Item
1. Business
Business
Overview
We are
one of the largest coal producers in the United States and we are the
largest coal company in Central Appalachia, our primary region of operation, in
terms of tons produced and total coal reserves in 2009.
We
produce, process and sell bituminous coal of various steam and metallurgical
grades, primarily of a low sulfur content, through our 23 processing and
shipping centers (“Resource Groups”), many of which receive coal from multiple
mines. At January 31, 2010, we operated 56 mines, including 42 underground mines
(two of which employ both room and pillar and longwall mining) and 14 surface
mines (with 12 highwall miners in operation) in West Virginia, Kentucky and
Virginia. The number of mines that we operate may vary from time to
time depending on a number of factors, including the existing demand for and
price of coal, exhaustion of economically recoverable reserves and availability
of experienced labor.
Customers
for our steam coal product include primarily electric power utility companies
who use our coal as fuel for their steam-powered
generators. Customers for our metallurgical coal include primarily
steel producers who use our coal to produce coke, which is in turn used as a raw
material in the steel manufacturing process.
A.T.
Massey was originally incorporated in Richmond, Virginia in 1920 as a coal
brokering business. In the late 1940s, A.T. Massey expanded its business to
include coal mining and processing. In 1974, St. Joe Minerals acquired a
majority interest in A.T. Massey. In 1981, St. Joe Minerals was acquired by
Fluor Corporation. A.T. Massey was wholly owned by Fluor Corporation from 1987
until November 30, 2000. On November 30, 2000, we completed a reverse spin-off
(the “Spin-Off”) which separated Fluor Corporation into two
entities: the “new” Fluor Corporation (“New Fluor”) and Fluor
Corporation which retained our coal-related businesses and was subsequently
renamed Massey Energy Company. Massey Energy Company has been a
separate, publicly traded company since December 1, 2000.
Industry
Overview
Coal
accounted for 25% of the energy consumed (excluding certain alternative fuels
including wind, geothermal and solar power generators) by the United States and
29% of energy consumed globally in 2008, according to the BP Statistical Review
of World Energy (“BP”). In 2008, coal was the fuel source of 49% of the
electricity generated nationwide, as reported by the Energy Information
Administration (“EIA”), a statistical agency of the United States Department of
Energy.
According
to BP, in 2008, the United States was the second largest coal producer in the
world, exceeded only by China. Other leading coal producers include Australia,
India, South Africa, the Russian Federation and Indonesia. According to BP, the
United States has the largest coal reserves in the world, with proved reserves
totaling 238 billion tons. The Russian Federation ranks second in proved coal
reserves with 157 billion tons, followed by China with 115 billion tons,
according to BP. The United States has more than 200 years of coal
reserves at current production rates.
United
States coal production has more than doubled over the last 40 years. In 2009,
total United States coal production, as estimated by EIA, was 1.1 billion tons.
The primary producing regions by tons were as follows:
|
Region
|
|
% of Total
|
|
|
Powder
River Basin
|
|
|
46%
|
|
|
Central
Appalachia
|
|
|
19%
|
|
|
Northern
Appalachia
|
|
|
12%
|
|
|
West
(other than Powder River Basin)
|
|
|
11%
|
|
|
Midwest
|
|
|
10%
|
|
|
All
other
|
|
|
2%
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100%
|
|
The EIA
estimated that approximately 69% of United States coal was produced by surface
mining methods in 2008. The remaining 31% was produced by underground mining
methods, which include room and pillar mining and longwall mining (more fully
described in Item 1. Business, under the heading “Mining Methods”).
Coal is
used in the United States by utilities to generate electricity, by steel
companies to make steel products, and by a variety of industrial users to
produce heat and to power foundries, cement plants, paper mills, chemical plants
and other manufacturing and processing facilities. Significant quantities of
coal are also exported from both East and Gulf Coast terminals. The breakdown of
United States coal consumption for the first ten months of 2009 as estimated by
EIA is as follows:
|
End
Use
|
|
% of Total
|
|
|
Electric
Power
|
|
|
94%
|
|
|
Other
Industrial
|
|
|
4%
|
|
|
Coke
|
|
|
2%
|
|
|
Residential
and Commercial
|
|
<1%
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100%
|
|
Coal has
long been favored as an electricity generating fuel because of its basic
economic advantage. The largest cost component in electricity generation is
fuel. This fuel cost is typically lower for coal than competing fuels such as
oil and natural gas on a Btu-comparable basis. The EIA estimates the
average cost of various fossil fuels for generating electricity in the first 10
months of 2009 was as follows:
|
Electricity
Generation Source
|
|
Average Cost per million BTU
|
|
Petroleum
Liquids
|
|
$9.92
|
|
Natural
Gas
|
|
$4.65
|
|
Coal
|
|
$2.22
|
|
Petroleum
Coke
|
|
$1.59
|
There are
factors other than fuel cost that influence each utility’s choice of electricity
generation mode, including facility construction cost, access to fuel
transportation infrastructure, environmental restrictions, and other factors.
