened payment terms and the possible
need to replace non-renewing letters of credit prompted CITGO to undertake
arrangements to supplement and improve its liquidity. To date, CITGO has
undertaken the following:
- On February 27, 2003 CITGO issued $550 million aggregate principal
amount of 11-3/8 percent unsecured senior notes due February 1, 2011.
29
- On February 27, 2003, CITGO closed on a three year $200 million, senior
secured term loan. Security is provided by CITGO's 15.8 percent equity
interest in Colonial Pipeline and CITGO's 6.8 percent equity interest
in Explorer Pipeline.
- On February 28, 2003, a new accounts receivable sales facility was
established. This facility allows for the non-recourse sale of certain
accounts receivable to independent third parties. A maximum of $200
million in accounts receivable may be sold at any one time. This new
facility does not contain any covenants that trigger increased costs or
burdens as a result of a change in CITGO's securities ratings.
- CITGO has reduced its planned capital expenditures in 2003 by
approximately $250 million.
In addition, CITGO is working on a transaction that, if consummated,
will provide CITGO with up to $100 million from the transfer of title to a third
party of certain of CITGO's refined products at the time those products are
delivered into the custody of interstate pipelines. CITGO would expect the terms
of any such agreement to include an option to acquire like volumes of refined
products from the third party at prevailing prices at predetermined transfer
points.
As of December 31, 2002, CITGO had an effective shelf registration
statement with the SEC under which it could have publicly offered up to $400
million principal amount of debt securities. Due to downgradings of CITGO's
credit ratings announced during the first part of 2003, the shelf registration
statement is not presently available. CITGO may not be able to access the public
market if and when it would like to do so. Due, at the time, to the prospect of
the Venezuelan work stoppage, in December 2002, CITGO postponed a planned
offering of up to $250 million of unsecured notes from its shelf-registration
statement.
PDV America's and CITGO's senior unsecured debt ratings, as currently
assessed by the three major debt rating agencies, are as follows:
PDV
America CITGO
------- -----
Moody's Investor's Services Caa1 Ba3
Standard & Poor's Ratings Group B+ B+
Fitch Investors Services, Inc. B- B+
CITGO's secured debt ratings, as currently assessed by the three major
debt rating agencies, are as follows:
Moody's Investor's Services Ba2
Standard & Poor's Ratings Group BB-
Fitch Investors Services, Inc. Not Rated
In connection with their recent downgrades of the Companies debt
ratings, the three major rating agencies have all noted concerns regarding the
continuing Venezuelan oil supply disruption. Moody's and Fitch have announced
that they continue to keep the Companies' securities on negative watch. S&P
recently changed its review to developing from negative, but noted the
importance of improved crude oil shipping volumes and external financing to
restoring liquidity. Moody's also noted concern that PDV America may need
substantial assistance from CITGO in order to pay off $500 million of notes
maturing in August 2003. PDV America holds a $500 million mirror note due from
PDVSA which is designed to provide sufficient liquidity to PDV America to make
this payment. While PDVSA's obligation remains unchanged, CITGO may use a
portion of the net proceeds from the sale of its 11-3/8% senior notes (described
above) to pay a portion of a dividend of up to $500 million to PDV America to
provide funds
30
for the repayment of PDV America's notes due August 2003, if CITGO satisfies the
conditions under the indenture governing its 11-3/8% senior notes to make such a
dividend.
The Companies' debt instruments do not contain any covenants that
trigger increased costs or burdens as a result of a change in its securities
ratings. However, certain of CITGO's guarantee agreements, which support
approximately $20 million of PDV Texas, Inc., an affiliate, letters of credit,
require CITGO to cash collateralize the applicable letters of credit upon a
reduction of CITGO's credit rating below a stated level.
As of February 28, 2003, PDV America and its subsidiaries had a total
of $2.5 billion of indebtedness outstanding that matures on various dates
through the year 2032:
000's omitted)
Revolving bank loans $ 285,000
Senior Secured Term Loan 200,000
Senior Notes $200 million face amount, due 2006
with interest rate of 7.875% 149,925
Senior Notes due 2003 with interest rate of 7.875% 499,757
Senior Notes $550 million face amount, due 2011
with interest rate of 11.375% 546,590
Private Placement Senior Notes, due 2003 to 2006
with interest rate of 9.30% 45,455
Master Shelf Agreement Senior Notes, due 2003 to 2009
with interest rates from 7.17% to 8.94% 235,000
Tax-Exempt Bonds, due 2004 to 2032 with variable and
fixed interest rates 425,872
Taxable Bonds, due 2026 to 2028 with variable interest rates 115,000
--------------
$ 2,502,599
==============
As of February 28, 2003, the Companies had $929 million in cash and
cash equivalents. CITGO intends to eliminate the amount of debt outstanding
under its revolving bank loans by the end of March 2003.
As of February 28, 2003 CITGO had net accounts payable of approximately
$361.9 million related to crude oil and refined product purchases from PDVSA for
which CITGO had not received invoices and which were outside the normal payment
terms. Through March 15, 2003, CITGO had paid $184.9 million to PDVSA for the
February accounts payable. Accounts receivable from a subsidiary of PDVSA for
sales made by CITGO that were past due on February 28, 2003 totaled $19.2
million.
PDV America believes that it has adequate liquidity from existing
sources to support its operations for the foreseeable future. The Companies are
continuing to review their operations for opportunities to reduce operating and
capital expenditures.
On February 27, 2003, the Company paid a dividend in the amount of
$20.5 million to its parent, PDV Holding.
31
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS
The following table summarizes future payments for PDV America's
contractual obligations at December 31, 2002.
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS
AT DECEMBER 31, 2002
EXPIRATION
-------------------------------------
LESS THAN YEAR YEAR OVER 5
TOTAL 1 YEAR 2-3 4-5 YEARS
----- --------- --- --- -----
($ in millions)
Long-Term Debt $ 1,800 $ 690 $ 209 $ 313 $ 588
Capital Lease Obligations 47 23 5 6 13
Operating Leases 255 106 101 35 13
------- ------- ------ ------ ------
Total Contractual Cash Obligations $ 2,102 $ 819 $ 315 $ 354 $ 614
======= ======= ====== ====== ======
(See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America--Notes 11 and 15 in Item
15a).
The following table summarizes PDV America's contingent commitments at
December 31, 2002.
OTHER COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS
AT DECEMBER 31, 2002
EXPIRATION
TOTAL -----------------------------------
AMOUNTS LESS THAN YEAR YEAR OVER 5
COMMITTED 1 YEAR 2-3 4-5 YEARS
--------- ---------- ----- ---- ------
($ in millions)
Letters of Credit (1) $ 3 $ 3 $ - $ - $ -
Guarantees 73 67 2 3 1
Surety Bonds 71 58 11 2 -
------ ------ ----- ---- ------
Total Commercial Commitments $ 147 $ 128 $ 13 $ 5 $ 1
====== ====== ===== ==== ======
- -------------
(1) The Company has outstanding letters of credit totaling approximately $451
million, which includes $448 million related to the Company's tax-exempt
and taxable revenue bonds shown in the table of contractual obligations
above.
(See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America--Note 14 in Item 15a).
32
NEW ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
In July 2001, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, "Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets" ("SFAS No. 142") which is fully effective in fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2001, although certain provisions of SFAS No. 142
are applicable to goodwill and other intangible assets acquired in transactions
completed after June 30, 2001. SFAS No. 142 addresses financial accounting and
reporting for acquired goodwill and other intangible assets and requires that
goodwill and intangibles with an indefinite life no longer be amortized but
instead be periodically reviewed for impairment. The adoption of SFAS No. 142
did not materially impact the Companies' financial position or results of
operations.
On January 1, 2003 the Companies adopted Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations"
(SFAS No. 143) which addresses financial accounting and reporting for
obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets and the
associated asset retirement costs. It applies to legal obligations associated
with the retirement of long-lived assets that result from the acquisition,
construction, development and/or the normal operation of a long-lived asset,
except for certain obligations of lessees. The Companies have identified certain
asset retirement obligations that are within the scope of the standard,
including obligations imposed by certain state laws pertaining to closure and/or
removal of storage tanks, contractual removal obligations included in certain
easement and right-of-way agreements associated with the Companies' pipeline
operations, and contractual removal obligations relating to a refinery
processing unit located within a third-party entity's facility. The Companies
cannot currently determine a reasonable estimate of the fair value of their
asset retirement obligations due to the fact that the related assets have
indeterminate useful lives which preclude development of assumptions about the
potential timing of settlement dates. Such obligations will be recognized in the
period in which sufficient information exists to estimate a range of potential
settlement dates. Accordingly, the adoption of SFAS No. 143 did not impact the
Companies' financial position or results of operations.
In August 2001, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 144, "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived
Assets" ("SFAS No. 144") which addresses financial accounting and reporting for
the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets by requiring that one accounting
model be used for long-lived assets to be disposed of by sale, whether
previously held and used or newly acquired, and by broadening the presentation
of discontinued operations to include more disposal transactions. SFAS No. 144
is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2001, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption
of SFAS No. 144 did not impact the Companies' financial position or results of
operations.
In November 2002, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 45, "Guarantor's
Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect
Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others." This interpretation elaborates on the
disclosures to be made by a guarantor in its financial statements about its
obligations under certain guarantees that it has issued. It also requires a
guarantor to recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the
fair value of the obligations it has undertaken in issuing the guarantee. The
initial recognition and initial measurement provisions of the interpretation are
applicable on a prospective basis to guarantees issued or modified after
December 31, 2002. The disclosure requirements are effective for financial
statements of interim or annual periods ending after December 15, 2002. (See
Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America - Note 14 in Item 15a.)
In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation
of Variable Interest Entities" ("FIN 46"), which clarifies the application of
Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, "Consolidated Financial Statements." FIN 46
defines variable interest entities and how an enterprise should assess its
interests in a variable interest entity to decide whether to consolidate that
entity. The interpretation requires certain minimum disclosures with respect to
variable interest entities in which an enterprise holds significant variable
interest but which it does not consolidate. FIN 46 applies
33
immediately to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and to
variable interest entities in which an enterprise obtains an interest after that
date. It applies in the first fiscal year or interim period beginning after June
15, 2003 to variable interest entities in which an enterprise holds a variable
interest that it acquired before February 1, 2003. FIN 46 applies to public
enterprises as of the beginning of the applicable interim or annual period, and
it applies to nonpublic enterprises as of the end of the applicable annual
period. FIN 46 may be applied prospectively with a cumulative-effect adjustment
as of the date on which it is first applied or by restating previously issued
financial statements for one or more years with a cumulative-effect adjustment
as of the beginning of the first year restated. The Companies have not
determined the impact on their financial position or results of operations that
may result from the application of FIN 46.
PROPOSED ACCOUNTING CHANGE
The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants ("AICPA") has
issued a "Statement of Position" exposure draft on cost capitalization that is
expected to require companies to expense the non-capital portion of major
maintenance costs as incurred. The statement is expected to require that any
existing unamortized deferred non-capital major maintenance costs be expensed
immediately. This statement also has provisions which will change the method of
determining depreciable lives. The impact on future depreciation expense is not
determinable at this time. The exposure draft indicates that this change will be
required to be adopted for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2003, and that
the effect of expensing existing unamortized deferred non-capital major
maintenance costs will be reported as a cumulative effect of an accounting
change in the consolidated statement of income. Currently, the AICPA is
discussing the future of this exposure draft with the FASB. The final accounting
requirements and timing of required adoption are not known at this time. At
December 31, 2002, the Companies had included turnaround costs of $210 million
in other assets. The Companies' management has not determined the amount, if
any, of these costs that could be capitalized under the provisions of the
exposure draft.
34
ITEM 7 A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Introduction. CITGO has exposure to price fluctuations of crude oil and
refined products as well as fluctuations in interest rates. To manage these
exposures, management has defined certain benchmarks consistent with its
preferred risk profile for the environment in which CITGO operates and finances
its assets. CITGO does not attempt to manage the price risk related to all of
its inventories of crude oil and refined products. As a result, at December 31,
2002, CITGO was exposed to the risk of broad market price declines with respect
to a substantial portion of its crude oil and refined product inventories. As of
December 31, 2002 CITGO's total crude and refined products inventory was 49
million barrels. Aggregate commodity derivative positions entered into for price
risk management purposes at that date totaled 1.6 million barrels. The following
disclosures do not attempt to quantify the price risk associated with such
commodity inventories.
Commodity Instruments. CITGO balances its crude oil and petroleum
product supply/demand and manages a portion of its price risk by entering into
petroleum commodity derivatives. Generally, CITGO's risk management strategies
qualified as hedges through December 31, 2000. Effective January 1, 2001,
CITGO's policy is to elect hedge accounting only under limited circumstances
involving derivatives with initial terms of 90 days or greater and notional
amounts of $25 million or greater. At December 31, 2002, none of CITGO's
commodity derivatives were accounted for as hedges.
35
NON TRADING COMMODITY DERIVATIVES
OPEN POSITIONS AT DECEMBER 31, 2002
MATURITY NUMBER OF CONTRACT MARKET
COMMODITY DERIVATIVE DATE CONTRACTS VALUE VALUE (4)
--------- ---------- -------- --------- -------- ---------
($ in millions)
---------------
No Lead Gasoline (1) Futures Purchased 2003 564 $ 19.9 $ 20.6
Futures Sold 2003 1,023 $ 35.3 $ 37.6
Listed Options Purchased 2003 1,225 $ - $ 4.2
Listed Options Sold 2003 2,225 $ - $ (5.5)
Forward Purchase Contracts 2003 2,577 $ 89.2 $ 92.5
Forward Sales Contracts 2003 2,364 $ 81.3 $ 86.2
Distillates (1) Futures Purchased 2003 2,227 $ 73.4 $ 78.7
Futures Purchased 2004 31 $ 0.8 $ 0.9
Futures Sold 2003 2,953 $ 93.2 $ 96.7
OTC Options Purchased 2003 66 $ - $ 0.1
OTC Options Sold 2003 66 $ - $ (0.1)
OTC Swaps (Pay Fixed/Receive Float) (3) 2003 12 $ - $ -
OTC Swaps (Pay Float/Receive Fixed) (3) 2003 75 $ - $ -
Forward Purchase Contracts 2003 3,134 $ 106.5 $ 111.0
Forward Sale Contracts 2003 2,944 $ 98.1 $ 104.7
Crude Oil (1) Futures Purchased 2003 1,986 $ 51.2 $ 54.5
Futures Sold 2003 1,476 $ 41.8 $ 45.3
Listed Options Purchased 2003 2,250 $ - $ 2.3
Listed Options Sold 2003 3,150 $ - $ (3.1)
OTC Swaps (Pay Float/Receive Fixed) (3) 2003 3,500 $ - $ (3.0)
Forward Purchase Contracts 2003 5,721 $ 160.8 $ 174.4
Forward Sale Contracts 2003 4,412 $ 129.8 $ 137.2
Natural Gas (2) Listed Options Purchased 2003 85 $ - $ 0.1
Listed Options Sold 2003 40 $ - $ 0.1
Propane (1) OTC Swaps (Pay Fixed / Receive Float) (3) 2003 75 $ - $ 0.5
OTC Swaps (Pay Float / Receive Fixed) (3) 2003 300 $ - $ (1.5)
- --------------
(1) 1,000 barrels per contract
(2) Ten-thousands of mmbtu per contract
(3) Floating price based on market index designated in contract; fixed price
agreed upon at date of contract.
(4) Based on actively quoted prices.
36
NON TRADING COMMODITY DERIVATIVES
OPEN POSITIONS AT DECEMBER 31, 2001
MATURITY NUMBER OF CONTRACT MARKET
COMMODITY DERIVATIVE DATE CONTRACTS VALUE VALUE (4)
--------- ---------- -------- --------- -------- ---------
($ in millions)
---------------
No Lead Gasoline (1) Futures Purchased 2002 994 $ 25.4 $ 25.0
Futures Sold 2002 332 $ 8.3 $ 8.1
Forward Purchase Contracts 2002 4,095 $ 95.8 $ 94.0
Forward Sale Contracts 2002 3,148 $ 71.2 $ 73.2
Distillates (1) Futures Purchased 2002 1,483 $ 43.4 $ 34.6
Futures Purchased 2003 94 $ 2.4 $ 2.3
Futures Sold 2002 943 $ 25.3 $ 21.8
OTC Options Purchased 2002 30 $ - $ -
OTC Options Sold 2002 30 $ (0.1) $ (0.1)
Forward Purchase Contracts 2002 1,123 $ 25.2 $ 24.9
Forward Sale Contracts 2002 2,536 $ 56.3 $ 56.4
Crude Oil (1) Futures Purchased 2002 517 $ 12.6 $ 10.4
Futures Sold 2002 649 $ 12.7 $ 12.9
OTC Swaps (Pay Float/Receive Fixed)(3) 2002 2 $ - $ 0.3
OTC Swaps (Pay Fixed/Receive Float)(3) 2002 1 $ - $ -
Forward Purchase Contracts 2002 6,652 $ 130.3 $ 135.2
Forward Sale Contracts 2002 6,268 $ 135.1 $ 137.0
Natural Gas (2) Futures Sold 2002 55 $ 1.6 $ 1.4
OTC Options Sold 2002 20 $ - $ (0.1)
- ---------------
(1) 1,000 barrels per contract
(2) Ten-thousands of mmbtu per contract
(3) Floating price based on market index designated in contract; fixed price
agreed upon at date of contract.
(4) Based on actively quoted prices.
37
Debt Related Instruments. CITGO has fixed and floating U.S. currency
denominated debt. CITGO uses interest rate swaps to manage its debt portfolio
toward a benchmark of 40 to 60 percent fixed rate debt to total fixed and
floating rate debt. These instruments have the effect of changing the interest
rate with the objective of minimizing CITGO's long-term costs. At December 31,
2002 and 2001, CITGO's primary exposures were to LIBOR and floating rates on tax
exempt bonds.
For interest rate swaps, the table below presents notional amounts and
interest rates by expected (contractual) maturity dates. Notional amounts are
used to calculate the contractual payments to be exchanged under the contracts.
NON TRADING INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES
OPEN POSITIONS AT DECEMBER 31, 2002 AND 2001
NOTIONAL
FIXED PRINCIPAL
VARIABLE RATE INDEX EXPIRATION DATE RATE PAID AMOUNT
- ------------------- --------------- --------- ---------
($ in millions)
J.J. Kenny February 2005 5.30% $ 12
J.J. Kenny February 2005 5.27% 15
J.J. Kenny February 2005 5.49% 15
-----
$ 42
=====
Interest expense includes $0.6 million in 2000 related to the net
settlements on these agreements. Effective January 1, 2001, changes in the fair
value of these agreements are recorded in other income (expense). The fair value
of the interest rate swap agreements in place at December 31, 2002, based on the
estimated amount that CITGO would receive or pay to terminate the agreements as
of that date and taking into account current interest rates, was a loss of $3.5
million, the offset of which is recorded in the balance sheet caption other
current liabilities.
38
For debt obligations, the table below presents principal cash flows and
related weighted average interest rates by expected maturity dates. Weighted
average variable rates are based on implied forward rates in the yield curve at
the reporting date.
DEBT OBLIGATIONS
AT DECEMBER 31, 2002
EXPECTED
EXPECTED FIXED AVERAGE FIXED VARIABLE AVERAGE VARIABLE
MATURITIES RATE DEBT INTEREST RATE RATE DEBT INTEREST RATE
- ---------- --------- ------------- --------- -------------
($ in millions) ($ in millions)
2003 $ 561 7.98% $ 129 2.60%
2004 31 8.02% 16 3.78%
2005 11 9.30% 150 5.77%
2006 252 8.06% - -
2007 50 8.94% 12 8.76%
Thereafter 183 7.50% 405 10.22%
------- ---- --------- -----
Total $ 1,088 7.97% $ 712 7.73%
======= ==== ========= =====
Fair Value $ 1,039 $ 712
======= =========
DEBT OBLIGATIONS
AT DECEMBER 31, 2001
EXPECTED
EXPECTED FIXED AVERAGE FIXED VARIABLE AVERAGE VARIABLE
MATURITIES RATE DEBT INTEREST RATE RATE DEBT INTEREST RATE
- ---------- --------------- ------------- --------------- ----------------
($ in millions) ($ in millions)
2002 $ 36 8.78% $ 71 3.45%
2003 560 7.98% 320 4.64%
2004 31 8.02% 16 5.72%
2005 11 9.30% - -
2006 251 8.06% - -
Thereafter 130 7.85% 485 8.50%
------ ---- -------- ----
Total $1,019 8.03% $ 892 6.66%
====== ==== ======== ====
Fair Value $1,035 $ 892
====== ========
39
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
The Consolidated Financial Statements, the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements and the Independent Auditors' Report are included in Item
15a of this report.
QUARTERLY RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following is a summary of the quarterly results of operations for
the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001:
1ST QTR. 2ND QTR. 3RD QTR. 4TH QTR.
(000s OMITTED)
2002
Sales $ 3,671,422 $ 4,793,441 $ 5,410,571 $ 5,482,888
============= ============= ============= =============
Cost of sales and operating expenses $ 3,708,903 $ 4,686,882 $ 5,298,606 $ 5,516,925
============= ============= ============= =============
Gross margin $ (37,481) $ 106,559 $ 111,965 $ (34,037)
============= ============= ============= =============
Net (loss) income $ (11,851) $ 100,007 $ 60,816 $ 48,678
============= ============= ============= =============
1ST QTR. 2ND QTR. 3RD QTR. 4TH QTR.
(000s OMITTED)
2001
Sales $ 4,961,551 $ 5,755,971 $ 5,168,112 $ 3,715,534
============= ============= ============= =============
Cost of sales and operating expenses $ 4,757,046 $ 5,308,280 $ 4,986,147 $ 3,683,179
============= ============= ============= =============
Gross margin $ 204,505 $ 447,691 $ 181,965 $ 32,355
============= ============= ============= =============
Income (loss) before cumulative effect
of change in accounting principle $ 104,470 $ 255,465 $ 76,158 $ (26,322)
============= ============= ============= =============
Net income (loss) $ 118,070 $ 255,465 $ 76,158 $ (26,322)
============= ============= ============= =============
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
None.
40
PART III
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
The registrant meets the conditions set forth in General Instructions
(I)(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore omitting the information
otherwise required by Item 10 of Form 10-K relating to Directors and Executive
Officers as permitted by General Instruction (I)(2)(c).
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The registrant meets the conditions set forth in General Instructions
(I)(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore omitting the information
otherwise required by Item 11 of Form 10-K relating to executive compensation as
permitted by General Instruction (I)(2)(c).
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
Not applicable.
41
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
PDV America is a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of PDVSA. As a
result, PDVSA either directly or indirectly, nominates and selects members of
the board of directors of PDV America and its subsidiaries.
CITGO has entered into several transactions with PDVSA or affiliates of
PDVSA, including crude oil and feedstock supply agreements, agreements for the
purchase of refined products and transportation agreements. Under these
agreements, CITGO purchased approximately $3.3 billion of crude oil, feedstocks
and refined products at market related prices from PDVSA in 2002. At December
31, 2002, $262 million was included in CITGO's current payable to affiliates as
a result of its transactions with PDVSA. At December 31, 2002, CITGO had
approximately $90 million in accounts payable related to crude oil deliveries
from PDVSA for which CITGO had not received invoices. (See "Items 1. and 2.
Business and Properties -- Crude Oil and Refined Product Purchases" for a
description of the contracts and the pricing mechanism).
Most of the crude oil and feedstocks purchased by CITGO from PDVSA are
delivered on tankers owned by PDV Marina, S.A., a wholly-owned subsidiary of
PDVSA. In 2002, 56% of the PDVSA contract crude oil delivered to the Lake
Charles and Corpus Christi refineries was delivered on tankers operated by this
PDVSA subsidiary.
LYONDELL-CITGO owns and operates a 265 MBPD refinery in Houston, Texas.
LYONDELL-CITGO was formed in 1993 by subsidiaries of CITGO and Lyondell ("the
Owners"). The heavy crude oil processed by the Houston refinery is supplied by
PDVSA under a long-term crude oil supply agreement through the year 2017. Under
this agreement, LYONDELL-CITGO purchased approximately $1.3 billion of crude oil
and feedstocks at market related prices from PDVSA in 2002. CITGO purchases
substantially all of the gasoline, diesel and jet fuel produced at the Houston
refinery under a long-term contract. (See Consolidated Financial Statements of
PDV America -- Notes 4 and 5 in Item 15a). Various disputes exist between
LYONDELL-CITGO and the partners and their affiliates concerning the
interpretation of these and other agreements between the parties relating to the
operation of the refinery.
CITGO's participation interest in LYONDELL-CITGO was approximately 41%
at December 31, 2002, in accordance with agreements between the Owners
concerning such interest. CITGO held a note receivable from LYONDELL-CITGO of
$35 million at December 31, 2002. The note bears interest at market rates which
were approximately 2.4% at December 31, 2002, and is due in December 2004.
On December 11, 2002, LYONDELL-CITGO completed a refinancing of its
working capital revolver and its $450 million term bank loan. The new term loan
and working capital revolver, secured by substantially all of the assets of
LYONDELL-CITGO, will mature in June 2004.
CITGO accounts for its investment in LYONDELL-CITGO using the equity
method of accounting and records its share of the net earnings of LYONDELL-CITGO
based on allocations of income agreed to by the Owners. Cash distributions are
allocated to the owners based on participation interest.
In October 1998, PDVSA V.I., Inc., an affiliate of PDVSA, acquired a
50% equity interest in HOVENSA and has the right under a product sales agreement
to assign periodically to CITGO, or other related parties, its option to
purchase 50% of the refined products produced by HOVENSA (less a certain portion
of such products that HOVENSA will market directly in the local and Caribbean
markets). In addition, under the product sales agreement, the PDVSA affiliate
has appointed CITGO as its agent in designating which of its affiliates shall
from time to time take deliveries of the refined products available to it. The
product sales agreement will be in effect for the life of the joint venture,
subject to termination events based on default or mutual agreement (See
Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America --
42
Notes 3 and 5 in Item 15a). Pursuant to the above arrangement, CITGO acquired
approximately 100 MBPD of refined products from the refinery during 2002,
approximately one-half of which was gasoline.
The refined product purchase agreements with LYONDELL-CITGO and HOVENSA
incorporate various formula prices based on published market prices and other
factors. Such purchases totaled $3.5 billion for 2002. At December 31, 2002,
$110 million was included in payables to affiliates as a result of these
transactions.
CITGO had refined product, feedstock, crude oil and other product sales
of $277 million to affiliates, including LYONDELL-CITGO and Mount Vernon Phenol
Plant Partnership, in 2002. At December 31, 2002, $94 million was included in
due from affiliates as a result of these and related transactions.
CITGO has guaranteed approximately $66 million of debt of certain
affiliates, including $10 million related to HOVENSA and $51 million related to
PDV Texas, Inc. (See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV America -- Note 14
in Item 15a).
Under a separate guarantee of rent agreement, PDVSA has guaranteed
payment of rent, stipulated loss value and termination value due under the lease
of the Corpus Christi Refinery West Plant facilities. (See Consolidated
Financial Statements of PDV America -- Note 5 in Item 15a).
In August 2002, two affiliates entered into agreements to advance
excess cash to CITGO from time to time under demand notes for amounts of up to a
maximum of $10 million with PDV Texas, Inc. and $10 million with PDV Holding.
The notes bear interest at rates equivalent to 30-day LIBOR plus 0.875% payable
quarterly. Amounts outstanding on these notes at December 31, 2002 were $5
million and $4 million from PDV Texas and PDV Holding, respectively, and are
included in payables to affiliates in PDV America's consolidated balance sheet.
PDV America has notes receivable from PDVSA which are unsecured and are
comprised of $500 million of 7.995 percent notes maturing on August 1, 2003.
Interest on these notes is payable semiannually by PDVSA to the Company on
February 1 and August 1 of each year, less one business day. Management
currently believes that PDVSA will pay these notes in full on the due date.
However, PDV America may pay a dividend of up to $500 million concurrent with
PDVSA's repayment of the notes receivable or may settle these notes receivable
through declaration of a non-cash dividend, in either case subject to certain
restrictions imposed by the indenture governing CITGO's $550 million of senior
notes issued February 27, 2003 (See Consolidated Financial Statements of PDV
America - Note 2 in Item 15a). Interest income attributable to such notes was
approximately $40 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, with
approximately $17 million included in due from affiliates at December 31, 2002.
The notes receivable from PDVSA Finance, Ltd. (an affiliate) are
unsecured and are comprised of two $130 million notes of 8.558 percent maturing
on November 10, 2013 and a $38 million 10.395 percent note maturing May 15,
2014. Interest on these notes is payable quarterly. Interest income attributable
to such notes was approximately $26 million for the year ended December 31,
2002, with approximately $4 million included in due from affiliates at December
31, 2002.
The Companies and PDV Holding are parties to a tax allocation agreement
that is designed to provide PDV Holding with sufficient cash to pay its
consolidated income tax liabilities. PDV Holding appointed CITGO as its agent to
handle the payment of such liabilities on its behalf. As such, CITGO calculates
the taxes due, allocates the payments among the members according to the
agreement and bills each member accordingly. Each member records its amounts due
or payable to CITGO in a related party payable account. At December 31, 2002,
PDV America had net related party receivables related to federal income taxes of
$6 million.
43
ITEM 14. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Within the 90 days prior to the date of this Report, the Companies'
management, including the principal executive officer and principal financial
officer, evaluated the Companies' disclosure controls and procedures related to
the recording, processing, summarization and reporting of information in the
Companies' periodic reports that it files with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). These disclosure controls and procedures have been designed to
ensure that (a) material information relating to PDV America, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to the Companies' management, including
these officers, by other employees of PDV America and its subsidiaries, and (b)
this information is recorded, processed, summarized, evaluated and reported, as
applicable, within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and forms. Due
to the inherent limitations of control systems, not all misstatements may be
detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in
decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple
error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual
acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management
override of the control. The Companies' controls and procedures can only provide
reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the above objectives have been met.
Also, PDV America does not control or manage certain of its unconsolidated
entities and as such, the disclosure controls and procedures with respect to
such entities are more limited than those it maintains with respect to its
consolidated subsidiaries.
As of December 31, 2002, these officers concluded that, subject to
limitations noted above, the design of the disclosure controls and procedures
provide reasonable assurance that they can accomplish their objectives.
There have been no significant changes in the Companies' internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect these controls
subsequent to the date of their evaluation.
44
PART IV
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
a. CERTAIN DOCUMENTS FILED AS PART OF THIS REPORT
(1) Financial Statements:
Page
----
PDV America, Inc.
Independent Auditors' Report F-1
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2002 and 2001 F-2
Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income
for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 F-3
Consolidated Statements of Shareholder's Equity for the years
ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 F-4
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 F-5
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements F-7
LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP
Report of Independent Accountants F-37
Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 F-38
Balance Sheets at December 31, 2002 and 2001 F-39
Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 F-40
Statements of Partners' Capital for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 F-41
Notes to Financial Statements F-42
(2) Exhibits:
The Exhibit Index in part c. below lists the exhibits that are filed as
part of, or incorporated by reference into, this report.
b. REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
None
45
c. EXHIBITS
Several debt instruments which would otherwise be required to be
listed below have not been so listed because those instruments do not
authorize securities in an amount that exceeds 10% of the total assets of
PDV America and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. PDV America
agrees to furnish a copy of any of those instruments to the SEC upon
request.
Exhibit
Number Description
- ------- -----------
3.1 Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation and
By-laws of PDV America (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration
Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 3.1 filed with the Commission on June 2,
1993).
4.1 Indenture, dated as of August 1, 1993, among PDV America, Propernyn, PDVSA and Citibank,
N.A., as trustee, relating to PDV America's 7-1/4% Senior Notes due 1998, 7-3/4% Senior
Notes due 2000 and 7-7/8% Senior Notes due 2003, including the form of Senior Notes
(incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File
No. 33-63742, Exhibit 4.1 filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
4.2 Indenture, dated February 27, 2003, between CITGO Petroleum Corporation, as Issuer, and
The Bank of New York, as Trustee, relating to the $550,000,000 11-3/8% Senior Notes due
2011 of CITGO Petroleum Corporation (incorporated by reference to CITGO Petroleum
Corporation's 2002 Form 10-K, File No. 1-14380, Exhibit 4.2 filed with the Commission on
March 24, 2003).
10.1 Crude Supply Agreement between CITGO Petroleum Corporation and Petroleos de Venezuela,
S.A., dated as of September 30, 1986 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s
Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.1 filed with the
Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.2 Supplemental Crude Supply Agreement dated as of September 30, 1986 between CITGO Petroleum
Corporation and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (incorporated by reference to PDV America,
Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.2 filed with the
Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.3 Crude Oil and Feedstock Supply Agreement dated as of March 31, 1987 between Champlin
Refining Company and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A (incorporated by reference to PDV
America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.3 filed
with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.4 Supplemental Crude Oil and Feedstock Supply Agreement dated as of March 31, 1987 between
Champlin Refining Company and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (incorporated by reference to
PDV America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.4
filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.5 Contract for the Purchase/Sale of Boscan Crude Oil dated as of June 2, 1993 between
Tradecal, S.A. and CITGO Asphalt Refining Company (incorporated by reference to PDV
America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.1 filed
with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.6 Restated Contract for the Purchase/Sale of Heavy/Extra Heavy Crude Oil dated December 28,
1990 among Maraven, S.A., Lagoven, S.A. and Seaview Oil Company (incorporated by reference
to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.6
filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.7 Sublease Agreement dated as of March 31, 1987 between Champlin Petroleum Company,
Sublessor, and Champlin Refining Company, Sublessee (incorporated by reference to PDV
46
America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.7 filed
with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.8 Contribution Agreement among Lyondell Petrochemical Company and LYONDELL-CITGO Refining
Company, Ltd. and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A (incorporated by reference to PDV America,
Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.10 filed with the
Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.9 Crude Oil Supply Agreement between LYONDELL-CITGO Refining Company, Ltd. and Lagoven, S.A.
dated as of May 5, 1993 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration
Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.11 filed with the Commission on June
2, 1993).
10.10 Supplemental Supply Agreement dated as of May 5, 1993 between LYONDELL-CITGO Refining
Company, Ltd. and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A (incorporated by reference to PDV America,
Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.12 filed with the
Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.11 Tax Allocation Agreement dated as of June 24, 1993 among PDV America, Inc., VPHI Midwest,
Inc., CITGO Petroleum Corporation and PDV USA, Inc., as amended (incorporated by reference
to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit
10.13 filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.12 Second Amendment to the Tax Allocation Agreement among PDV America, Inc., VPHI Midwest,
Inc., CITGO Petroleum Corporation and PDV USA, Inc., dated as of January 1, 1997
(incorporated by reference to CITGO Petroleum Corporation's 2001 Form 10-K, File No.
1-12138, Exhibit 10.13(i) filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.13 Limited Partnership Agreement of LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP, dated December 31, 1998
(incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s 1998 Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138,
Exhibit 10.20 filed with the Commission on March 30, 1999).
10.14 Loan Agreement with PDVSA Finance Ltd. consisting of a Promissory Note in the amount of
$130,000,000, dated November 10, 1998 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s
1998 Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit 10.21 filed with the Commission on March 30,
1999).
10.15 Loan Agreement with PDVSA Finance Ltd. consisting of a Promissory Note in the amount of
$130,000,000,dated November 10, 1998 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s
1998 Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit 10.22 filed with the Commission on March 30,
1999).
10.16 Loan Agreement with PDVSA Finance Ltd. consisting of a Promissory Note in the amount of
$38,000,000, dated July 2, 1999 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s 1999
Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit 10.23 filed with the Commission on March 30, 2000).
12.1** Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
21.1** List of Subsidiaries of the Registrant.
23.1* Consent of Independent Auditors.
23.2* Consent of Independent Accountants of LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP.
47
31.1* Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002
filed by Aires Barreto, Chief Executive Officer.
31.2* Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002
filed by Luis Vierma, Chief Financial Officer.
32.1* Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code as to
the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 filed by Aires
Barreto, Chief Executive Officer.
32.2* Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code as to
the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 filed by Luis
Vierma, Chief Financial Officer.
- -----------
* Filed Herewith
** Previously Filed
48
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.
PDV AMERICA, INC.