The breakdown of United States electricity generation by fuel source in the
first 10 months of 2009, as estimated by EIA, is as follows:
|
Electricity
Generation Source
|
|
%
of Total Electricity Generation
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
44%
|
|
|
Natural
Gas
|
|
|
24%
|
|
|
Nuclear
|
|
|
20%
|
|
|
Hydroelectric
|
|
|
7%
|
|
|
Oil
and other (solar, wind, etc.)
|
|
|
5%
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100%
|
|
Demand
for electricity has historically been driven by United States economic growth
but it can fluctuate from year to year depending on weather patterns. In the
first 10 months of 2009, electricity consumption in the United States decreased
4.4% from the same period in 2008, but the average growth rate in the past
decade was approximately 1.3% per year according to EIA estimates. Because
coal-fired generation is used in most cases to meet base load requirements, coal
consumption has generally grown at the pace of electricity demand
growth.
According
to the World Coal Institute (“WCI”), in 2008, the United States ranked fourth
among worldwide exporters of coal. Australia was the largest exporter, with
other major exporters including Indonesia, the Russian Federation, Columbia,
South Africa and China. According to Energy Ventures Analysis, Inc. ("EVA"),
United States exports decreased by 28% from 2008 to 2009. The usage breakdown
for 2009 United States coal exports of 59 million tons was 39% for electricity
generation and 61% for steel production. In 2009, United States coal exports
were shipped to more than 40 countries. The largest purchaser of United States
exported utility coal in 2009 continued to be Canada, which took 8.2 million
tons or 36% of total utility coal exports. This was down 57% compared to the
19.1 million tons exported to Canada in 2008. Overall steam coal exports
decreased 41% in 2009 compared to 2008. The largest purchaser of United States
exported metallurgical coal was Brazil, which
imported
approximately 8.1 million tons from the United States, or 22% of total United
States metallurgical coal exports. In total, metallurgical coal exports
decreased 16% in 2009, compared to 2008.
Depending
on the relative strength of the United States dollar versus currencies in other
coal producing regions of the world, United States producers may export more or
less coal into foreign countries as they compete on price with other foreign
coal producing sources. Likewise, the domestic coal market may be impacted due
to the relative strength of the United States dollar to other currencies, as
foreign sources could be cost-advantaged based on a coal producing region’s
relative currency position.
During
the past ten years, the global marketplace for coal has experienced swings in
the demand/supply balance. In periods of supply shortfall, as
occurred from 2003 to early 2006 and again in late 2007 through late 2008, the
prices for coal reached record highs in the United States. The increased
worldwide demand was primarily driven by higher prices for oil and natural gas
and economic expansion, particularly in China, India and elsewhere in Asia. At
the same time, infrastructure and regulatory limitations in China contributed to
a tightening of worldwide coal supply, affecting global prices of coal. The
growth in China and India caused an increase in worldwide demand for raw
materials and a disruption of expected coal exports from China to Japan, Korea
and other countries. Since mid-2008, the United States and world
economies have been in an economic recession and financial credit crisis,
reducing the demand for coal.
Metallurgical
grade coal is distinguished by special quality characteristics that include high
carbon content, volatile matter, low expansion pressure, low sulfur content, and
various other chemical attributes. High vol met coal is also high in heat
content (as measured in Btus), and therefore is desirable to utilities as fuel
for electricity generation. Consequently, high vol met coal producers have the
ongoing opportunity to select the market that provides maximum revenue and
profitability. The premium price offered by steel makers for the metallurgical
quality attributes is typically higher than the price offered by utility coal
buyers that value only the heat content. The primary concentration of United
States metallurgical coal reserves is located in the Central Appalachian region.
EVA estimates that the Central Appalachian region supplied 88% of domestic
metallurgical coal and 70% of United States exported metallurgical coal during
2008.
For
utility coal buyers, the primary goal is to maximize heat content, with other
specifications like ash content, sulfur content, and size varying considerably
among different customers. Low sulfur coals, such as those produced in the
western United States and in Central Appalachia, generally demand a higher price
due to restrictions on sulfur emissions imposed by the Federal Clean Air Act, as
amended, and implementing regulations (“Clean Air Act”) and the volatility in
sulfur dioxide
(
“
SO
2
”)
allowance prices that occurred in recent years when the demand for all
specifications of coal increased. SO
2
allowances
permit utilities to emit a higher level of SO
2
than
otherwise required under the Clean Air Act regulations. The demand and premium
price for low sulfur coal is expected to diminish as more utilities install
scrubbers at their coal-fired plants.