/s/ Aires Barreto
-------------------------------
Aires Barreto
Chief Executive Officer and
Director
Date: December 8, 2003
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report
has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant in
the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signatures Title Date
---------- ----- ----
By /s/ Aires Barreto Chief Executive Officer December 8, 2003
-------------------------------- and Director
Aires Barreto
By /s/ Luis E. Marin Director December 8, 2003
--------------------------------
Luis E. Marin
By /s/ Luis Vierma Chief Financial Officer December 8, 2003
--------------------------------
Luis Vierma
By /s/ Paul Largess Chief Accounting Officer December 8, 2003
--------------------------------
Paul Largess
49
PDV AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Financial Statements as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and for Each
of the Three Years in the Period Ended December 31, 2002, and Independent
Auditors' Report
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
To the Board of Directors and Shareholder of
PDV America, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of PDV America,
Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the
related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income,
shareholder's equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended December 31, 2002. These financial statements are the responsibility of
the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of PDV America, Inc. and subsidiaries
at December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the results of their operations and their
cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2002 in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Tulsa, Oklahoma
March 20, 2003
F-1
PDV AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
DECEMBER 31,
--------------------------
2002 2001
ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS:
Cash and cash equivalents $ 40,337 $ 116,069
Accounts receivable, net 905,178 913,068
Due from affiliates 86,066 67,788
Inventories 1,090,915 1,109,346
Current portion of notes receivables from PDVSA 500,000 -
Prepaid expenses and other 76,384 122,921
----------- ----------
Total current assets 2,698,880 2,329,192
NOTES RECEIVABLE FROM PDVSA AND AFFILIATE 298,000 798,000
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT - Net 3,750,239 3,292,555
RESTRICTED CASH 23,486 -
INVESTMENTS IN AFFILIATES 716,469 700,701
OTHER ASSETS 310,188 231,222
----------- ----------
$ 7,797,262 $7,351,670
=========== ==========
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDER'S EQUITY
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
Accounts payable $ 830,769 $ 616,854
Payables to affiliates 387,634 265,518
Taxes other than income 229,072 219,699
Other 299,810 313,946
Current portion of long-term debt 690,325 107,864
Current portion of capital lease obligation 22,713 20,358
----------- ----------
Total current liabilities 2,460,323 1,544,239
LONG-TERM DEBT 1,109,861 1,802,809
CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATION 24,251 46,964
POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS 247,762 218,706
OTHER NONCURRENT LIABILITIES 213,637 218,766
DEFERRED INCOME TAXES 862,191 793,233
MINORITY INTEREST - 23,176
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Note 14)
SHAREHOLDER'S EQUITY:
Common stock, $1.00 par value - 1,000 shares authorized, issued and outstanding 1 1
Additional capital 1,532,435 1,532,435
Retained earnings 1,372,456 1,174,806
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (25,655) (3,465)
----------- ----------
Total shareholder's equity 2,879,237 2,703,777
----------- ----------
$ 7,797,262 $7,351,670
=========== ==========
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-2
PDV AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
EACH OF THE THREE YEARS IN THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
2002 2001 2000
REVENUES:
Net sales $19,080,845 $19,343,263 $21,941,263
Sales to affiliates 277,477 257,905 215,965
----------- ----------- -----------
19,358,322 19,601,168 22,157,228
Equity in earnings of affiliates 101,326 108,915 58,728
Interest income from PDVSA and affiliate 66,176 66,176 77,405
Insurance recoveries 406,570 52,868 -
Other income (expense) - net (19,193) (54,710) (24,028)
----------- ----------- -----------
19,913,201 19,774,417 22,269,333
----------- ----------- -----------
COST OF SALES AND EXPENSES:
Cost of sales and operating expenses (including purchases of
$6,779,798, $6,558,203, and $8,676,970 from affiliates) 19,211,316 18,734,652 21,370,315
Selling, general and administrative expenses 286,632 294,810 228,642
Interest expense, excluding capital lease 108,565 110,451 138,150
Capital lease interest charge 7,017 9,128 11,019
Minority interest - 1,971 1,808
----------- ----------- -----------
19,613,530 19,151,012 21,749,934
----------- ----------- -----------
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES AND CUMULATIVE
EFFECT OF CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE 299,671 623,405 519,399
INCOME TAXES 102,021 213,634 183,130
----------- ----------- -----------
INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN
ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE 197,650 409,771 336,269
CUMULATIVE EFFECT, ACCOUNTING FOR
DERIVATIVES, NET OF RELATED INCOME TAXES OF $7,977 - 13,600 -
----------- ----------- -----------
NET INCOME 197,650 423,371 336,269
OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS):
Cash flow hedges:
Cumulative effect, accounting for derivatives,
net of related income taxes of $(850) - (1,450) -
Less: reclassification adjustment for derivative losses
included in net income, net of related income taxes of
$182 in 2002 and $265 in 2001 310 469 -
----------- ----------- -----------
310 (981) -
Foreign currency translation loss, net of related income taxes of $(78) (172) - -
Minimum pension liability adjustment, net of deferred taxes of $12,835
in 2002, $69 in 2001, and $(499) in 2000 (22,328) (119) 849
----------- ----------- -----------
Total other comprehensive (loss) income (22,190) (1,100) 849
----------- ----------- -----------
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME $ 175,460 $ 422,271 $ 337,118
=========== =========== ===========
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-3
PDV AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDER'S EQUITY
EACH OF THE THREE YEARS IN THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
(DOLLARS AND SHARES IN THOUSANDS)
ACCUMULATED OTHER
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
---------------------------
COMMON STOCK MINIMUM FOREIGN CASH TOTAL
-------------- ADDITIONAL RETAINED PENSION CURRENCY FLOW SHAREHOLDER'S
SHARES AMOUNT CAPITAL EARNINGS LIABILITY TRANSLATION HEDGES TOTAL EQUITY
BALANCE,
JANUARY 1, 2000 1 $ 1 $ 1,532,435 $ 1,189,066 $ (3,214) $ $ $ (3,214) $ 2,718,288
Net income - - - 336,269 - - - - 336,269
Other comprehensive income - - - - 849 - - 849 849
Dividend paid - - - (266,200) - - - - (266,200)
----- ---- ----------- ----------- -------- ------- ----- -------- -----------
BALANCE,
DECEMBER 31, 2000 1 1 1,532,435 1,259,135 (2,365) - - (2,365) 2,789,206
Net income - - - 423,371 - - - - 423,371
Other comprehensive loss - - - - (119) - (981) (1,100) (1,100)
Dividends paid - - - (507,700) - - - - (507,700)
----- ---- ----------- ----------- -------- ------- ----- -------- -----------
BALANCE,
DECEMBER 31, 2001 1 1 1,532,435 1,174,806 (2,484) - (981) (3,465) 2,703,777
Net income - - - 197,650 - - - - 197,650
Other comprehensive (loss)
income - - - - (22,328) (172) 310 (22,190) (22,190)
----- ---- ----------- ----------- -------- ------- ----- -------- -----------
BALANCE,
DECEMBER 31, 2002 1 $ 1 $ 1,532,435 $ 1,372,456 $(24,812) $ (172) $(671) $(25,655) $ 2,879,237
===== ==== =========== =========== ======== ======= ===== ======== ===========
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-4
PDV AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
EACH OF THE THREE YEARS IN THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
2002 2001 2000
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net income $ 197,650 $ 423,371 $ 336,269
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization 300,657 290,699 292,259
Provision for losses on accounts receivable 17,458 6,239 1,651
Loss on sale of investments - - 1
Deferred income taxes 45,898 118,387 56,185
Distributions in excess of equity in
earnings of affiliates 22,313 44,521 68,196
Other adjustments 3,992 24,680 23,080
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable and due from affiliates (39,993) 445,204 (340,083)
Inventories 18,431 42,960 (58,142)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets 62,465 (106,253) 419
Accounts payable and other current liabilities 313,015 (605,184) 510,595
Other assets (128,502) (90,968) (57,994)
Other liabilities 30,494 29,624 (2,664)
--------- --------- ---------
Total adjustments 646,228 199,909 493,503
--------- --------- ---------
Net cash provided by operating activities 843,878 623,280 829,772
--------- --------- ---------
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Capital expenditures (711,834) (253,464) (122,049)
Proceeds from sales of property, plant and equipment 919 3,866 4,491
Proceeds from notes receivable from PDVSA - - 250,000
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash (23,486) - 3,015
Investments in LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP (32,000) (31,800) (17,600)
Loans to LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP - - (7,024)
Investments in and advances to other affiliates (22,484) (11,435) (14,500)
--------- --------- ---------
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities (788,885) (292,833) 96,333
--------- --------- ---------
(Continued)
F-5
PDV AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
EACH OF THE THREE YEARS IN THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
2002 2001 2000
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Net (repayments of) proceeds from short-term
bank loans $ - $ (37,500) $ 21,500
Net (repayments of) proceeds from revolving
bank loans (112,200) 391,500 (462,000)
Proceeds from loans from affiliates 9,000 - -
Payments on private placement senior notes (11,364) (39,935) (39,935)
Payments on master shelf agreement notes (25,000) - -
Payments on senior notes - - (250,000)
Payments on taxable bonds (31,000) (28,000) -
Proceeds from issuance of tax-exempt bonds 68,502 28,000 -
Payments of capital lease obligations (20,358) (26,649) (7,954)
Repayments of other debt (8,305) (14,845) (14,179)
Dividends paid - (507,700) (266,200)
----------- ----------- -----------
Net cash used in financing activities (130,725) (235,129) (1,018,768)
----------- ----------- -----------
(DECREASE) INCREASE IN CASH AND
CASH EQUIVALENTS (75,732) 95,318 (92,663)
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS,
BEGINNING OF PERIOD 116,069 20,751 113,414
----------- ----------- -----------
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS,
END OF PERIOD $ 40,337 $ 116,069 $ 20,751
=========== =========== ===========
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOW
INFORMATION:
Cash paid during the period for:
Interest (net of amounts capitalized) $ 112,345 $ 123,347 $ 150,830
=========== =========== ===========
Income taxes, net of refunds of $50,733 in 2002
and $7,345 in 2001 $ (45,745) $ 289,634 $ 60,501
=========== =========== ===========
See notes to consolidated financial statements. (Concluded)
F-6
PDV AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
EACH OF THE THREE YEARS IN THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS - PDV America, Inc. ("PDV America" or the
"Company") was incorporated on November 14, 1986 and is a wholly owned
subsidiary, effective April 21, 1997, of PDV Holding, Inc. ("PDV Holding"),
a Delaware corporation (see below). The Company's ultimate parent is
Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. ("PDVSA"), the national oil company of the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
The Companies (as defined below) manufacture or refine and market quality
transportation fuels as well as lubricants, refined waxes, petrochemicals,
asphalt and other industrial products. CITGO (as defined below) owns and
operates three modern, highly complex crude oil refineries (Lake Charles,
Louisiana, Corpus Christi, Texas and Lemont, Illinois) and two asphalt
refineries (Paulsboro, New Jersey, and Savannah, Georgia) with a combined
aggregate rated crude oil refining capacity of 756 thousand barrels per day
("MBPD"). CITGO also owns a minority interest in LYONDELL-CITGO Refining
LP, a limited partnership (formerly a limited liability company) that owns
and operates a refinery in Houston, Texas, with a rated crude oil refining
capacity of 265 MBPD. CITGO's consolidated financial statements also
include accounts relating to a lubricant and wax plant, pipelines, and
equity interests in pipeline companies and petroleum storage terminals.
Transportation fuel customers include primarily CITGO branded wholesale
marketers, convenience stores and airlines located mainly east of the Rocky
Mountains. Asphalt is generally marketed to independent paving contractors
on the East and Gulf Coasts and the Midwest of the United States.
Lubricants are sold principally in the United States to independent
marketers, mass marketers and industrial customers. Petrochemical
feedstocks and industrial products are sold to various manufacturers and
industrial companies throughout the United States. Petroleum coke is sold
primarily in international markets. CITGO is also engaged in an effort to
sell lubricants, gasoline and distillates in various Latin American
markets.
PRINCIPLES OF CONSOLIDATION - The consolidated financial statements include
the accounts of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries, CITGO
Petroleum Corporation ("CITGO"), and PDV USA, Inc., as well as CITGO's
wholly owned subsidiaries, VPHI Midwest, Inc. ("VPHI") and its wholly owned
subsidiary, PDV Midwest Refining, L.L.C. ("PDVMR"), and Cit-Con Oil
Corporation ("Cit-Con"), which was 65 percent owned by CITGO through
December 31, 2001 (collectively referred to as the "Companies"). On January
1, 2002, CITGO acquired the outstanding 35 percent interest in Cit-Con from
Conoco, Inc. The principal asset of Cit-Con is a lubricant and wax plant in
Lake Charles, Louisiana. This transaction did not have a material effect on
the consolidated financial position or results of operations of the
Company. The legal entity, Cit-Con Oil Corporation, was dissolved effective
April 1, 2002. All subsidiaries are wholly owned. All material intercompany
transactions and accounts have been eliminated.
On January 1, 2002, PDV America contributed all of the common stock of VHPI
to CITGO. This transaction had no effect on the consolidated financial
statements of PDV America.
The Companies' investments in less than majority-owned affiliates are
accounted for by the equity method. The excess of the carrying value of the
investments over the equity in the underlying net assets of the affiliates
is amortized on a straight-line basis over 40 years, which is based upon
the estimated useful lives of the affiliates' assets.
F-7
ESTIMATES, RISKS AND UNCERTAINTIES - The preparation of financial
statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
The Companies' operations can be influenced by domestic and international
political, legislative, regulatory and legal environments. In addition,
significant changes in the prices or availability of crude oil and refined
products could have a significant impact on the results of operations for
any particular year.
IMPAIRMENT OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS - The Companies periodically evaluate the
carrying value of long-lived assets to be held and used when events and
circumstances warrant such a review. The carrying value of a long-lived
asset is considered impaired when the separately identifiable anticipated
undiscounted net cash flow from such asset is less than its carrying value.
In that event, a loss is recognized based on the amount by which the
carrying value exceeds the fair value of the long-lived asset. Fair value
is determined primarily using the anticipated net cash flows discounted at
a rate commensurate with the risk involved. Losses on long-lived assets to
be disposed of are determined in a similar manner, except that fair values
are reduced for disposal costs.
REVENUE RECOGNITION - Revenue is generated from the sale of refined
petroleum products to bulk purchasers, wholesale purchasers and final
consumers. The Companies' transportation fuel customers include primarily
CITGO branded wholesale marketers, convenience stores and airlines located
mainly east of the Rocky Mountains. Asphalt is generally marketed to
independent paving contractors on the East and Gulf Coasts and the Midwest
of the United States. Lubricants are sold principally in the United States
to independent marketers, mass marketers and industrial customers.
Petrochemical feedstocks and industrial products are sold to various
manufacturers and industrial companies throughout the United States.
Petroleum coke is sold primarily in international markets. The Companies
also engaged in an effort to sell lubricants, gasoline and distillates in
various Latin American markets.
Revenue recognition occurs at the point that title to the refined petroleum
product is transferred to the customer. That transfer is determined from
the delivery terms of the customer's contract. In the case of bulk
purchasers, delivery and title transfer may occur while the refined
petroleum products are in transit, if agreed by the purchaser; or may occur
when the hydrocarbons are transferred into a storage facility at the
direction of the purchaser. In the case of wholesale purchasers, delivery
and title transfer generally occurs when the refined petroleum products are
transferred from a storage facility to the transport truck. Direct sales to
the final consumer make up an immaterial portion of revenue recognized by
the Companies.
SUPPLY AND MARKETING ACTIVITIES - The Companies engage in the buying and
selling of crude oil to supply their refineries. The net results of this
activity are recorded in cost of sales. The Companies also engage in the
buying and selling of refined products to facilitate the marketing of their
refined products. The results of this activity are recorded in cost of
sales and sales.
Refined product exchange transactions that do not involve the payment or
receipt of cash are not accounted for as purchases or sales. Any resulting
volumetric exchange balances are accounted for as inventory in accordance
with the Companies' last-in, first-out ("LIFO") inventory method. Exchanges
that are settled through payment or receipt of cash are accounted for as
purchases or sales.
EXCISE TAXES - The Companies collect excise taxes on sales of gasoline and
other motor fuels. Excise taxes of approximately $3.2 billion, $3.3
billion, and $3.2 billion were collected from customers and
F-8
paid to various governmental entities in 2002, 2001, and 2000,
respectively. Excise taxes are not included in sales.
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS - Cash and cash equivalents consist of highly
liquid short-term investments and bank deposits with initial maturities of
three months or less.
INVENTORIES - Crude oil and refined product inventories are stated at the
lower of cost or market and cost is determined using the LIFO method.
Materials and supplies are valued using the average cost method.
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT - Property, plant and equipment is reported
at cost, less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is based upon the
estimated useful lives of the related assets using the straight-line
method. Depreciable lives are generally as follows: buildings and
leaseholds - 10 to 24 years; machinery and equipment - 5 to 24 years; and
vehicles - 3 to 10 years.
Upon disposal or retirement of property, plant and equipment, the cost and
related accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any
resulting gain or loss is recognized in income.
The Companies capitalize interest on projects when construction entails
major expenditures over extended time periods. Such interest is allocated
to property, plant and equipment and amortized over the estimated useful
lives of the related assets. Interest capitalized totaled $4 million, $2
million and $4 million in 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively.
RESTRICTED CASH - The Companies have restricted cash of $23 million at
December 31, 2002 consisting of highly liquid investments held in trust
accounts in accordance with tax exempt revenue bonds due 2032. Funds are
released solely for financing the qualified capital expenditures as defined
in the bond agreement.
COMMODITY AND INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES - The Companies enter into
petroleum futures contracts, options and other over-the-counter commodity
derivatives, primarily to reduce their inventory purchase and product sale
exposure to market risk. In the normal course of business, the Companies
also enter into certain petroleum commodity forward purchase and sale
contracts, which qualify as derivatives. The Companies also enter into
various interest rate swap agreements to manage their risk related to
interest rate change on their debt.
In June 1998, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, "Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities" ("SFAS No. 133"). In June
2000, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 138, "Accounting for
Certain Derivative Instruments and Certain Hedging Activities, an amendment
of SFAS No. 133," was issued. The statement, as amended, establishes
accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and for
hedging activities. It requires that an entity recognize all derivatives,
at fair value, as either assets or liabilities in the statement of
financial position with an offset either to shareholder's equity and
comprehensive income or income depending upon the classification of the
derivative. The Companies adopted SFAS No. 133 on January 1, 2001. Certain
of the derivative instruments identified at January 1, 2001 under the
provisions of SFAS No. 133 had been previously designated in hedging
relationships that addressed the variable cash flow exposure of forecasted
transactions; under the transition provisions of SFAS No. 133, on January
1, 2001 the Companies recorded an after-tax, cumulative-effect-type
transition charge of $1.5 million to accumulated other comprehensive income
related to these derivatives. Certain of the derivative instruments
identified at January 1, 2001, under the provisions of SFAS No. 133 had
been previously designated in hedging relationships that addressed the fair
value of certain forward purchase and sale commitments; under the
transition provisions of SFAS No. 133, on January 1, 2001 the Companies
recorded fair value adjustments to the subject derivatives and related
commitments resulting in the recording of a net after-tax,
cumulative-effect-type transition
F-9
charge of $0.2 million to net income. The remaining derivatives identified
at January 1, 2001 under the provisions of SFAS No. 133, consisting of
certain forward purchases and sales, had not previously been considered
derivatives under accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America; under the transition provisions of SFAS No. 133, on
January 1, 2001 the Companies recorded an after-tax, cumulative-effect-type
benefit of $13.8 million to net income related to these derivatives. The
Companies did not elect prospective hedge accounting for derivatives
existing at the date of adoption of SFAS No. 133.
Effective January 1, 2001, fair values of derivatives are recorded in other
current assets or other current liabilities, as applicable, and changes in
the fair value of derivatives not designated in hedging relationships are
recorded in income. Effective January 1, 2001, the Companies' policy is to
elect hedge accounting only under limited circumstances involving
derivatives with initial terms of 90 days or greater and notional amounts
of $25 million or greater.
Prior to January 1, 2001, gains or losses on contracts which qualified as
hedges were recognized when the related inventory was sold or the hedged
transaction was consummated. Changes in the market value of commodity
derivatives which were not hedges were recorded as gains or losses in the
period in which they occurred. Additionally, prior to January 1, 2001,
premiums paid for purchased interest rate swap agreements were amortized to
interest expense over the terms of the agreements. Unamortized premiums
were included in other assets. The interest rate differentials received or
paid by the Companies related to these agreements were recognized as
adjustments to interest expense over the term of the agreements.
REFINERY MAINTENANCE - Costs of major refinery turnaround maintenance are
charged to operations over the estimated period between turnarounds.
Turnaround periods range approximately from one to seven years. Unamortized
costs are included in other assets. Amortization of refinery turnaround
costs is included in depreciation and amortization expense. Amortization
was $75 million, $69 million, and $68 million for 2002, 2001, and 2000,
respectively. Ordinary maintenance is expensed as incurred.
The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants has issued a
"Statement of Position" exposure draft on cost capitalization that is
expected to require companies to expense the non-capital portion of major
maintenance costs as incurred. The statement is expected to require that
any existing unamortized deferred non-capital major maintenance costs be
expensed immediately. The exposure draft indicates that this change will be
required to be adopted for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2003, and
that the effect of expensing existing unamortized deferred non-capital
major maintenance costs will be reported as a cumulative effect of an
accounting change in the consolidated statement of income. Currently, the
AICPA is discussing the future of this exposure draft with the FASB. The
final accounting requirements and timing of required adoption are not known
at this time. At December 31, 2002, the Companies had included turnaround
costs of $210 million in other assets. The Companies' management has not
determined the amount, if any, of these costs that could be capitalized
under the provisions of the exposure draft.
ENVIRONMENTAL EXPENDITURES - Environmental expenditures that relate to
current or future revenues are expensed or capitalized as appropriate.
Expenditures that relate to an existing condition caused by past operations
and that do not contribute to current or future revenue generation are
expensed. Liabilities are recorded when environmental assessments and/or
cleanups are probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated.
Environmental liabilities are not discounted to their present value and are
recorded without consideration of potential recoveries from third parties.
Subsequent adjustments to estimates, to the extent required, may be made as
more refined information becomes available.
F-10
INCOME TAXES - The Companies are included in the consolidated U.S. federal
tax return filed by PDV Holding. The Companies' current and deferred income
tax expense have been computed on a stand-alone basis using an asset and
liability approach.
NEW ACCOUNTING STANDARDS - In July 2001, the FASB issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets" ("SFAS No. 142") which is fully effective in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2001, although certain provisions of SFAS No. 142 are
applicable to goodwill and other intangible assets acquired in transactions
completed after June 30, 2001. SFAS No. 142 addresses financial accounting
and reporting for acquired goodwill and other intangible assets and
requires that goodwill and intangibles with an indefinite life no longer be
amortized but instead be periodically reviewed for impairment. The adoption
of SFAS No. 142 did not materially impact the Companies' financial position
or results of operations.
On January 1, 2003 the Companies adopted Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations" (SFAS No.
143) which addresses financial accounting and reporting for obligations
associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets and the
associated asset retirement costs. It applies to legal obligations
associated with the retirement of long-lived assets that result from the
acquisition, construction, development and/or the normal operation of a
long-lived asset, except for certain obligations of lessees. The Companies
have identified certain asset retirement obligations that are within the
scope of the standard, including obligations imposed by certain state laws
pertaining to closure and/or removal of storage tanks, contractual removal
obligations included in certain easement and right-of-way agreements
associated with the Companies' pipeline operations, and contractual removal
obligations relating to a refinery processing unit located within a
third-party entity's facility. The Companies cannot currently determine a
reasonable estimate of the fair value of their asset retirement obligations
due to the fact that the related assets have indeterminate useful lives
which preclude development of assumptions about the potential timing of
settlement dates. Such obligations will be recognized in the period in
which sufficient information exists to estimate a range or potential
settlement dates. Accordingly, the adoption of SFAS No. 143 did not impact
the Companies' financial position or results of operation.
In August 2001, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 144, "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets"
("SFAS No. 144") which addresses financial accounting and reporting for the
impairment or disposal of long-lived assets by requiring that one
accounting model be used for long-lived assets to be disposed of by sale,
whether previously held and used or newly acquired, and by broadening the
presentation of discontinued operations to include more disposal
transactions. SFAS No. 144 is effective for financial statements issued for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2001, and interim periods within
those fiscal years. The provisions of this statement generally are to be
applied prospectively; therefore, the adoption of SFAS No. 144 did not
impact the Companies' financial position or results of operations.
In November 2002, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 45, "Guarantor's
Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect
Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others." This interpretation elaborates on
the disclosures to be made by a guarantor in its financial statements about
its obligations under certain guarantees that it has issued. It also
requires a guarantor to recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a
liability for the fair value of the obligations it has undertaken in
issuing the guarantee. The initial recognition and initial measurement
provisions of the interpretation are applicable on a prospective basis to
guarantees issued or modified after December 31, 2002. The disclosure
requirements are effective for financial statements of interim or annual
periods ending after December 15, 2002. (See Note 14).
In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation of
Variable Interest Entities" ("FIN 46"), which clarifies the application of
Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, "Consolidated
F-11
Financial Statements." FIN 46 defines variable interest entities and how an
enterprise should assess its interests in a variable interest entity to
decide whether to consolidate that entity. The interpretation requires
certain minimum disclosures with respect to variable interest entities in
which an enterprise holds significant variable interest but which it does
not consolidate. FIN 46 applies immediately to variable interest entities
created after January 31, 2003, and to variable interest entities in which
an enterprise obtains an interest after that date. It applies in the first
fiscal year or interim period beginning after June 15, 2003 to variable
interest entities in which an enterprise holds a variable interest that it
acquired before February 1, 2003. FIN 46 applies to public enterprises as
of the beginning of the applicable interim or annual period, and it applies
to nonpublic enterprises as of the end of the applicable annual period. FIN
46 may be applied prospectively with a cumulative-effect adjustment as of
the date on which it is first applied or by restating previously issued
financial statements for one or more years with a cumulative-effect
adjustment as of the beginning of the first year restated. The Companies
have not determined the impact on their financial position or results of
operations that may result from the application of FIN 46.
RECLASSIFICATIONS - Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2001
and 2000 financial statements to conform with the classifications used in
2002.
2. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
PDV America's ultimate parent is PDVSA, the national oil company of the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and CITGO's largest supplier of crude oil.
CITGO has long-term crude oil supply agreements with PDVSA for a portion of
the crude oil requirements for its Lake Charles, Corpus Christi, Paulsboro
and Savannah refineries.
A nation-wide work stoppage by opponents of President Hugo Chavez began in
Venezuela on December 2, 2002, and has disrupted most activity in that
country, including the operations of PDVSA. A significant number of PDVSA's
employees abandoned their jobs during the month of December. PDVSA also
informed CITGO that its production of crude oil and natural gas, as well as
the export of crude oil and refined petroleum products, were severely
affected by these events in December. Subsequently, the production and
export of crude oil has been progressively increasing. PDVSA has reported
that some employees are returning to work.
CITGO continues to be able to locate and purchase adequate crude oil,
albeit at higher prices than under the contracts with PDVSA, to maintain
normal operations at its refineries and to meet its refined products
commitments to its customers. In December 2002, CITGO received
approximately 61 percent of the crude oil volumes that it received from
PDVSA in December 2001. In January 2003, CITGO received approximately 94
percent of the crude oil volumes that it received from PDVSA in January
2002. Historically, CITGO purchased approximately 50 percent of its total
crude oil requirements from PDVSA. At December 31, 2002, CITGO had
approximately $90 million in accounts payable related to crude oil
deliveries from PDVSA for which CITGO had not received invoices. The
reduction in supply from PDVSA and the purchase of crude oil from
alternative sources has had the effect of increasing CITGO's crude oil cost
and decreasing its gross margin and profit margin from what they would have
been had the crude oil been purchased under its long-term crude oil supply
contracts with PDVSA.
The Companies' liquidity has been adversely affected recently as a result
of events directly and indirectly associated with the disruption in their
Venezuelan crude oil supply from PDVSA. During this supply disruption,
CITGO has been successful in covering any shortfall with spot market
purchases, but those purchases generally require payment fifteen days
sooner than would be the case for comparable deliveries under its supply
agreements with PDVSA. This shortening of CITGO's payment cycle has
increased its cash needs and reduced its liquidity. Also, a number of trade
creditors have sought to
F-12
tighten credit payment terms on purchases that CITGO makes from them. That
tightening, if adopted by all creditors, would increase the Companies' cash
needs and reduce their liquidity.
In addition, all three major rating agencies lowered CITGO's and PDV
America's debt ratings based upon, among other things, concerns regarding
the supply disruption. This downgrading caused a termination event under
CITGO's existing accounts receivable sale facility, which ultimately led to
the repurchase of $125 million in accounts receivable and cancellation of
the facility on January 31, 2003. That facility had a maximum size of $225
million of which $125 million was used at the time of repurchase. CITGO
established a new accounts receivable sales facility on February 28, 2003
to replace the cancelled facility. (See Note 6).
Additionally, effective following the debt rating downgrade, CITGO's
uncommitted, unsecured, short-term borrowing capacity is no longer
available.
Also, letter of credit providers for $76 million of CITGO's outstanding
letters of credit have indicated that they will not renew such letters of
credit. These letters of credit support approximately $75 million of
tax-exempt bond issues that were issued previously for CITGO's benefit. In
March 2003, CITGO repurchased these tax-exempt revenue bonds. CITGO expects
that it will seek to reissue these tax-exempt bonds with replacement
letters of credit in support if it is able to obtain such letters of credit
from other financial institutions or, alternatively, it will seek to
replace these tax-exempt bonds with new tax-exempt bonds that will not
require letter of credit support. CITGO has an additional $231 million of
letters of credit outstanding that back or support other bond issues that
it has issued through governmental entities, which are subject to renewal
during 2003. CITGO has not received notice from the issuers of these
additional letters of credit indicating an intention not to renew.
Operating cash flow represents a primary source for meeting the Companies'
liquidity requirements; however, the termination of CITGO's accounts
receivable sale facility, the possibility of additional tightened payment
terms and the possible need to replace non-renewing letters of credit has
prompted the Companies to examine alternative arrangements to supplement
and improve their liquidity. The Companies' management believes that it has
adequate liquidity from existing sources to support its operations for the
foreseeable future.
On February 27, 2003 CITGO issued $550 million, 11 3/8 percent unsecured
senior notes due February 1, 2011. The net proceeds received by CITGO were
$534.9 million.. The interest on the notes is payable on February 1 and
August 1 of each year. The first interest payment will be made on August 1,
2003. On February 27, 2003, CITGO repurchased $50 million face amount of
its 7 7/8% Senior Notes due 2006 for $48.6 million. The Company currently
expects to use the remaining net proceeds for general corporate purposes.
However, the Company may use a portion of the net proceeds for the
repayment of its 7 7/8% Senior notes due on August 1, 2003 (Note 11) or to
pay a portion of a dividend of up to $500 million to PDV Holding in
connection with the anticipated August, 2003 settlement of $500 million of
the Company's notes receivable from PDVSA (Note 5), in either case, only if
permitted under the indenture governing the CITGO notes.
On February 27, 2003, CITGO closed on a three year $200 million, senior
secured term loan. Interest is based, at CITGO's discretion, on either a
one or three-month period Eurodollar rate plus an applicable margin of 5.25
percent. Interest is payable in arrears on the last day of each interest
period, except that if CITGO selects an interest period longer than three
months, interest would be payable on the last business day of each quarter
during such interest period. Security is provided by CITGO's 15.79 percent
equity interest in Colonial Pipeline and CITGO's 6.8 percent equity
interest in Explorer Pipeline (Note 9), which together had a combined net
book value of approximately $125 million at December 31, 2002.
F-13
On February 27, 2003, the Company paid a dividend in the amount of $20.5
million to its parent, PDV Holding.
3. REFINERY AGREEMENTS
An affiliate of PDVSA acquired a 50 percent equity interest in a refinery
in Chalmette, Louisiana ("Chalmette") in October 1997, and assigned to
CITGO its option to purchase up to 50 percent of the refined products
produced at the refinery through December 31, 2000 (Note 5). CITGO
exercised this option during 2000, and acquired approximately 67 MBPD of
refined products from the refinery, approximately one-half of which was
gasoline. The affiliate did not assign this option to CITGO for 2001 or
2002.
In October 1998, an affiliate of PDVSA acquired a 50 percent equity
interest in a joint venture that owns and operates a refinery in St. Croix,
U.S. Virgin Islands ("HOVENSA") and has the right under a product sales
agreement to assign periodically to CITGO, or other related parties, its
option to purchase 50 percent of the refined products produced by HOVENSA
(less a certain portion of such products that HOVENSA markets directly in
the local and Caribbean markets). In addition, under the product sales
agreement, the PDVSA affiliate has appointed CITGO as its agent in
designating which of its affiliates shall from time to time take deliveries
of the refined products available to it. The product sales agreement will
be in effect for the life of the joint venture, subject to termination
events based on default or mutual agreement (Note 5). Pursuant to the above
arrangement, CITGO acquired approximately 100 MBPD, 106 MBPD, and 125 MBPD
of refined products from HOVENSA during 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively,
approximately one-half of which was gasoline.
4. INVESTMENT IN LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP ("LYONDELL-CITGO") owns and operates a 265 MBPD
refinery in Houston, Texas and is owned by subsidiaries of CITGO (41.25%)
and Lyondell Chemical Company (58.75%) ("the Owners"). This refinery
processes heavy crude oil supplied by PDVSA under a long-term supply
contract that expires in 2017. CITGO purchases substantially all of the
gasoline, diesel and jet fuel produced at the refinery under a long-term
contract (Note 5).
At various times since April 1998, PDVSA, pursuant to its contractual
rights, declared force majeure and reduced deliveries of crude oil to
LYONDELL-CITGO; this required LYONDELL-CITGO to obtain alternative sources
of crude oil supply in replacement, which resulted in lower operating
margins. Most recently, LYONDELL-CITGO received notice of force majeure
from PDVSA in December 2002. Crude oil was purchased in the spot market to
replace the volume not delivered under the contract during December 2002.
By February 2003, crude oil deliveries had returned to contract volumes.
As of December 31, 2002, CITGO has outstanding loans to LYONDELL-CITGO of
$35 million. The notes bear interest at market rates which were
approximately 2.4 percent, 2.2 percent, and 6.9 percent at December 31,
2002, 2001 and 2000. Principal and interest are due in December 2004.
Accordingly, these notes are included in other assets in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets.
F-14
CITGO accounts for its investment in LYONDELL-CITGO using the equity method
of accounting and records its share of the net earnings of LYONDELL-CITGO
based on allocation of income agreed to by the Owners, which differs from
participation interests. Cash distributions are allocated to the Owners
based on participation interest. Information on CITGO's investment in
LYONDELL-CITGO follows:
DECEMBER 31,
--------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000
(000s OMITTED)
Carrying value of investment $ 518,279 $ 507,940 $ 518,333
Notes receivable 35,278 35,278 35,278
Participation interest 41% 41% 41%
Equity in net income $ 77,902 $ 73,983 $ 41,478
Cash distributions received 88,663 116,177 100,972
Summary of LYONDELL-CITGO's financial position:
Current assets $ 357,000 $ 227,000 $ 310,000
Noncurrent assets 1,400,000 1,434,000 1,386,000
Current liabilities:
Debt - 50,000 470,000
Distributions payable to partners 181,000 29,000 16,000
Other 333,000 298,000 381,000
Noncurrent liabilities (including debt of
$450,000 at December 31, 2002 and 2001
and $-0- at December 31, 2000) 840,000 776,000 321,000
Partners' capital 403,000 508,000 508,000
Summary of operating results:
Revenue $3,392,000 $3,284,000 $4,075,000
Gross profit 299,000 317,000 250,000
Net income 213,000 203,000 128,000
On December 11, 2002, LYONDELL-CITGO completed a refinancing of its working
capital revolver and its term bank loan. The new term loan and working
capital revolver, secured by substantially all of the assets of
LYONDELL-CITGO, will mature in June 2004.
5. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
CITGO purchases approximately one-half of the crude oil processed in its
refineries from subsidiaries of PDVSA under long-term supply agreements.
These supply agreements extend through the year 2006 for the Lake Charles
refinery, 2010 for the Paulsboro refinery, 2012 for the Corpus Christi
refinery and 2013 for the Savannah refinery. CITGO purchased $3.3 billion,
$3.0 billion, and $3.2 billion of crude oil, feedstocks and other products
from wholly owned subsidiaries of PDVSA in 2002, 2001, and 2000,
respectively, under these and other purchase agreements.
At various times since April 1998, PDVSA deliveries of crude oil to CITGO
were less than contractual base volumes due to PDVSA's declaration of force
majeure pursuant to all four long-term crude oil supply contracts described
above. Under a force majeure declaration, PDVSA may reduce the amount of
crude oil that it would otherwise be required to supply under these
agreements. When PDVSA reduces its delivery of crude oil under these crude
oil supply agreements, CITGO may obtain alternative sources of crude oil
which may result in increased crude costs or increase its purchases of
refined products. As a result, CITGO was required to obtain alternative
sources of crude oil. See Note 2 for a description of events that led to
further disruptions of supplies in December 2002.
F-15
During 2002, 2001 and 2000, PDVSA did not deliver naphtha pursuant to
certain contracts and has made or will make contractually specified
payments in lieu thereof.
These crude oil supply agreements require PDVSA to supply minimum
quantities of crude oil and other feedstocks to CITGO for a fixed period.
The supply agreements differ somewhat for each refinery but generally
incorporate formula prices based on the market value of a slate of refined
products deemed to be produced from each particular grade of crude oil or
feedstock, less (i) specified deemed refining costs; (ii) specified actual
costs, including transportation charges, actual cost of natural gas and
electricity, import duties and taxes; and (iii) a deemed margin, which
varies according to the grade of crude oil or feedstock delivered. Under
each supply agreement, deemed margins and deemed costs are adjusted
periodically by a formula primarily based on the rate of inflation. Because
deemed operating costs and the slate of refined products deemed to be
produced for a given barrel of crude oil or other feedstock do not
necessarily reflect the actual costs and yields in any period, the actual
refining margin earned by CITGO under the various supply agreements will
vary depending on, among other things, the efficiency with which CITGO
conducts its operations during such period. At December 31, 2002 and 2001,
$262 million and $185 million, respectively, were included in payables to
affiliates as a result of these transactions. At December 31, 2002, the
Company had approximately $90 million in accounts payable related to crude
oil deliveries from PDVSA for which CITGO had not received invoices.
The price CITGO pays for crude oil purchased under these crude oil supply
agreements is not directly related to the market price of any other crude
oil. However, the intention of the pricing mechanism in the crude supply
agreements was to reflect market pricing over long periods of time, but
there may be periods in which the price paid for crude oil purchased under
those agreements may be higher or lower than the price that might have been
paid in the spot market. Internal estimates indicate that the pricing
mechanism is working as intended to reflect market prices over long periods
of time.
CITGO also purchases refined products from various other affiliates
including LYONDELL-CITGO, HOVENSA, and Chalmette, under long-term
contracts. These agreements incorporate various formula prices based on
published market prices and other factors. Such purchases totaled $3.5
billion, $3.4 billion, and $5.3 billion for 2002, 2001, and 2000,
respectively. At December 31, 2002 and 2001, $110 million and $73 million,
respectively, were included in payables to affiliates as a result of these
transactions.
CITGO had refined product, feedstock, and other product sales to
affiliates, primarily at market-related prices, of $277 million, $248
million, and $205 million in 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively. At
December 31, 2002 and 2001, $94 million and $64 million, respectively, were
included in due from affiliates as a result of these and related
transactions.
Under a separate guarantee of rent agreement, PDVSA has guaranteed payment
of rent, stipulated loss value and terminating value due under the lease of
the Corpus Christi refinery facilities described in Note 15. CITGO has also
guaranteed debt of certain affiliates (Note 14).
In August 2002, two affiliates entered into agreements to advance excess
cash to CITGO from time to time under demand notes for amounts of up to a
maximum of $10 million with PDV Texas, Inc. ("PDV Texas") and $10 million
with PDV Holding, Inc. ("PDV Holding"). The notes bear interest at rates
equivalent to 30-day LIBOR plus .875% payable quarterly. Amounts
outstanding on these notes at December 31, 2002 were $5 million and $4
million from PDV Texas and PDV Holding, respectively and are included in
payables to affiliates in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
The notes receivable from PDVSA are unsecured and are comprised of $500
million of 7.995 percent notes maturing on August 1, 2003. Interest on
these notes is payable semiannually by PDVSA to the Company on February 1
and August 1 of each year, less one business day. Management currently
F-16
believes that PDVSA will pay these notes in full on the due date. However,
the Company may pay a dividend of up to $500 million concurrent with
PDVSA's repayment of the notes receivable or may settle these notes
receivable through declaration of a non-cash dividend, in either case
subject to certain restrictions imposed by the indenture governing CITGO's
$550 million of senior notes issued February 27, 2003 as discussed in Note
2. Interest income attributable to such notes and on the $250 million of
7.75 percent notes receivable from PDVSA that matured on August 1, 2000,
was approximately $40 million, $40 million, and $51 million for the years
ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively, with approximately
$17 million included in due from affiliates at both December 31, 2002 and
2001.
The notes receivable from PDVSA Finance, Ltd. (an affiliate) are unsecured
and are comprised of two $130 million notes of 8.558 percent maturing on
November 10, 2013 and a $38 million 10.395 percent note maturing May 15,
2014. Interest on these notes is payable quarterly. Interest income
attributable to such notes was approximately $26 million for each of the
years ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000, with approximately $4
million included in due from affiliates at both December 31, 2002 and 2001.
Due to the related party nature of these notes receivable, it is not
practicable to estimate their fair value.
The Company and PDV Holding are parties to a tax allocation agreement that
is designed to provide PDV Holding with sufficient cash to pay its
consolidated income tax liabilities. PDV Holding appointed CITGO as its
agent to handle the payments of such liabilities on its behalf. As such,
CITGO calculates the taxes due, allocates the payments among the members
according to the agreement and bills each member accordingly. Each member
records its amounts due or payable to CITGO in a related party payable
account. At December 31, 2002, the Company had net related party payables
related to federal income taxes of $2 million. At December 31, 2001, the
Company had net related party receivables related to federal income taxes
of $6 million.
At December 31, 2002, the Companies had income tax prepayments of $15
million included in prepaid expenses. At December 31, 2001, the Companies
had income taxes prepayments of $100 million included in prepaid expenses.
6. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
2002 2001
(000s OMITTED)
Trade $766,824 $718,319
Credit card 116,246 121,334
Other 39,313 87,195
-------- --------
922,383 926,848
Less allowance for uncollectible accounts (17,205) (13,780)
-------- --------
$905,178 $913,068
======== ========
Sales are made on account, based on pre-approved unsecured credit terms
established by the Companies' management. CITGO also has a proprietary
credit card program which allows commercial customers to purchase fuel at
CITGO branded outlets. Allowances for uncollectible accounts are
established based on several factors that include, but are not limited to,
analysis of specific customers, historical trends, current economic
conditions and other information.
F-17
CITGO has a limited purpose consolidated subsidiary, CITGO Funding
Corporation, which established a non-recourse agreement to sell an
undivided interest in specified trade accounts receivables ("pool") to
independent third parties. Under the terms of the agreement, new
receivables are added to the pool as collections (administered by
CITGO) reduce previously sold receivables. CITGO pays specified fees
related to its sale of receivables under the program. The amount sold
at any one time under the trade accounts receivable sales agreement was
limited to a maximum of $225 million (increased from $125 million
through an amendment in April 2000).
As of December 31, 2002 and 2001, $765 million and $640 million,
respectively, of CITGO's accounts receivable comprised the designated
pool of trade receivables included in this program. These receivables
had weighted average lives of 5.0 and 4.5 days and included no
delinquent accounts under 61 days overdue at December 31, 2002 and
2001. Of the receivables in the designated pool, $125 million was sold
to the third party and the remaining amount was retained by CITGO
Funding as of December 31, 2002 and 2001. This retained interest, which
is included in receivables, net in the consolidated balance sheets, is
recorded at fair value. Due to (i) a short average collection cycle for
such trade receivables, (ii) CITGO's positive collection history, and
(iii) the characteristics of such trade accounts receivables, the fair
value of CITGO's retained interest approximates the total amount of
trade accounts receivable reduced by the amount of trade accounts
receivable sold to the third-party under the facility. CITGO recorded
no gains or losses associated with the sales in the years ended
December 31, 2002 and 2001.
CITGO is responsible for servicing the transferred receivables. It does
not receive any fees for this servicing activity, and it does not
believe that it incurs incremental costs associated with the activity.
As a result, it has not recorded any servicing assets or liabilities
related to this servicing activity.
The fees incurred by CITGO related to this facility, which were
included in other income (expense), net in the consolidated statements
of income, were $3.3 million, $7.6 million and $16 million for the
years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. The third
party's interests in CITGO trade accounts receivables were never in
excess of the sales facility limits at any time under this program. No
accounts receivable included in this program were written off as
uncollectible during 2002, 2001 or 2000.
In January 2003, CITGO's debt rating was lowered based upon, among
other things, concerns regarding the supply disruption of crude oil
from Venezuela. This downgrade caused a termination event under the
trade accounts receivable sales agreement, which ultimately led to the
cancellation of the facility and the voluntary repurchase of $125
million in accounts receivable on January 31, 2003.
On February 28, 2003, a new account receivable sales facility was
established. This facility allows for the non-recourse sale of certain
accounts receivable to independent third parties. A maximum of $200
million in accounts receivable may be sold at any one time.
In 2000, CITGO realized a gain of $5 million resulting from the
reversal of the allowance for uncollectible accounts related to certain
receivables sold.
F-18
7. INVENTORIES
2002 2001
(000s OMITTED)
Refined product $ 781,495 $ 836,683
Crude oil 221,422 193,319
Materials and supplies 87,998 79,344
------------ ------------
$ 1,090,915 $ 1,109,346
============ ============
At December 31, 2002 and 2001, estimated net market values exceeded
historical cost by approximately $572 million and $174 million,
respectively.
The reduction of hydrocarbon LIFO inventory quantities resulted in a
liquidation of prior years' LIFO layers and decreased cost of goods
sold by $29 million in 2002.
8. PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
2002 2001
(000s OMITTED)
Land $ 138,156 $ 137,927
Buildings and leaseholds 431,899 470,465
Machinery and equipment 4,533,423 3,951,725
Vehicles 24,597 23,866
Construction in process 384,869 219,938
----------- -----------
5,512,944 4,803,921
Accumulated depreciation and amortization (1,762,705) (1,511,366)
----------- -----------
$ 3,750,239 $ 3,292,555
=========== ===========
Depreciation expense for 2002, 2001, and 2000 was $223 million, $220
million, and $222 million, respectively.
Other income (expense) includes gains and losses on disposals and
retirements of property, plant and equipment. Such net losses were
approximately $5 million, $24 million, and $11 million in 2002, 2001,
and 2000, respectively.
9. INVESTMENTS IN AFFILIATES
In addition to LYONDELL-CITGO, CITGO's investments in affiliates
consist of equity interests of 6.8 percent to 50 percent in joint
interest pipelines and terminals, including a 15.79 percent interest in
Colonial Pipeline Company (Note 2); a 6.8 percent interest in Explorer
Pipeline (Note 2); a 49.5 percent partnership interest in Nelson
Industrial Steam Company ("NISCO"), which is a qualified cogeneration
facility; a 49 percent partnership interest in Mount Vernon Phenol
Plant; and a 25 percent interest in The Needle Coker Company. The
carrying value of these investments exceeded CITGO's equity in the
underlying net assets by approximately $137.6 million and $139 million
at December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively.
At December 31, 2002 and 2001, NISCO had a partnership deficit. CITGO's
share of this deficit, as a general partner, was $34.0 million and
$39.5 million at December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively, which is
included in other noncurrent liabilities in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets.
F-19
Information on CITGO's investments, including LYONDELL-CITGO, follows:
DECEMBER 31,
----------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000
(000s OMITTED)
CITGO's investments in affiliates
(excluding NISCO) $ 716,469 $ 700,701 $ 712,560
CITGO's equity in net income of affiliates 101,326 108,915 58,728
Dividends and distributions received from affiliates 123,639 153,435 126,600
Selected financial information provided by the affiliates is summarized
as follows:
DECEMBER 31,
----------------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000
(000s OMITTED)
Summary of financial position:
Current assets $ 740,019 $ 566,204 $ 638,297
Noncurrent assets 3,396,209 3,288,950 3,005,582
Current liabilities (including debt of $52,417,
$685,089, and $729,806 at December 31,
2002, 2001, and 2000 respectively) 846,623 1,240,391 1,336,989
Noncurrent liabilities (including debt of
$2,185,502, $1,460,196, and $1,247,069
at December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000
respectively) 2,863,505 2,082,573 1,874,465
Summary of operating results:
Revenues $ 4,906,397 $ 4,603,136 $ 5,221,382
Gross profit 879,907 781,630 700,317
Net income 449,779 397,501 325,489
F-20
10. SHORT-TERM BANK LOANS
As of December 31, 2002, CITGO had established $90 million of
uncommitted, unsecured, short-term borrowing facilities with various
banks. Interest rates on these facilities were determined daily based
upon the federal funds' interest rates, and maturity options vary up to
30 days. The weighted average interest rates actually incurred in 2002,
2001, and 2000 were 2.5 percent, 2.3 percent, and 6.4 percent,
respectively. CITGO had no borrowings outstanding under these
facilities at December 31, 2002 and 2001.
As of January 13, 2003, following a debt rating downgrade, this
uncommitted, unsecured, short-term borrowing capacity is no longer
available.
11. LONG-TERM DEBT AND FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS
2002 2001
(000s OMITTED)
Revolving bank loans $ 279,300 $ 391,500
Senior Notes $200 million face amount, due 2006 with
interest rate of 7.875% 199,898 199,867
Senior Notes due 2003 with interest rate of 7.875% 499,661 499,117
Private Placement Senior Notes, due 2003 to 2006 with an
interest rate of 9.30% 45,455 56,819
Master Shelf Agreement Senior Notes, due 2003 to
2009 with interest rates from 7.17% to 8.94% 235,000 260,000
Tax-Exempt Bonds, due 2004 to 2032 with variable
and fixed interest rates 425,872 357,370
Taxable Bonds, due 2026 to 2028 with variable interest rates 115,000 146,000
------------ ------------
1,800,186 1,910,673
Current portion of long-term debt (690,325) (107,864)
------------ ------------
$ 1,109,861 $ 1,802,809
============ ============
REVOLVING BANK LOANS - CITGO's credit agreements with various banks
consist of: (i) a $260 million, three-year, revolving bank loan
maturing in December 2005; (ii) a $260 million, 364-day, revolving bank
loan maturing in December 2003; and (iii) a $25 million 364-day,
revolving bank loan maturing in May 2003, all of which are unsecured
and have various interest rate options. Interest rates on the revolving
bank loans ranged from 2.4 percent to 2.5 percent at December 31, 2002;
$279 million was outstanding under these credit agreements at December
31, 2002.
SHELF REGISTRATION - SENIOR NOTES - In April 1996, CITGO filed a
registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission
relating to the shelf registration of $600 million of debt securities
that may be offered and sold from time to time. In May 1996, the
registration became effective and
F-21
CITGO sold a tranche of debt securities with an aggregate offering
price of $200 million. On October 28, 1997, CITGO entered into a
Selling Agency Agreement with Salomon Brothers Inc. and Chase
Securities Inc. providing for the sale of up to an additional $235
million in aggregate principal amount of notes in tranches from time to
time by CITGO under the shelf registration. No amounts were sold under
this agreement as of December 31, 2002. Due to downgradings of CITGO's
credit ratings announced during the first part of 2003, the shelf
registration statement is not presently available. (See Note 2.)
SENIOR NOTES DUE 2003 - In August 1993, PDV America issued $1 billion
principal amount of Senior Notes with interest rates ranging from 7.25
percent to 7.875 percent with due dates ranging from 1998 to 2003.
Interest on these notes is payable semiannually, commencing February 1,
1994. The Senior Notes represent senior unsecured indebtedness of PDV
America, and are structurally subordinated to the liabilities of the
Company's subsidiaries. The Senior Notes are guaranteed by PDVSA and
Propernyn B.V., a Dutch limited liability company whose ultimate parent
is PDVSA. At December 31, 2002, the outstanding balance of $499.7
million, due on August 1, 2003, is included in current portion of
long-term debt.
PRIVATE PLACEMENT - At December 31, 2002, CITGO has outstanding
approximately $45 million of privately placed, unsecured Senior Notes.
Principal amounts are payable in annual installments in November and
interest is payable semiannually in May and November.
MASTER SHELF AGREEMENT - At December 31, 2002, CITGO has outstanding
$235 million of privately placed senior notes under an unsecured Master
Shelf Agreement with an insurance company. The notes have various fixed
interest rates and maturities.
COVENANTS - The various debt agreements above contain certain covenants
that, depending upon the level of capitalization and earnings of the
Companies, could impose limitations on the ability of the Companies to
pay dividends, incur additional debt, place liens on property, and sell
fixed assets. The Companies debt instruments described above do not
contain any covenants that trigger prepayment or increased costs as a
result of a change in their debt ratings. The Companies were in
compliance with the debt covenants at December 31, 2002.
TAX-EXEMPT BONDS - At December 31, 2002, through state entities, CITGO
has outstanding $49.8 million of industrial development bonds for
certain Lake Charles port facilities and pollution control equipment
and $356.2 million of environmental revenue bonds to finance a portion
of CITGO's environmental facilities at its Lake Charles and Corpus
Christi refineries and at the LYONDELL-CITGO refinery. The bonds bear
interest at various fixed and floating rates, which ranged from 2.1
percent to 8.0 percent at December 31, 2002 and ranged from 2.5 percent
to 6.0 percent at December 31, 2001. Additional credit support for the
variable rate bonds is provided through letters of credit.
PDVMR has issued $19.9 million of variable rate pollution control
bonds, with interest currently paid monthly. The bonds have one payment
at maturity in the year 2008 to retire the principal, and principal and
interest payments are guaranteed by a $20.3 million letter of credit.
TAXABLE BONDS - At December 31, 2002, through state entities, CITGO has
outstanding $115 million of taxable environmental revenue bonds to
finance a portion of CITGO's environmental facilities at its Lake
Charles refinery and at the LYONDELL-CITGO refinery. Such bonds are
secured by letters of credit and have floating interest rates (2.5
percent at December 31, 2002 and 3.1 percent at December 31, 2001). At
the option of CITGO and upon the occurrence of certain specified
conditions, all or any portion of such taxable bonds may be converted
to tax-exempt bonds. During 2002, 2001 and
F-22
2000, $31 million, $28 million and $0 of originally issued taxable
bonds were converted to tax-exempt bonds.
DEBT MATURITIES - Future maturities of long-term debt as of December
31, 2002 are: 2003 - $690.3 million; 2004 - $47.2 million; 2005 -
$161.3 million; 2006 - $251.2 million; 2007 - $61.8 million, and $588.3
million thereafter.
INTEREST RATE SWAP AGREEMENTS - CITGO has entered into the following
interest rate swap agreements to reduce the impact of interest rate
changes on its variable interest rate debt:
NOTIONAL PRINCIPAL AMOUNT
-------------------------
EXPIRATION FIXED RATE 2002 2001
VARIABLE RATE INDEX DATE PAID (000s OMITTED)
J.J. Kenny February 2005 5.30% $ 12,000 $ 12,000
J.J. Kenny February 2005 5.27% 15,000 15,000
J.J. Kenny February 2005 5.49% 15,000 15,000
--------- ---------
$ 42,000 $ 42,000
========= =========
Interest expense includes $0.6 million in 2000 related to net
settlements on these agreements. Effective January 1, 2001, changes in
the fair value of these agreements are recorded in other income
(expense). The fair value of these agreements at December 31, 2002,
based on the estimated amount that CITGO would receive or pay to
terminate the agreements as of that date and taking into account
current interest rates, was a loss of $3.5 million, the offset of which
is recorded in the balance sheet caption other current liabilities.
12. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS
EMPLOYEE SAVINGS - CITGO sponsors three qualified defined contribution
retirement and savings plans covering substantially all eligible
salaried and hourly employees. Participants make voluntary
contributions to the plans and CITGO makes contributions, including
matching of employee contributions, based on plan provisions. CITGO
expensed $23 million, $20 million, and $17 million related to its
contributions to these plans in 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively.
PENSION BENEFITS - CITGO sponsors three qualified noncontributory
defined benefit pension plans, two covering eligible hourly employees
and one covering eligible salaried employees. CITGO also sponsors three
nonqualified defined benefit plans for certain eligible employees. The
qualified plans' assets include corporate securities, shares in a fixed
income mutual fund, two collective funds and a short-term investment
fund. The nonqualified plans are not funded.
CITGO's policy is to fund the qualified pension plans in accordance
with applicable laws and regulations and not to exceed the tax
deductible limits. The nonqualified plans are funded as necessary to
pay retiree benefits. The plan benefits for each of the qualified
pension plans are primarily based on an employee's years of plan
service and compensation as defined by each plan.
POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS - In addition to pension
benefits, CITGO also provides certain health care and life insurance
benefits for eligible salaried and hourly employees at retirement.
These benefits are subject to deductibles, copayment provisions and
other limitations and are primarily funded on a pay-as-you-go basis.
CITGO reserves the right to change or to terminate the benefits at any
time.
F-23
The following sets forth the changes in benefit obligations and plan
assets for the CITGO pension and postretirement plans for the years
ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the funded status of such plans
reconciled with amounts reported in the Companies' consolidated balance
sheets:
PENSION BENEFITS OTHER BENEFITS
---------------------- ----------------------
2002 2001 2002 2001
(000s OMITTED) (000s OMITTED)
CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION:
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $ 336,917 $ 288,188 $ 260,696 $ 206,276
Service cost 17,171 15,680 7,191 5,754
Interest cost 24,007 21,798 18,603 15,708
Plan vesting changes 30 - - -
Actuarial loss 27,371 23,130 55,654 40,556
Benefits paid (11,670) (11,879) (7,993) (7,598)
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Benefit obligation at end of year 393,826 336,917 334,151 260,696
--------- --------- --------- ---------
CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS:
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 263,953 272,889 1,115 1,053
Actual return on plan assets (20,666) (10,185) 67 62
Employer contribution 9,182 13,128 7,993 7,598
Benefits paid (11,670) (11,879) (7,993) (7,598)
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 240,799 263,953 1,182 1,115
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Funded status (153,027) (72,965) (332,969) (259,581)
Unrecognized net actuarial loss (gain) 69,184 (1,991) 75,206 30,840
Unrecognized prior service cost 1,972 2,293 - -
Net gain at date of adoption (207) (475) - -
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Net amount recognized $ (82,078) $ (73,138) $(257,763) $(228,741)
========= ========= ========= =========
Amounts recognized in the Companies'
consolidated balance sheets consist of:
Accrued benefit liability $ (91,093) $ (80,238) $(257,763) $(228,741)
Intangible asset 2,308 3,035 - -
Accumulated other comprehensive income 6,707 4,065 - -
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Net amount recognized $ (82,078) $ (73,138) $(257,763) $(228,741)
========= ========= ========= =========
PENSION BENEFITS OTHER BENEFITS
------------------ ----------------
2002 2001 2002 2001
WEIGHTED-AVERAGE ASSUMPTIONS AS OF
DECEMBER 31:
Discount rate 6.75% 7.25% 6.75% 7.25%
Expected return on plan assets 8.50% 9.00% 6.00% 6.00%
Rate of compensation increase 5.00% 5.00% - -
F-24
For measurement purposes, a 10 percent pre-65 and an 11 percent post-65
annual rate of increase in the per capita cost of covered health care
benefits was assumed for 2002. These rates are assumed to decrease 1
percent per year to an ultimate level of 5 percent by 2008 for pre-65
and 2009 for post-65 participants, and to remain at that level
thereafter.
PENSION BENEFITS OTHER BENEFITS
---------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000
(000s OMITTED) (000s OMITTED)
Components of net periodic benefit cost:
Service cost $ 17,171 $ 15,680 $ 15,533 $ 7,191 $ 5,754 $ 5,769
Interest cost 24,007 21,798 19,680 18,603 15,708 14,392
Expected return on plan assets (23,668) (24,165) (24,397) (67) (63) (59)
Amortization of prior service cost 350 351 143 - - -
Amortization of net gain at date
of adoption (268) (268) (268) - - -
Recognized net actuarial gain 530 (3,021) (4,824) 11,288 - (17,254)
--------- --------- --------- -------- -------- ---------
Net periodic benefit cost $ 18,122 $ 10,375 $ 5,867 $ 37,015 $ 21,399 $ 2,848
========= ========= ========= ======== ======== =========
One-time adjustment $ - $ - $ 2,875 $ - $ - $ -
========= ========= ========= ======== ======== =========
Actuarial gains (or losses) related to the postretirement benefit
obligation are recognized as a component of net postretirement benefit
cost by the amount the beginning of year unrecognized net gain (or
loss) exceeds 7.5 percent of the accumulated postretirement benefit
obligation.
The projected benefit obligation, accumulated benefit obligation, and
fair value of plan assets for the pension plan with accumulated benefit
obligations in excess of plan assets were $37.3 million, $32.7 million
and $0, respectively, as of December 31, 2002 and $33.4 million, $29.3
million and $0, respectively, as of December 31, 2001.
Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the
amounts reported for the health care plans. A one-percentage-point
change in assumed health care cost trend rates would have the following
effects:
1-PERCENTAGE- 1-PERCENTAGE-
POINT INCREASE POINT DECREASE
-------------- --------------
(000s OMITTED)
Increase (decrease) in total of service and interest cost
components $ 4,623 $ (3,679)
Increase (decrease) in postretirement benefit obligation 52,653 (42,496)
PDVMR PENSION PLANS - In connection with the creation of PDVMR, on May
1, 1997, PDVMR assumed the responsibility for a former partnership's
pension plans, which include both a qualified and a nonqualified plan
which were frozen at their current levels on April 30, 1997. The plans
cover former employees of the partnership who were participants in the
plans as of April 30, 1997. At December 31, 2002 and 2001, plan assets
consisted of equity securities, bonds and cash.
The following sets forth the changes in benefit obligations and plan
assets for the PDVMR pension plans for the years ended December 31,
2002 and 2001, and the funded status of such plans reconciled with
amounts reported in the Companies' consolidated balance sheets:
F-25
2002 2001
---------------------
(000s OMITTED)
Change in benefit obligation:
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $ 53,590 $ 51,446
Interest cost 3,873 3,934
Actuarial loss (gain) 1,079 (2)
Benefits paid (2,713) (1,788)
-------- --------
Benefit obligation at end of year 55,829 53,590
-------- --------
Change in plan assets:
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 60,288 66,737
Actual return on plan assets (7,886) (4,661)
Employer contribution 106 -
Benefits paid (2,713) (1,788)
-------- --------
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 49,795 60,288
-------- --------
Funded status (6,033) 6,698
Unrecognized net actuarial loss 21,676 6,091
-------- --------
Net amount recognized $ 15,643 $ 12,789
======== ========
Amounts recognized in the Companies'
consolidated balance sheets consist of:
Prepaid Pension Cost - 13,179
Accrued benefit liability (6,033) (487)
Accumulated other comprehensive income 21,676 97
-------- --------
Net amount recognized $ 15,643 $ 12,789
======== ========
2002 2001
-----------------
WEIGHTED-AVERAGE ASSUMPTIONS AS OF DECEMBER 31:
Discount rate 6.75% 7.25%
Expected return on plan assets 8.50% 9.50%
2002 2001 2000
------------------------------
(000s OMITTED)
COMPONENTS OF NET PERIODIC BENEFIT CREDIT:
Interest cost $ 3,873 $ 3,934 $ 3,823
Expected return on plan assets (6,625) (6,421) (6,123)
Recognized net actuarial loss (gain) 4 3 (55)
------- ------- -------
Net periodic benefit credit $(2,748) $(2,484) $(2,355)
======= ======= =======
The projected benefit obligation of the nonqualified plan (which equals
the accumulated benefit obligation for this plan) was $380,000 as of
December 31, 2002 and $487,000 as of December 31, 2001. The plan is
unfunded.
F-26
13. INCOME TAXES
The provisions for income taxes are comprised of the following:
2002 2001 2000
(000s OMITTED)
Current:
Federal $ 44,979 $ 89,014 $108,130
State 751 5,687 4,614
Foreign 222
-------- -------- --------
45,952 94,701 112,744
Deferred 56,069 118,933 70,386
-------- -------- --------
$102,021 $213,634 $183,130
======== ======== ========
The federal statutory tax rate differs from the effective tax rate due
to the following:
2002 2001 2000
Federal statutory tax rate 35.0 % 35.0 % 35.0 %
State taxes, net of federal benefit 2.2 % 0.9 % 1.5 %
Dividend exclusions (2.8)% (1.1)% (1.2)%
Foreign tax credit - prior year - % - % (1.2)%
Foreign tax credit - current year - % (0.3)% (0.3)%
Other (0.4)% (0.1)% 1.5 %
---- ---- ----
Effective tax rate 34.0% 34.4% 35.3%
==== ==== ====
F-27
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of: (i) temporary
differences between the financial and tax bases of assets and
liabilities, and (ii) loss and tax credit carryforwards. The tax
effects of significant items comprising the net deferred tax liability
of the Companies as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 are as follows:
DECEMBER 31,
--------------------------------
2002 2001
(000s OMITTED)
Deferred tax liabilities:
Property, plant and equipment $ 754,839 $ 709,963
Inventories 81,912 93,459
Investments in affiliates 173,603 173,724
Other 95,978 58,399
----------- -----------
1,106,332 1,035,545
----------- -----------
Deferred tax assets:
Postretirement benefit obligations 99,234 88,049
Employee benefit accruals 58,130 52,486
Alternative minimum tax credit carryforward 36,536 33,469
Net operating loss carryforward 17,222 1,602
Foreign tax credit carryforward 5,202 3,091
Marketing and promotional accruals 4,815 4,989
Other 48,753 57,327
----------- -----------
269,892 241,013
----------- -----------
Netdeferred tax liability (of which $25,751 is included in current
assets at December 31, 2002 and $1,299 is included in current
liabilities at December 31, 2001) $ 836,440 $ 794,532
=========== ===========
The Companies' alternative minimum tax credit carryforwards are
available to offset regular federal income taxes in future years
without expiration, subject to certain alternative minimum tax
limitations.
On April 26, 1999, the Company filed a claim with the IRS for foreign
tax credits for Venezuelan income taxes withheld on interest payments
from PDVSA to PDV America, Inc. for tax years 1993 through 1995. The
total foreign tax credits claimed for these years was approximately
$9.8 million. The claim was approved by the IRS and the Joint Committee
and the refunds were received in 2001. In addition, the Company filed a
claim for similar foreign tax credits for the 1996 and 1997 tax years.
The total foreign tax credits for these years is approximately $8.1
million. The IRS audit for these years was partially settled in 2002
and the agreed upon tax (net of the foreign tax credit) was paid. One
issue from the 1996/1997 audit (unrelated to the foreign tax credit) is
pending resolution by the U.S. Tax Court. Resolution of this issue is
expected in 2003 and the Company believes that the Tax Court will not
disturb the allowance of the 1996/1997 foreign tax credits.
14. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
LITIGATION AND INJURY CLAIMS - Various lawsuits and claims arising in
the ordinary course of business are pending against the Companies. The
Companies record accruals for potential losses when, in management's
opinion, such losses are probable and reasonably estimable. If known
lawsuits and claims were to be determined in a manner adverse to the
Companies, and in amounts greater than the Companies' accruals, then
such determinations could have a material adverse effect on the
Companies'
F-28
results of operations in a given reporting period. The most significant
lawsuits and claims are discussed below.
A class action lawsuit brought by four former marketers of the UNO-VEN
Company ("UNO-VEN") in U.S. District Court in Wisconsin against UNO-VEN
alleging improper termination of the UNO-VEN Marketer Sales Agreement
under the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act in connection with PDVMR's
1997 acquisition of Unocal's interest in UNO-VEN has resulted in the
judge granting the Companies' motion for summary judgment. The
plaintiffs appealed the summary judgment and the Seventh Circuit of the
U.S. Court of Appeals has affirmed the judgment. The time for an appeal
to the U.S. Supreme court has expired, and therefore, this action is
concluded.
The Companies have settled a lawsuit against PDVMR and CITGO in
Illinois state court which claimed damages as a result of PDVMR
invoicing a partnership in which it is a partner, and an affiliate of
the other partner of the partnership, allegedly excessive charges for
electricity utilized by these entities' facilities located adjacent to
the Lemont, Illinois refinery. The electricity supplier to the refinery
is seeking recovery from the Companies of alleged underpayments for
electricity. The Companies have denied all allegations and are pursuing
their defenses.
In May 1997, a fire occurred at CITGO's Corpus Christi refinery.
Approximately seventeen related lawsuits were filed in federal and
state courts in Corpus Christi, Texas against CITGO on behalf of a
number of individuals, currently estimated to be approximately 5,000,
alleging property damages, personal injury and punitive damages. In
September 2002, CITGO reached an agreement to settle substantially all
of the claims related to this incident for an amount that did not have
a material financial impact on the Companies.
In September 2002, a state District Court in Corpus Christi, Texas has
ordered CITGO to pay property owners and their attorneys approximately
$6 million based on alleged settlement of class action property damage
claims as a result of alleged air, soil and groundwater contamination
from emissions released from CITGO's Corpus Christi, Texas refinery.
CITGO has appealed the ruling to Texas Court of Appeals.
Litigation is pending in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana
against CITGO by a number of current and former refinery employees and
applicants asserting claims of racial discrimination in connection with
CITGO's employment practices. A trial involving two plaintiffs resulted
in verdicts for CITGO. The Court granted CITGO summary judgment with
respect to another group of plaintiffs' claims, which rulings were
appealed and affirmed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Trials of
the remaining cases are set to begin in December 2003. CITGO does not
expect that the ultimate resolution of these cases will have an adverse
material effect on its financial condition or results of operations.
CITGO is among refinery defendants to state and federal lawsuits in New
York and state actions in Illinois and California alleging
contamination of water supplies by methyl tertiary butyl ether
("MTBE"), a component of gasoline. Plaintiffs claim that MTBE is a
defective product and that refiners failed to adequately warn customers
and the public about risks associated with the use of MTBE in gasoline.
These actions allege that MTBE poses public health risks and seek
testing, damages and remediation of the alleged contamination.
Plaintiffs filed putative class action lawsuits in federal courts in
Illinois, California, Florida and New York. CITGO was named as a
defendant in all but the California case. The federal cases were all
consolidated in a Multidistrict Litigation case in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York ("MDL 1358"). In
July 2002, the court in the MDL case denied plaintiffs' motion for
class certification. The California plaintiffs in the MDL action then
dismissed their federal lawsuit and refilled in state court in
California. CITGO does not expect that the resolution of the MDL and
California lawsuits will have a material impact on CITGO's financial
condition or results of operations. In August 2002, a New York state
court judge handling two separate
F-29
but related individual MTBE lawsuits dismissed plaintiffs' product
liability claims, leaving only traditional nuisance and trespass claims
for leakage from underground storage tanks at gasoline stations near
plaintiffs' water wells. Subsequently, a putative class action
involving the same leaking underground storage tanks has been filed.
CITGO anticipates filing a motion to dismiss the product liability
claims and will also oppose class certification. Also, in late October
2002, The County of Suffolk, New York, and the Suffolk County Water
Authority filed suit in state court, claiming MTBE contamination of
that county's water supply. The Illinois state action has been brought
on behalf of a class of contaminated well owners in Illinois and a
second class of all well owners within a defined distance of leaking
underground storage tanks. The judge in the Illinois state court action
is expected to hear plaintiffs' motion for class certification in that
case sometime within the next year.
In August 1999, the U.S. Department of Commerce rejected a petition
filed by a group of independent oil producers to apply antidumping
measures and countervailing duties against imports of crude oil from
Venezuela, Iraq, Mexico and Saudi Arabia. The petitioners appealed this
decision before the U.S. Court of International Trade based in New
York, where the matter is still pending. On September 19, 2000, the
Court of International Trade remanded the case to the Department of
Commerce with instructions to reconsider its August 1999 decision. The
Department of Commerce was required to make a revised decision as to
whether or not to initiate an investigation within 60 days. The
Department of Commerce appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit, which dismissed the appeal as premature on July 31,
2001. The Department of Commerce issued its revised decision, which
again rejected the petition, in August 2001. The revised decision was
affirmed by the Court of International Trade at December 17, 2002. The
independent oil producers may or may not appeal the Court of
International Trade's decision.
Approximately 140 lawsuits are currently pending against CITGO in state
and federal courts, primarily in Louisiana and Texas, arising from
asbestos related, illness, in which the Companies are a named
defendant. The cases were brought by former employees and contractor
employees seeking damages for asbestos related illnesses allegedly
resulting from exposure at refineries owned or operated by CITGO in
Lake Charles, Louisiana and Corpus Christi, Texas. In many of these
cases, there are multiple defendants. In some cases, CITGO is
indemnified by or has the right to seek indemnification for losses and
expense that it may incur from prior owners of the refineries or
employers of the claimants. CITGO does not believe that the resolution
of the cases will have an adverse material effect on its financial
condition or results of operations.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND REMEDIATION - The U.S. refining industry
is required to comply with increasingly stringent product
specifications under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments for reformulated
gasoline and low sulphur gasoline and diesel fuel that have
necessitated additional capital and operating expenditures, and altered
significantly the U.S. refining industry and the return realized on
refinery investments. Also, regulatory interpretations by the U.S. EPA
regarding "modifications" to refinery equipment under the New Source
Review ("NSR") provisions of the Clean Air Act have created uncertainty
about the extent to which additional capital and operating expenditures
will be required and administrative penalties imposed.
In addition, the Companies are subject to various federal, state and
local environmental laws and regulations which may require the
Companies to take additional compliance actions and also actions to
remediate the effects on the environment of prior disposal or release
of petroleum, hazardous substances and other waste and/or pay for
natural resource damages. Maintaining compliance with environmental
laws and regulations could require significant capital expenditures and
additional operating costs. Also, numerous other factors affect the
Companies' plans with respect to environmental compliance and related
expenditures.
F-30
The Companies' accounting policy establishes environmental reserves as
probable site restoration and remediation obligations become reasonably
capable of estimation. The Companies believe the amounts provided in
their consolidated financial statements, as prescribed by generally
accepted accounting principles, are adequate in light of probable and
estimable liabilities and obligations. However, there can be no
assurance that the actual amounts required to discharge alleged
liabilities and obligations and to comply with applicable laws and
regulations will not exceed amounts provided for or will not have a
material adverse affect on their consolidated results of operations,
financial condition and cash flows.
In 1992, an agreement was reached between CITGO and the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality ("LDEQ") to cease usage of certain
surface impoundments at the Lake Charles refinery by 1994. A mutually
acceptable closure plan was filed with the LDEQ in 1993. CITGO and its
former owner are participating in the closure and sharing the related
costs based on estimated contributions of waste and ownership periods.
The remediation commenced in December 1993. In 1997, CITGO presented a
proposal to the LDEQ revising the 1993 closure plan. In 1998 and 2000,
CITGO submitted further revisions as requested by the LDEQ. The LDEQ
issued an administrative order in June 2002 that addressed the
requirements and schedule for proceeding to develop and implement the
corrective action or closure plan for these surface impoundments and
related waste units. Compliance with the terms of the administrative
order has begun.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ("TCEQ") conducted a
two-day multi-media investigation of the Corpus Christi Refinery during
the second quarter of 2002 and has issued a Notice of Enforcement to
CITGO which identifies 31 items of alleged violations of Texas
environmental regulations. CITGO anticipates that penalties will be
proposed with respect to these matters, but no amounts have yet been
specified.
In June 1999, CITGO and numerous other industrial companies received
notice from the U.S. EPA that the U.S. EPA believes these companies
have contributed to contamination in the Calcasieu Estuary, in the
proximity of Lake Charles, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana and are
Potentially Responsible Parties ("PRPs") under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA"). The
U.S. EPA made a demand for payment of its past investigation costs from
CITGO and other PRPs and is conducting a Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study ("RI/FS") under its CERCLA authority.
CITGO and other PRPs may be potentially responsible for the costs of
the RI/FS, subsequent remedial actions and natural resource damages.
CITGO disagrees with the U.S. EPA's allegations and intends to contest
this matter.
In January and July 2001, CITGO received Notices of Violation ("NOVs")
from the U.S. EPA alleging violations of the Federal Clean Air Act. The
NOVs are an outgrowth of an industry-wide and multi-industry U.S. EPA
enforcement initiative alleging that many refineries and electric
utilities modified air emission sources without obtaining permits or
installing new control equipment under the New Source Review provisions
of the Clean Air Act. The NOVs followed inspections and formal
Information Requests regarding CITGO's Lake Charles, Louisiana, Corpus
Christi, Texas and Lemont, Illinois refineries. Since mid-2002, CITGO
has been engaged in settlement negotiations with the U.S. EPA. The
settlement negotiations have focused on different levels of air
pollutant emission reductions and the merits of various types of
control equipment to achieve those reductions. No settlement agreement,
or agreement in principal, has been reached. Based primarily on the
costs of control equipment reported by the U.S. EPA and other petroleum
companies and the types and number of emission control devices that
have been agreed to in previous petroleum companies' NSR settlement
with the U.S. EPA, CITGO estimates that the capital costs of a
settlement with the U.S. EPA could range from $130 to $200 million. Any
such capital costs would be incurred over a period of years,
anticipated to be from 2003 to 2008. Also, this cost estimate range,
while based on current information and judgment, is dependent on a
number of subjective factors, including the types of control devices
installed, the emission limitations set for the units the year the
technology may be installed, and possible future operational changes.
CITGO
F-31
also may be subject to possible penalties. If settlement discussions
fail, CITGO is prepared to contest the NOVs. If CITGO is found to have
violated the provisions cited in the NOVs, CITGO estimates the capital
expenditures or penalties that might result could range up to $290
million to be incurred over a period of years if a court makes a number
of legal interpretations that are adverse to CITGO.
In June 1999, an NOV was issued by the U.S. EPA alleging violations of
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
regulations covering benzene emissions from wastewater treatment
operations at the Lemont, Illinois refinery operated by CITGO. CITGO is
in settlement discussions with the U.S. EPA. CITGO believes this matter
will be consolidated with the matters described in the previous
paragraph.
In June 2002, a Consolidated Compliance Order and Notice of Potential
Penalty was issued by the LDEQ alleging violations of the Louisiana air
quality regulations at the Lake Charles, Louisiana refinery. CITGO is
in settlement discussions with the LDEQ.
Various regulatory authorities have the right to conduct, and from time
to time do conduct, environmental compliance audits of the Companies'
facilities and operations. Those audits have the potential to reveal
matters that those authorities believe represent non-compliance in one
or more respects with regulatory requirements and for which those
authorities may seek corrective actions and/or penalties in an
administrative or judicial proceeding. Other than matters described
above, based upon current information, the Companies are not aware that
any such audits or their findings have resulted in the filing of such a
proceeding or are the subject of a threatened filing with respect to
such a proceeding, nor do the Companies believe that any such audit or
their findings will have a material adverse effect on their future
business and operating results.
Conditions which require additional expenditures may exist with respect
to various sites of the Companies including, but not limited to, the
Companies' operating refinery complexes, former refinery sites, service
stations and crude oil and petroleum product storage terminals. Based
on currently available information, we cannot determine the amount of
any such future expenditures.
Increasingly stringent environmental regulatory provisions and
obligations periodically require additional capital expenditures.
During 2002, CITGO spent approximately $148 million for environmental
and regulatory capital improvements in its operations. Management
currently estimates that CITGO will spend approximately $1.3 billion
for environmental and regulatory capital projects over the five-year
period 2003-2007. These estimates may vary due to a variety of factors.
SUPPLY AGREEMENTS - CITGO purchases the crude oil processed at its
refineries and also purchases refined products to supplement the
production from its refineries to meet marketing demands and resolve
logistical issues. In addition to supply agreements with various
affiliates (Notes 3 and 5), CITGO has various other crude oil, refined
product and feedstock purchase agreements with unaffiliated entities
with terms ranging from monthly to annual renewal. CITGO believes these
sources of supply are reliable and adequate for its current
requirements.
THROUGHPUT AGREEMENTS - CITGO has throughput agreements with certain
pipeline affiliates (Note 9). These throughput agreements may be used
to secure obligations of the pipeline affiliates. Under these
agreements, CITGO may be required to provide its pipeline affiliates
with additional funds through advances against future charges for the
shipping of petroleum products. CITGO currently ships on these
pipelines and has not been required to advance funds in the past. At
December 31, 2002, CITGO has no fixed and determinable, unconditional
purchase obligations under these agreements.
COMMODITY DERIVATIVE ACTIVITY - As of December 31, 2002 the Companies'
petroleum commodity derivatives included exchange traded futures
contracts, forward purchase and sale contracts, exchange
F-32
traded and over-the-counter options, and over-the-counter swaps. At
December 31, 2002, the balance sheet captions other current assets and
other current liabilities include $29.5 million and $32.9 million,
respectively, related to the fair values of open commodity derivatives.
GUARANTEES - As of December 31, 2002, CITGO has guaranteed the debt of
others in a variety of circumstances including letters of credit issued
for an affiliate, bank debt of an affiliate, bank debt of an equity
investment, bank debt of customers and customer debt related to the
acquisition of marketing equipment as shown in the following table:
(000s OMITTED)
Letters of credit $ 50,740
Bank debt
Affiliate 10,000
Equity investment 5,500
Customers 4,471
Financing debt of customers
Equipment acquisition 2,766
--------
Total $ 73,477
========
In each case, if the debtor fails to meet its obligation, CITGO would
be obligated to make the required payment. The guarantees related to
letters of credit, affiliate's bank debt and equity investment bank
debt expire in 2003. The guarantees related to customer bank debt
expire between 2004 and 2009. The guarantees related to financing debt
associated with equipment acquisition by customers expire between 2003
and 2007. CITGO has not recorded any amounts on its balance sheet
relating to these guarantees.
In the event of debtor default on the letters of credit, CITGO has been
indemnified by PDV Holding, Inc., the direct parent of PDV America. In
the event of debtor default on the affiliate's and equity investment
bank debt, CITGO has no recourse. In the event of debtor default on
customer bank debt, CITGO generally has recourse to personal guarantees
from principals or liens on property, except in one case, in which the
guaranteed amount is $170 thousand, CITGO has no recourse. In the event
of debtor default on financing debt incurred by customers, CITGO would
receive an interest in the equipment being financed after making the
guaranteed debt payment.
CITGO has granted indemnities to the buyers in connection with past
sales of product terminal facilities. These indemnities provide that
CITGO will accept responsibility for claims arising from the period in
which CITGO owned the facilities. Due to the uncertainties in this
situation, CITGO is not able to estimate a liability relating to these
indemnities.
The Companies have not recorded a liability on their balance sheet
relating to product warranties because historically, product warranty
claims have not been significant.
OTHER CREDIT AND OFF-BALANCE SHEET RISK INFORMATION AS OF DECEMBER 31,
2002 - CITGO has outstanding letters of credit totaling approximately
$451 million, which includes $428 million related to
F-33
CITGO's tax-exempt and taxable revenue bonds and $20.3 million related
to PDVMR's pollution control bonds (Note 11).
CITGO has also acquired surety bonds totaling $71 million primarily due
to requirements of various government entities. CITGO does not expect
liabilities to be incurred related to such guarantees, letters of
credit or surety bonds.
Neither the Companies nor the counterparties are required to
collateralize their obligations under interest rate swaps or
over-the-counter derivative commodity agreements. The Companies are
exposed to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the
counterparties to these agreements. The Companies do not anticipate
nonperformance by the counterparties, which consist primarily of major
financial institutions.
Management considers the credit risk to the Companies related to their
commodity and interest rate derivatives to be insignificant during the
periods presented.
15. LEASES
CITGO leases certain of its Corpus Christi refinery facilities under a
capital lease. The basic term of the lease expires on January 1, 2004;
however, CITGO may renew the lease until January 31, 2011, the date of
its option to purchase the facilities at a nominal amount. Capitalized
costs included in property, plant and equipment related to the leased
assets were approximately $209 million at December 31, 2002 and 2001.
Accumulated amortization related to the leased assets was approximately
$134 million and $126 million at December 31, 2002, and 2001,
respectively. Amortization is included in depreciation expense.
The Companies also have various noncancelable operating leases,
primarily for product storage facilities, office space, computer
equipment, vessels and vehicles. Rent expense on all operating leases
totaled $102 million in 2002, $77 million in 2001, and $63 million in
2000. Future minimum lease payments for the capital lease and
noncancelable operating leases are as follows:
OPERATING
CAPITAL LEASES
YEAR LEASE (000s OMITTED) TOTAL
2003 $ 27,375 $105,580 $132,955
2004 5,000 64,296 69,296
2005 5,000 37,171 42,171
2006 5,000 21,038 26,038
2007 5,000 14,393 19,393
Thereafter 16,000 12,659 28,659
-------- -------- --------
Total minimum lease payments 63,375 $255,137 $318,512
======== ========
Amount representing interest 16,411
--------
Present value of minimum lease payments 46,964
Current portion (22,713)
--------
$ 24,251
========
F-34
16. FAIR VALUE INFORMATION
The following estimated fair value amounts have been determined by the
Companies, using available market information and appropriate valuation
methodologies. However, considerable judgment is necessarily required
in interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value.
Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not necessarily
indicative of the amounts that the Companies could realize in a current
market exchange. The use of different market assumptions and/or
estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated
fair value amounts.
The carrying amounts of cash equivalents approximate fair value. The
carrying amounts and estimated fair values of the Companies' other
financial instruments for which fair value estimates are practicable
are as follows:
2002 2001
---------------------------- ----------------------------
CARRYING FAIR CARRYING FAIR
AMOUNT VALUE AMOUNT VALUE
(000s OMITTED) (000s OMITTED)
LIABILITIES:
Long-term debt $ 1,800,186 $ 1,751,766 $ 1,910,673 $ 1,925,799
DERIVATIVE AND OFF-
BALANCE-SHEET
FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS -
UNREALIZED LOSSES:
Interest rate swap agreements (3,450) (3,450) (2,816) (2,816)
Guarantees of debt - (2,012) - (1,470)
Letters of credit - (6,548) - (5,903)
Surety bonds - (303) - (292)
At February 11, 2003, using current rates, the estimated fair values of
guarantees of debt and letters of credit are approximately $4.2 million
and $13.5 million, respectively.
SHORT-TERM BANK LOANS AND LONG-TERM DEBT - The fair value of short-term
bank loans and long-term debt is based on interest rates that are
currently available to the Companies for issuance of debt with similar
terms and remaining maturities.
INTEREST RATE SWAP AGREEMENTS - The fair value of these agreements is
based on the estimated amount that the Company would receive or pay to
terminate the agreements at the reporting dates, taking into account
current interest rates and the current creditworthiness of the
counterparties.
GUARANTEES, LETTERS OF CREDIT AND SURETY BONDS - The estimated fair
value of contingent guarantees of third-party debt, letters of credit
and surety bonds is based on fees currently charged for similar
one-year agreements or on the estimated cost to terminate them or
otherwise settle the obligations with the counterparties at the
reporting dates.
The fair value estimates presented herein are based on pertinent
information available to management as of the reporting dates. Although
management is not aware of any factors that would significantly affect
the estimated fair value amounts, such amounts have not been
comprehensively revalued for purposes of these financial statements
since that date, and current estimates of fair value may differ
significantly from the amounts presented herein.
F-35
17. INSURANCE RECOVERIES
On August 14, 2001, a fire occurred at the crude oil distillation unit
of the Lemont refinery. The crude unit was destroyed and the refinery's
other processing units were temporarily taken out of production. A new
crude unit was operational at the end of May 2002.
On September 21, 2001, a fire occurred at the hydrocracker unit of the
Lake Charles refinery. The hydrocracker unit was damaged and operations
at other processing units were temporarily affected. Operation of the
other refinery units returned to normal on October 16, 2001. Operations
at the hydrocracker resumed on November 22, 2001.
The Companies recognize property damage insurance recoveries in excess
of the amount of recorded losses and related expenses, and business
interruption insurance recoveries when such amounts are realized.
During the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, the Companies
recorded $407 million and $52 million, respectively, of insurance
recoveries related to these fires. Additionally, during 2001, the
Companies recorded in other income (expense), property losses and
related expenses totaling $54.3 million related to these fires. The
Companies received cash proceeds of $442 million and $29 million during
the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001. The Companies expect to
recover additional amounts related to the Lemont refinery event subject
to final settlement negotiations.
******
F-36
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
To the Partnership Governance Committee
of LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheets and related statements of
income, Partners' capital and cash flows present fairly, in all material
respects, the financial position of LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP (the Partnership)
at December 31, 2002 and December 31, 2001, and the results of its operations
and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
2002 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Partnership's management; our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits of these
statements in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the
United States of America, which require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing
the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Houston, Texas
February 14, 2003
F-37
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
----------------------------------------------
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001 2000
- ------------------- ------- ------- -------
SALES AND OTHER OPERATING REVENUES $ 3,392 $ 3,284 $ 4,075
OPERATING COSTS AND EXPENSES:
Cost of sales:
Crude oil and feedstock 2,546 2,379 3,246
Operating and other expenses 547 588 580
Selling, general and administrative expenses 53 61 60
------- ------- -------
3,146 3,028 3,886
------- ------- -------
Operating income 246 256 189
Interest expense (32) (52) (63)
Interest income -- 1 2
------- ------- -------
Income before extraordinary items 214 205 128
Extraordinary loss on extinguishment of debt (1) (2) --
------- ------- -------
NET INCOME $ 213 $ 203 $ 128
======= ======= =======
See Notes to Financial Statements.
F-38
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
BALANCE SHEETS
DECEMBER 31,
------------------------------
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001
- ------------------- ----------- -----------
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $ 101 $ 3
Accounts receivable:
Trade, net 47 31
Related parties and affiliates 106 62
Inventories 93 130
Prepaid expenses and other current assets 10 4
----------- -----------
Total current assets 357 230
----------- -----------
Property, plant and equipment 2,392 2,322
Construction projects in progress 159 177
Accumulated depreciation and amortization (1,239) (1,156)
----------- -----------
1,312 1,343
Deferred charges and other assets 88 97
----------- -----------
Total assets $ 1,757 $ 1,670
=========== ===========
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' CAPITAL
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable:
Trade $ 69 $ 117
Related parties and affiliates 212 98
Distribution payable to Lyondell Partners 106 17
Distribution payable to CITGO Partners 75 12
Loan payable to bank -- 50
Taxes, payroll and other liabilities 52 91
----------- -----------
Total current liabilities 514 385
----------- -----------
Long-term debt 450 450
Loan payable to Lyondell Partners 229 229
Loan payable to CITGO Partners 35 35
Pension, postretirement benefit and other liabilities 126 79
----------- -----------
Total long-term liabilities 840 793
----------- -----------
Commitments and contingencies
Partners' capital:
Partners' accounts 432 507
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (29) (15)
----------- -----------
Total partners' capital 403 492
----------- -----------
Total liabilities and partners' capital $ 1,757 $ 1,670
=========== ===========
See Notes to Financial Statements.
F-39
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
----------------------------------------------
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001 2000
- ------------------- ------- ------- -------
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net income $ 213 $ 203 $ 128
Adjustments to reconcile net income to
cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization 116 108 112
Net loss (gain) on disposition of assets 1 (3) 1
Extraordinary items 1 2 --
Changes in assets and liabilities that provided (used) cash:
Accounts receivable (59) 113 (62)
Inventories 37 (40) (43)
Accounts payable 70 (88) 97
Prepaid expenses and other current assets (5) 7 10
Other assets and liabilities (13) (22) (21)
------- ------- -------
Cash provided by operating activities 361 280 222
------- ------- -------
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Expenditures for property, plant and equipment (65) (109) (60)
Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment 2 8 --
Proceeds from sales tax refund related to capital expenditures -- 5 --
Other (3) -- (1)
------- ------- -------
Cash used in investing activities (66) (96) (61)
------- ------- -------
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Proceeds from (repayment of) bank loan (50) 30 20
Contributions from Lyondell Partners 46 45 25
Contributions from CITGO Partners 32 32 18
Distributions to Lyondell Partners (126) (165) (144)
Distributions to CITGO Partners (89) (116) (101)
Payment of debt issuance costs (10) (8) --
Repayment of current maturities of long-term debt -- -- (450)
Proceeds from PDVSA loan -- -- 439
Proceeds from Lyondell Partners' loans -- -- 4
Proceeds from CITGO Partners' loans -- -- 13
------- ------- -------
Cash used in financing activities (197) (182) (176)
------- ------- -------
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS 98 2 (15)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 3 1 16
------- ------- -------
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 101 $ 3 $ 1
======= ======= =======
See Notes to Financial Statements.
F-40
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS' CAPITAL
PARTNERS' ACCOUNTS ACCUMULATED
------------------------------------------------ OTHER
LYONDELL CITGO COMPREHENSIVE COMPREHENSIVE
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PARTNERS PARTNERS TOTAL INCOME (LOSS) INCOME (LOSS)
- ------------------- ---------- ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------
BALANCE AT JANUARY 1, 2000 $ 20 $ 536 $ 556 $ -- $ --
Net income 86 42 128 -- 128
Cash contributions 25 18 43 -- --
Distributions to Partners (128) (91) (219) -- --
---------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Comprehensive income $ 128
===========
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2000 3 505 508 -- $ --
Net income 129 74 203 -- 203
Cash contributions 45 32 77 -- --
Distributions to Partners (165) (116) (281) -- --
Other comprehensive income:
Minimum pension liability (15) (15)
---------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Comprehensive income $ 188
===========
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2001 12 495 507 (15) $ --
Net income 135 78 213 -- 213
Cash contributions 46 32 78 -- --
Distributions to Partners (215) (151) (366) -- --
Other comprehensive income:
Minimum pension liability (14) (14)
---------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Comprehensive income $ 199
===========
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2002 $ (22) $ 454 $ 432 $ (29)
========== =========== =========== ===========
See Notes to Financial Statements.
F-41
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. THE PARTNERSHIP
LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP ("LCR" or the "Partnership") was formed on July 1,
1993, by subsidiaries of Lyondell Chemical Company ("Lyondell") and CITGO
Petroleum Corporation ("CITGO") in order to own and operate a refinery
("Refinery") located adjacent to the Houston Ship Channel in Houston, Texas and
a lube oil blending and packaging plant in Birmingport, Alabama.
Lyondell owns its interest in the Partnership through wholly owned subsidiaries,
Lyondell Refining Partners, LP ("Lyondell LP") and Lyondell Refining Company
("Lyondell GP"). Lyondell LP and Lyondell GP together are known as Lyondell
Partners. CITGO holds its interest through CITGO Refining Investment Company
("CITGO LP") and CITGO Gulf Coast Refining, Inc. ("CITGO GP"), both wholly owned
subsidiaries of CITGO. CITGO LP and CITGO GP together are known as CITGO
Partners. Lyondell Partners and CITGO Partners together are known as the
Partners. LCR will continue in existence until it is dissolved under the terms
of the Limited Partnership Agreement (the "Agreement").
The Partners have agreed to allocate cash distributions based on an ownership
interest that is determined by certain contributions instead of allocating such
amounts based on their capital account balances. Based upon these contributions,
Lyondell Partners and CITGO Partners had ownership interests of approximately
59% and 41%, respectively, as of December 31, 2002. Net income before
depreciation, as shown on the statements of partners' capital is allocated to
the partners based on ownership interests, while depreciation is allocated to
the partners based on contributed assets.
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Revenue Recognition--Revenue from product sales is recognized as risk and title
to the product transfer to the customer, which usually occurs when shipment is
made.
Cash and Cash Equivalents--Cash equivalents consist of highly liquid debt
instruments such as certificates of deposit, commercial paper and money market
accounts. Cash equivalents include instruments with an original maturity date of
three months or less. Cash equivalents are stated at cost, which approximates
fair value. The Partnership's policy is to invest cash in conservative, highly
rated instruments and limit the amount of credit exposure to any one
institution.
Accounts Receivable--The Partnership sells its products primarily to other
industrial concerns in the petrochemical and refining industries. The
Partnership performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers' financial
condition and in certain circumstances, requires letters of credit from them.
The Partnership's allowance for doubtful accounts receivable, which is reflected
in the Balance Sheets as a reduction of accounts receivable-trade, totaled
$25,000 at both December 31, 2002 and 2001.
Inventories--Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is
determined using the last-in, first-out ("LIFO") basis for substantially all
inventories, except for materials and supplies, which are valued using the
average cost method.
Inventory exchange transactions, which involve fungible commodities and do not
involve the payment or receipt of cash, are not accounted for as purchases and
sales. Any resulting volumetric exchange balances are accounted for as inventory
in accordance with the normal LIFO valuation policy.
F-42
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
Property, Plant and Equipment--Property, plant and equipment are recorded at
cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated
useful asset lives, generally, 24 years for major manufacturing equipment, 24 to
30 years for buildings, 5 to 10 years for light equipment and instrumentation,
10 years for office furniture and 5 years for information system equipment. Upon
retirement or sale, LCR removes the cost of the asset and the related
accumulated depreciation from the accounts and reflects any resulting gain or
loss in the Statement of Income. LCR's policy is to capitalize interest cost
incurred on debt during the construction of major projects exceeding one year.
Long-Lived Asset Impairment--LCR evaluates long-lived assets for impairment
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that a carrying amount of
an asset may not be recoverable. When it is probable that undiscounted future
cash flows will not be sufficient to recover an asset's carrying amount, the
asset is written down to its estimated fair value. Long-lived assets to be
disposed of are reported at the lower of carrying amount or estimated fair value
less costs to sell the assets.
Turnaround Maintenance and Repair Costs--Costs of maintenance and repairs
exceeding $5 million incurred in connection with turnarounds of major units at
the Refinery are deferred and amortized using the straight-line method over the
period until the next planned turnaround, generally four to six years. These
costs are maintenance, repair and replacement costs that are necessary to
maintain, extend and improve the operating capacity and efficiency rates of the
production units. Amortization of deferred turnaround costs for 2002, 2001 and
2000 were $13 million, $11 million and $11 million, respectively. Other
turnaround costs and ordinary repair and maintenance costs were expensed as
incurred.
Environmental Remediation Costs--Anticipated expenditures related to
investigation and remediation of contaminated sites, which include operating
facilities and waste disposal sites, are accrued when it is probable a liability
has been incurred and the amount of the liability can reasonably be estimated.
Estimated expenditures have not been discounted to present value.
Income Taxes--The Partnership is not subject to federal income taxes as income
is reportable directly by the individual partners; therefore, there is no
provision for federal income taxes in the accompanying financial statements. The
Partnership is subject to certain state income taxes.
Use of Estimates--The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Accounting Changes--Effective January 1, 2002, LCR implemented Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 141, Business Combinations, SFAS No.
142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets and SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. Implementation of SFAS No. 141,
SFAS No. 142 and SFAS No. 144 did not have a material effect on the financial
statements of LCR.
Anticipated Accounting Changes--LCR expects to implement two significant
accounting changes in 2003, as discussed below.
In April 2002, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued SFAS No.
145, Rescission of FASB Statement No. 4, 44 and 64, Amendment of FASB Statement
No. 13, and Technical Corrections. The primary impact of the statement on LCR,
when implemented in 2003, will be the classification of gains or losses that
result from early extinguishment of debt as an element of income before
extraordinary items. Reclassification of prior period gains or losses that were
originally reported as extraordinary items also will be required (See Note 3).
F-43
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46 (FIN No. 46),
Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities. FIN No. 46 addresses situations in
which a company should include in its financial statements the assets,
liabilities and activities of another entity. FIN No. 46 applies immediately to
entities created after January 31, 2003 and, for LCR, will apply to older
entities beginning in the third quarter 2003. LCR does not expect FIN No. 46 to
have a significant effect on its financial statements.
Other Recent Accounting Pronouncements--In June 2001, the FASB issued SFAS No.
143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations, which addresses obligations
associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets. In July 2002, the
FASB issued SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Exit or Disposal Activities. SFAS No.
146 addresses the recognition, measurement and reporting of costs associated
with exit and disposal activities, including restructuring activities and
facility closings. SFAS No. 146 will be effective for activities initiated after
December 31, 2002. LCR does not expect adoption of SFAS No. 143 or SFAS No. 146
to have a material impact on its financial statements.
In November 2002, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 45 (FIN No. 45),
Guarantor's Accounting and Disclosure Requirements. FIN No. 45 expands required
disclosures for certain types of guarantees for the period ended December 31,
2002 and requires recognition of a liability at fair value for guarantees
granted after December 31, 2002. LCR does not expect FIN No. 45 to have a
significant effect on its financial statements.
Reclassifications--Certain previously reported amounts have been reclassified to
conform to classifications adopted in 2002.
3. EXTRAORDINARY ITEMS
In December 2002, LCR completed the refinancing of its credit facilities with a
new $450 million term bank loan facility and a $70 million working capital
revolving credit facility prior to maturity (See Note 7). LCR wrote off
unamortized debt issuance costs of $1 million. The $1 million charge was
reported as an extraordinary loss on extinguishment of debt. Previously, these
debt issuance costs had been deferred and amortized to interest expense.
In July 2001, LCR wrote off $2 million of unamortized debt issuance costs
related to the early retirement of the $450 million term credit facility. The
charge was reported as an extraordinary loss on extinguishment of debt (See Note
7).
F-44
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
4. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
LCR is party to agreements with the following related parties:
- - CITGO
- - CITGO Partners
- - Equistar Chemicals, LP ("Equistar") - Lyondell holds a 70.5% interest
- - Lyondell
- - Lyondell Partners
- - Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. ("PDVSA")
- - PDV Holding, Inc.
- - PDVSA Petroleo, S.A. ("PDVSA Oil")
- - PDVSA Services
- - Petrozuata Financial, Inc.
- - TCP Petcoke Corporation
LCR buys a substantial majority of its crude oil supply at deemed product-based
prices, adjusted for certain indexed items (See Notes 11 and 12), from PDVSA Oil
under the terms of a long-term crude oil supply agreement ("Crude Supply
Agreement").
Under the terms of a long-term product sales agreement, CITGO buys all of the
finished gasoline, jet fuel, low sulfur diesel, heating oils, coke and sulfur
produced at the Refinery at market-based prices.
LCR is party to a number of raw materials, product sales and administrative
service agreements with Lyondell, CITGO and Equistar. This includes a hydrogen
take-or-pay contract with Equistar (See Note 11). In addition, a processing
agreement provides for the production of alkylate and methyl tertiary butyl
ether for the Partnership at Equistar's Channelview, Texas petrochemical
complex.
Under the terms of a lubricant facility operating agreement, CITGO operates the
lubricant facility in Birmingport, Alabama while the Partnership retains
ownership. Under the terms of the lubricant sales agreements, CITGO buys
paraffinic lubricants base oil, naphthenic lubricants, white mineral oils and
specialty oils from the Partnership.
F-45
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
Related party transactions are summarized as follows:
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
---------------------------------------------
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001 2000
- ------------------- ------ ------ ------
LCR billed related parties for the following:
Sales of products:
CITGO $2,488 $2,309 $2,879
Equistar 217 203 264
Lyondell 1 -- --
PDVSA Services -- -- 14
TCP Petcoke Corporation 17 40 32
Services and cost sharing arrangements:
Equistar 1 2 - -
Lyondell 1 3 2
Related parties billed LCR for the following:
Purchase of products:
CITGO 78 80 52
Equistar 324 359 425
Lyondell 1 -- --
PDVSA 1,259 1,474 1,796
Petrozuata 22 -- --
Transportation charges:
CITGO 1 1 1
Equistar 3 3 --
PDVSA 3 3 1
Services and cost sharing arrangements:
CITGO 8 3 2
Equistar 17 19 15
Lyondell 3 3 4
During 2002, LCR and the Partners agreed to renew and extend a number of
existing notes due to Lyondell Partners and CITGO Partners with master notes to
each Partner. These master notes replace existing notes dated on or prior to
July 31, 2000. At December 31, 2002, Lyondell Partners and CITGO Partners loans
totaled $229 million and $35 million, respectively. Both master notes are due on
December 7, 2004. In accordance with an agreement with the Partners related to
LCR's credit facility (See Note 7), no interest was paid to Lyondell Partners or
CITGO Partners on these loans during 2002 or 2001.
During 2000, LCR paid PDVSA $15 million for interest on the $450 million interim
financing from May 2000 through September 2000. During 2000, LCR paid PDV
Holding, Inc. $1 million for interest on the interim $70 million revolver loan
from May 2000 through September 2000.
5. SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION
At December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, construction in progress included
approximately $6 million, $11 million and $3 million, respectively, of non-cash
additions which related to accounts payable accruals.
During 2002, 2001 and 2000, LCR paid interest of $26 million, $38 million and
$41 million, respectively. No interest costs were capitalized in 2002, 2001 or
2000. During each of the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, LCR paid
less than $1 million in state income tax.
F-46
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
During the third quarter 2000, LCR recorded certain non-cash financing
transactions. Proceeds from the $450 million one-year credit facility completed
in September 2000, net of approximately $11 million of loan costs, were paid
directly to the holder of the interim financing note. Also, approximately $6
million was paid by Lyondell directly to CITGO for Lyondell's share of previous
capital funding loans made by CITGO to LCR.
6. INVENTORIES
Inventories consisted of the following components at December 31:
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001
- ------------------- ---- ----
Finished goods $ 29 $ 42
Raw materials 51 75
Materials and supplies 13 13
---- ----
Total inventories $ 93 $130
==== ====
In 2002 and 2001, all inventory, excluding materials and supplies, were
determined by the LIFO method. The excess of replacement cost of inventories
over the carrying value was approximately $140 million and $53 million at
December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively.
7. FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS
In December 2002, LCR completed the refinancing of its credit facilities with a
new $450 million term bank loan facility and a $70 million working capital
revolving credit facility with eighteen-month terms (See Note 3). The
facilities, secured by substantially all of the assets of LCR, will mature in
June 2004. The $450 million term bank loan facility was originally used to
partially fund an upgrade project at the Refinery which was completed in
February 1997. At December 31, 2002, $450 million was outstanding under this
credit facility with a weighted-average interest rate of 4.5%. Interest for this
facility was determined by base rates or eurodollar rates at the Partnership's
option. The $70 million working capital revolving credit facility is utilized
for general business purposes and for letters of credit. At December 31, 2002,
no amounts were outstanding under this credit facility.
The December 2002 refinancing replaced an eighteen-month credit facility
consisting of a $450 million term loan (See Note 3) and a $70 million revolving
credit facility with a group of banks, that would have expired in January 2003.
These facilities replaced similar facilities, which would have expired in
September 2001.
At December 31, 2001, $450 million was outstanding under the $450 million term
loan with a weighted-average interest rate of 5.4%. At December 31, 2001, $50
million was outstanding under the $70 million revolving credit facility with a
weighted-average interest rate of 4.8%.
Both facilities contain covenants that require LCR to maintain a minimum net
worth and maintain certain financial ratios defined in the agreements. The
facilities also contain other customary covenants which limit the Partnership's
ability to modify certain significant contracts, incur significant additional
debt or liens, dispose of assets, make restricted payments as defined in the
agreements or merge or consolidate with other entities. LCR was in compliance
with all such covenants at December 31, 2002.
Also during the December 2002 refinancing, the Partners and LCR agreed to renew
and extend a number of existing notes due to Lyondell Partners and CITGO
Partners with master notes to each Partner. Both master notes extend the due
date to December 7, 2004 from July 1, 2003 and are subordinate to the two bank
credit facilities. At December 31, 2002, Lyondell Partners and CITGO Partners
loans totaled $229 million and $35 million, respectively, and both loans had
weighted-average interest rates of 2.2%, which were based on eurodollar rates.
At December 31, 2001, Lyondell Partners and CITGO Partners loans totaled $229
million and $35 million, respectively, and both loans had weighted-average
interest rates of 4.4%, which were based on eurodollar rates. Interest to both
Partners was paid at
F-47
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
the end of each calendar quarter through June 30, 1999, but is now deferred in
accordance with an agreement with the Partners related to the $450 million
credit facility.
At December 31, 2002, LCR had outstanding letters of credit totaling $12
million.
8. LEASE COMMITMENTS
LCR leases crude oil storage facilities, computers, office equipment and other
items under noncancelable operating lease arrangements for varying periods. As
of December 31, 2002, future minimum lease payments for the next five years and
thereafter, relating to all noncancelable operating leases with terms in excess
of one year were as follows:
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
- -------------------
2003 $ 29
2004 12
2005 12
2006 9
2007 8
Thereafter 13
------
Total minimum lease payments $ 83
======
Operating lease net rental expenses for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001
and 2000 were approximately $34 million, $32 million and $31 million,
respectively.
9. FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The fair value of all financial instruments included in current assets and
current liabilities, including cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable,
accounts payable and loan payable to bank, approximated their carrying value due
to their short maturity. The fair value of long-term loans payable approximated
their carrying value because they bear interest at variable rates.
10. PENSION AND OTHER POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS
All full-time regular employees of the Partnership are covered by defined
benefit pension plans sponsored by LCR. Retirement benefits are based on years
of service and the employee's highest three consecutive years of compensation
during the last ten years of service. LCR accrues pension costs based upon an
actuarial valuation and funds the plans through periodic contributions to
pension trust funds as required by applicable law. LCR also has one unfunded
supplemental nonqualified retirement plan, which provides pension benefits for
certain employees in excess of the tax-qualified plans' limit. In addition, LCR
sponsors unfunded postretirement benefit plans other than pensions, which
provide medical and life insurance benefits. The postretirement medical plan is
contributory, while the life insurance plan is noncontributory.
F-48
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
The following table provides a reconciliation of benefit obligations, plan
assets and the funded status of the plans:
OTHER POSTRETIREMENT
PENSION BENEFITS BENEFITS
----------------------- --------------------------
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001 2002 2001
- ------------------- -------- -------- --------- ---------
CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION:
Benefit obligation, January 1 $ 97 $ 70 $ 31 $ 32
Service cost 6 5 1 1
Interest cost 8 6 2 2
Plan amendments 1 -- -- --
Actuarial loss (gain) 15 21 3 (2)
Benefits paid (3) (5) (2) (2)
-------- -------- --------- ---------
Benefit obligation, December 31 124 97 35 31
-------- -------- --------- ---------
CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS:
Fair value of plan assets, January 1 39 42 -- --
Actual return on plan assets (5) (3) -- --
Partnership contributions 18 5 2 2
Benefits paid (3) (5) (2) (2)
-------- -------- --------- ---------
Fair value of plan assets, December 31 49 39 -- --
-------- -------- --------- ---------
Funded status (75) (58) (35) (31)
Unrecognized actuarial and investment loss 59 38 14 8
Unrecognized prior service cost (benefit) 3 2 (19) (22)
-------- -------- --------- ---------
Net amount recognized $ (13) $ (18) $ (40) $ (45)
======== ======== ========= =========
AMOUNTS RECOGNIZED IN BALANCE SHEETS:
Accrued benefit liability $ (13) $ (18) $ (40) $ (45)
Additional minimum liability (32) (17) -- --
Intangible asset 3 2 -- --
Accumulated other comprehensive income 29 15 -- --
-------- -------- --------- ---------
Net amount recognized $ (13) $ (18) $ (40) $ (45)
======== ======== ========= =========
Pension plans with projected and accumulated benefit obligations in excess of
the fair value of assets are summarized as follows at December 31:
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001
- ------------------- ---- ----
Projected benefit obligations $123 $ 97
Accumulated benefit obligations 93 74
Fair value of assets 49 39
F-49
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
Net periodic pension and other postretirement benefit costs included the
following components:
OTHER POSTRETIREMENT
PENSION BENEFITS BENEFITS
--------------------------------- ---------------------------------
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000
- ------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
COMPONENTS OF NET PERIODIC
BENEFIT COST:
Service cost $ 6 $ 5 $ 4 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1
Interest cost 8 6 6 2 2 2
Actual loss on plan assets 5 3 2 - - - - - -
Less-unrecognized loss (9) (7) (5) - - - - - -
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Recognized gain on plan assets (4) (4) (3) - - - - - -
Amortization of prior service costs - - - - - - (3) (3) (3)
Amortization of actuarial and
investment loss 3 2 - - 1 - - 1
Net effect of curtailments,
settlements and special
termination benefits - - - - 2 - - 1 - -
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Net periodic benefit cost $ 13 $ 9 $ 9 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1
====== ====== ====== ====== ====== ======
Special termination benefit charge $ - - $ - - $ 1 $ - - $ - - $ - -
====== ====== ====== ====== ====== ======
The assumptions used in determining net pension cost and net pension liability
were as follows at December 31:
OTHER POSTRETIREMENT
PENSION BENEFITS BENEFITS
--------------------------------- ---------------------------------
2002 2001 2000 2002 2001 2000
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Discount rate 6.50% 7.00% 7.50% 6.50% 7.00% 7.50%
Expected return on plan assets 9.50% 9.50% 9.50% N/A N/A N/A
Rate of compensation increase 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50%
The assumed annual rate of increase in the per capita cost of covered health
care benefits as of December 31, 2002 was 10% for 2003 through 2004, 7% for 2005
through 2007 and 5% thereafter. The health care cost trend rate assumption does
not have a significant effect on the amounts reported due to limits on LCR's
maximum contribution level to the medical plan. To illustrate, increasing or
decreasing the assumed health care cost trend rates by one percentage point in
each year would not change the accumulated postretirement benefit liability as
of December 31, 2002 and would not have a material effect on the aggregate
service and interest cost components of the net periodic postretirement benefit
cost for the year then ended.
LCR also maintains voluntary defined contribution savings plans for eligible
employees. Contributions to the plans by LCR were $5 million in each of the
three years ended December 31, 2002.
F-50
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
11. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Commitments--LCR has various purchase commitments for materials, supplies and
services incident to the ordinary conduct of business, generally for quantities
required for LCR's business and at prevailing market prices. LCR is party to
various unconditional purchase obligation contracts as a purchaser for products
and services, principally take-or-pay contracts for hydrogen, electricity and
steam. At December 31, 2002, future minimum payments under these contracts with
noncancelable contract terms in excess of one year and fixed minimum payments
were as follows:
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
- -------------------
2003 $ 49
2004 45
2005 43
2006 44
2007 46
Thereafter through 2021 419
-------
Total minimum contract payments $ 646
=======
Total LCR purchases under these agreements were $68 million, $94 million and $78
million during 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. A substantial portion of the
future minimum payments and purchases were related to a hydrogen take-or-pay
agreement with Equistar (See Note 4).
Crude Supply Agreement--Under the Crude Supply Agreement ("CSA"), which will
expire on December 31, 2017, PDVSA Oil is required to sell, and LCR is required
to purchase 230,000 barrels per day of extra heavy Venezuelan crude oil, which
constitutes approximately 86% of the Refinery's refining capacity of 268,000
barrels per day of crude oil (See Note 4). Since April 1998, PDVSA Oil has, from
time to time, declared itself in a force majeure situation and subsequently
reduced deliveries of crude oil. Such reductions in deliveries were purportedly
based on announced OPEC production cuts. PDVSA Oil informed LCR that the
Venezuelan government, through the Ministry of Energy and Mines, had instructed
that production of certain grades of crude oil be reduced. In certain
circumstances, PDVSA Oil made payments under a different provision of the CSA in
partial compensation for such reductions.
In January 2002, PDVSA Oil again declared itself in a force majeure situation
and stated that crude oil deliveries could be reduced by up to 20.3% beginning
March 1, 2002. Beginning in March 2002, deliveries of crude oil to LCR were
reduced to approximately 198,000 barrels per day, reaching a level of 190,000
barrels per day during the second quarter 2002. Crude oil deliveries to LCR
under the CSA increased to the contract level of 230,000 barrels per day during
the third quarter of 2002, averaging 212,000 barrels per day for the third
quarter. Although deliveries of crude oil increased to contract levels during
the third quarter 2002, PDVSA Oil did not revoke its January 2002 force majeure
declaration during 2002.
A national work stoppage in Venezuela began in early December 2002 and disrupted
deliveries of crude oil to LCR under the CSA, causing LCR to temporarily reduce
operating rates. PDVSA Oil again declared a force majeure and reduced deliveries
of crude oil to LCR. LCR compensated for the loss in supply by reducing its
inventories of CSA crude oil and increasing purchases of crude oil in the
merchant market (See Note 12). Recent media reports indicate that the force
majeure has been lifted.
LCR has consistently contested the validity of PDVSA Oil's and PDVSA's
reductions in deliveries under the CSA. The parties have different
interpretations of the provisions of the contracts concerning the delivery of
crude oil. The contracts do not contain dispute resolution procedures and the
parties have been unable to resolve their commercial
F-51
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
dispute. As a result, on February 1, 2002, LCR filed a lawsuit against PDVSA and
PDVSA Oil in connection with the force majeure declarations. From time to time,
Lyondell and PDVSA have had discussions covering both a restructuring of the CSA
and a broader restructuring of the LCR partnership. LCR is unable to predict
whether changes in either arrangement will occur.
Subject to the consent of the other partner and rights of first offer and first
refusal, the Partners each have a right to transfer their interest in LCR to
unaffiliated third parties in certain circumstances. In the event that CITGO
were to transfer its interest in LCR to an unaffiliated third party, PDVSA Oil
would have an option to terminate the CSA.
Depending on then-current market conditions, any breach or termination of the
CSA, or reduction in supply thereunder, would require LCR to purchase all or a
portion of its crude oil feedstocks in the merchant market, could subject LCR to
significant volatility and price fluctuations and could adversely affect the
Partnership. There can be no assurance that alternative crude oil supplies with
similar margins would be available for purchase by LCR.
Environmental Remediation--With respect to liabilities associated with the
Refinery, Lyondell generally has retained liability for events that occurred
prior to July 1, 1993 and certain ongoing environmental projects at the Refinery
under the Contribution Agreement, retained liability section. LCR generally is
responsible for liabilities associated with events occurring after June 30, 1993
and ongoing environmental compliance inherent to the operation of the Refinery.
LCR's policy is to be in compliance with all applicable environmental laws. LCR
is subject to extensive national, state and local environmental laws and
regulations concerning emissions to the air, discharges onto land or waters and
the generation, handling, storage, transportation, treatment and disposal of
waste materials. Many of these laws and regulations provide for substantial
fines and potential criminal sanctions for violations. Some of these laws and
regulations are subject to varying and conflicting interpretations. In addition,
the Partnership cannot accurately predict future developments, such as
increasingly strict environmental laws, inspection and enforcement policies, as
well as higher compliance costs therefrom, which might affect the handling,
manufacture, use, emission or disposal of products, other materials or hazardous
and non-hazardous waste. Some risk of environmental costs and liabilities is
inherent in particular operations and products of the Partnership, as it is with
other companies engaged in similar businesses, and there is no assurance that
material costs and liabilities will not be incurred. In general, however, with
respect to the capital expenditures and risks described above, the Partnership
does not expect that it will be affected differently than the rest of the
refining industry where LCR is located.
LCR estimates that it has a liability of approximately $1 million at December
31, 2002 related to future assessment and remediation costs. Lyondell has a
contractual obligation to reimburse LCR for approximately half of this
liability. Accordingly, LCR has reflected a current liability for the remaining
portion of this liability that will not be reimbursed by Lyondell. In the
opinion of management, there is currently no material estimable range of loss in
excess of the amount recorded. However, it is possible that new information
associated with this liability, new technology or future developments such as
involvement in investigations by regulatory agencies, could require LCR to
reassess its potential exposure related to environmental matters.
Clean Air Act--The eight-county Houston/Galveston region has been designated a
severe non-attainment area for ozone by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA"). Emission reduction controls for nitrogen oxides ("NOx") must be
installed at the Refinery located in the Houston/Galveston region during the
next several years. Recently adopted revisions by the regulatory agencies
changed the required NOx reduction levels from 90% to 80%. Under the previous
90% reduction standard, LCR estimated that aggregate related capital
expenditures could total between $130 million and $150 million before the 2007
deadline. Under the revised 80% standard, LCR estimates that capital
expenditures would decrease to between $50 million and $55 million. However, the
savings from this revision could be offset by costs of stricter proposed
controls over highly reactive, volatile organic compounds ("HRVOC"). LCR is
still assessing the impact of the proposed HRVOC revisions and there can be no
guarantee as to the ultimate capital cost of implementing any final plan
developed to ensure ozone attainment by the 2007 deadline. The timing and amount
of these expenditures are also subject to regulatory and other uncertainties, as
well as obtaining the necessary permits and approvals.
F-52
LYONDELL-CITGO REFINING LP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(CONTINUED)
The Clean Air Act also specified certain emissions standards for vehicles, and
in 1998, the EPA concluded that additional controls on gasoline and diesel fuel
were necessary. New standards for gasoline were finalized in 1999 and will
require refiners to produce a low sulfur gasoline by 2004, with final compliance
by 2006. A new "on-road" diesel standard was adopted in January 2001 and will
require refiners to produce ultra low sulfur diesel by June 2006, with some
allowance for a conditional phase-in period that could extend final compliance
until 2009. LCR estimates that these standards will result in increased capital
investment totaling between $175 million to $225 million for the new gasoline
standards and between $250 million to $300 million for the new diesel standard,
between now and the implementation dates. In addition, these standards could
result in higher operating costs.
General--LCR is involved in various lawsuits and proceedings. Subject to the
uncertainty inherent in all litigation, management believes the resolution of
these proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on the financial
position, liquidity or results of operations of LCR.
In the opinion of management, any liability arising from the matters discussed
in this note is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the financial
position or liquidity of LCR. However, the adverse resolution in any reporting
period of one or more of these matters discussed in this note could have a
material impact on LCR's results of operations for that period without giving
effect to contribution or indemnification obligations of codefendants or others,
or to the effect of any insurance coverage that may be available to offset the
effects of any such award.
12. SUBSEQUENT EVENT
Due to the national work stoppage in Venezuela that began in early December
2002, the resulting force majeure declared by PDVSA Oil and the related
reduction of CSA crude oil deliveries, LCR began purchasing significant volumes
of crude oil in the merchant market in late December 2002 and January 2003 (See
Note 11). As a result of these merchant market purchases and the lower CSA
deliveries, LCR operated at approximately 70% of capacity in January 2003.
Operating rates returned to 265,000 barrels per day beginning in February 2003
as CSA deliveries returned to the contractual level, despite the force majeure
declaration. Given the uncertainties surrounding the restoration of normal
operations at PDVSA, future effects on the CSA cannot be determined. Recent
media reports indicate that the force majeure has been lifted.
F-53
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
Exhibit
Number Description
- ------ -----------
3.1 Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation and By-
laws of PDV America (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration Statement
on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 3.1 filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
4.1 Indenture, dated as of August 1, 1993, among PDV America, Propernyn, PDVSA and Citibank, N.A.,
as trustee, relating to PDV America's 7-1/4% Senior Notes due 1998, 7-3/4% Senior Notes due
2000 and 7-7/8% Senior Notes due 2003, including the form of Senior Notes (incorporated by
reference to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742,
Exhibit 4.1 filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
4.2 Indenture, dated February 27, 2003, between CITGO Petroleum Corporation, as Issuer, and The
Bank of New York, as Trustee, relating to the $550,000,000 11-3/8% Senior Notes due 2011 of
CITGO Petroleum Corporation (incorporated by reference to CITGO Petroleum Corporation's 2002
Form 10-K, File No. 1-14380, Exhibit 4.2 filed with the Commission on March 24, 2003).
10.1 Crude Supply Agreement between CITGO Petroleum Corporation and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A.,
dated as of September 30, 1986 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration
Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.1 filed with the Commission on June 2,
1993).
10.2 Supplemental Crude Supply Agreement dated as of September 30, 1986 between CITGO Petroleum
Corporation and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s
Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.2 filed with the Commission
on June 2, 1993).
10.3 Crude Oil and Feedstock Supply Agreement dated as of March 31, 1987 between Champlin Refining
Company and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s
Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.3 filed with the Commission
on June 2, 1993).
10.4 Supplemental Crude Oil and Feedstock Supply Agreement dated as of March 31, 1987 between
Champlin Refining Company and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (incorporated by reference to PDV
America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.4 filed with
the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.5 Contract for the Purchase/Sale of Boscan Crude Oil dated as of June 2, 1993 between Tradecal,
S.A. and CITGO Asphalt Refining Company (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s
Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.1 filed with the Commission
on June 2, 1993).
10.6 Restated Contract for the Purchase/Sale of Heavy/Extra Heavy Crude Oil dated December 28, 1990
among Maraven, S.A., Lagoven, S.A. and Seaview Oil Company (incorporated by reference to PDV
America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.6 filed with
the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.7 Sublease Agreement dated as of March 31, 1987 between Champlin Petroleum Company, Sublessor,
and Champlin Refining Company, Sublessee (incorporated by reference to PDV
America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.7 filed
with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.8 Contribution Agreement among Lyondell Petrochemical Company and LYONDELL-CITGO Refining
Company, Ltd. and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A (incorporated by reference to PDV America,
Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.10 filed with the
Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.9 Crude Oil Supply Agreement between LYONDELL-CITGO Refining Company, Ltd. and Lagoven, S.A.
dated as of May 5, 1993 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s Registration
Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.11 filed with the Commission on June 2,
1993).
10.10 Supplemental Supply Agreement dated as of May 5, 1993 between LYONDELL-CITGO Refining Company,
Ltd. and Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s
Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.12 filed with the Commission
on June 2, 1993).
10.11 Tax Allocation Agreement dated as of June 24, 1993 among PDV America, Inc., VPHI Midwest,
Inc., CITGO Petroleum Corporation and PDV USA, Inc., as amended (incorporated by reference to
PDV America, Inc.'s Registration Statement on Form F-1, File No. 33-63742, Exhibit 10.13 filed
with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.12 Second Amendment to the Tax Allocation Agreement among PDV America, Inc., VPHI Midwest, Inc.,
CITGO Petroleum Corporation and PDV USA, Inc., dated as of January 1, 1997 (incorporated by
reference to CITGO Petroleum Corporation's 2001 Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit 10.13(i)
filed with the Commission on June 2, 1993).
10.13 Limited Partnership Agreement of LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP, dated December 31, 1998
(incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s 1998 Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit
10.20 filed with the Commission on March 30, 1999).
10.14 Loan Agreement with PDVSA Finance Ltd. consisting of a Promissory Note in the amount of
$130,000,000, dated November 10, 1998 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s 1998
Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit 10.21 filed with the Commission on March 30, 1999).
10.15 Loan Agreement with PDVSA Finance Ltd. consisting of a Promissory Note in the amount of
$130,000,000,dated November 10, 1998 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s 1998
Form 10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit 10.22 filed with the Commission on March 30, 1999).
10.16 Loan Agreement with PDVSA Finance Ltd. consisting of a Promissory Note in the amount of
$38,000,000, dated July 2, 1999 (incorporated by reference to PDV America, Inc.'s 1999 Form
10-K, File No. 1-12138, Exhibit 10.23 filed with the Commission on March 30, 2000).
12.1** Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
21.1** List of Subsidiaries of the Registrant.
23.1* Consent of Independent Auditors.
23.2* Consent of Independent Accountants of LYONDELL-CITGO Refining LP.
31.1* Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 filed by
Aires Barreto, Chief Executive Officer.
31.2* Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 filed by Luis
Vierma, Chief Financial Officer.
32.1* Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code as to the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 filed by Aires Barreto,
Chief Executive Officer.
32.2* Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code as to the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 filed by Luis Vierma,
Chief Financial Officer.
- -----------
* Filed Herewith
** Previously Filed