Coal
shipped for North American consumption is typically sold at the mine loading
facility with transportation costs being borne by the purchaser. Offshore export
shipments are normally sold at the ship-loading terminal, with the purchaser
paying the ocean freight. According to the National Mining Association (“NMA”),
approximately two-thirds of United States coal shipments in recent years were
transported via railroads. Final delivery to consumers often involves more than
one transportation mode. A significant portion of United States production is
delivered to customers via barges on the inland waterway system and ships loaded
at Great Lakes ports.
Neither
we nor any of our subsidiaries are affiliated with or have any investment in BP,
EIA, EVA or WCI. We are a member of the NMA.
Mining
Methods
We
produce coal using four distinct mining methods: underground room and pillar,
underground longwall, surface and highwall mining, which are explained as
follows:
In the
underground room and pillar method of mining, continuous miners cut three to
nine entries into the coal bed and connect them by driving crosscuts, leaving a
series of rectangular pillars, or columns of coal, to help support the mine roof
and control the flow of air. Generally openings are driven 20 feet wide and the
pillars are 40 to 100 feet wide. As mining advances, a grid-like pattern of
entries and pillars is formed. When mining advances to the end of a panel,
retreat mining may begin. In retreat mining, as much coal as is feasible is
mined from the pillars that were created in advancing the panel, allowing the
roof to fall upon retreat. When retreat mining is completed to the mouth of the
panel, the mined panel is abandoned.
In
longwall mining (which is a type of underground mining), a shearer (cutting
head) moves back and forth across a panel of coal typically about 1,000 feet in
width, cutting a slice approximately 3.5 feet deep. The cut coal falls onto a
flexible conveyor for removal. Longwall mining is performed under hydraulic roof
supports (shields) that are advanced as the seam is cut. The roof in the mined
out areas falls as the shields advance.
Surface
mining is used to extract coal deposits found close to the surface. This method
involves removal of overburden (earth and rock covering coal) with heavy earth
moving equipment, including large shovels and draglines, and explosives,
followed by extraction of coal from coal seams. After extraction of coal,
disturbed parcels of land are reclaimed by replacing overburden and
reestablishing vegetation and plant life.
Highwall
mining is used in connection with surface mining. A highwall mining system
consists of a remotely controlled continuous miner, which extracts coal and
conveys it via augers or belt conveyors to the portal. The cut is typically a
rectangular, horizontal opening in the highwall (the unexcavated face of exposed
overburden and coal in a surface mine) 11-feet wide and reaching depths of up to
1,000 feet. Multiple, parallel openings are driven into the highwall, separated
by narrow pillars that extend the full depth of the hole.
Use of
continuous miners in the room and pillar method of underground mining
represented approximately 45% of our 2009 coal production. Production from
underground longwall mining operations constituted approximately 3% of our 2009
production. Surface mining represented approximately 44% of our 2009 coal
production. Highwall mining represented approximately 8% of our 2009 coal
production.
Mining
Operations
We
currently have 23 distinct Resource Groups, including seventeen in West
Virginia, five in Kentucky and one in Virginia. These complexes blend, process
and ship coal that is produced from one or more mines, with a single complex
handling the coal production of as many as ten distinct underground or surface
mines. Our mines have been developed at strategic locations in close proximity
to our preparation plants and rail shipping facilities.
We
currently operate solely in the Central Appalachian region, which is the
principal source of low sulfur bituminous coal in the United States, used for
power generation, metallurgical coke production and industrial boilers. Central
Appalachian coal accounted for 19% of 2009 United States coal production
according to EIA.
The
following map provides the location of our operations within the Central
Appalachian region:
The
following table provides key operational information on our Resource Groups in
2009:
|
Resource
Group Name
|
Location
(County)
|
Active/
Inactive
|
|
Mine
Type
|
|
|
Active
Mine Count
(1)
|
|
Mining
Equipment
|
Transportation
|
|
2009
Production
(2)
|
|
|
2009
Shipments
(3)
|
|
|
Year
Established or Acquired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands
of Tons)
|
|
|
|
|
|
West
Virgina Resource Groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black
Castle
|
Boone
|
Active
|
|
|
S
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
HW
|
truck,
barge
|
|
|
2,680
|
|
|
|
1,843
|
|
|
|
1987
|
|
|
|
|
Delbarton
|
Mingo
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
NS
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
893
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
|
Edwight
|
Raleigh
|
Active
|
|
|
S
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
CSX
|
|
|
1,482
|
|
|
|
2,159
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
|
Elk
Run
|
Boone
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
CSX
|
|
|
2,033
|
|
|
|
3,292
|
|
|
|
1978
|
|
|
|
|
Endurance
|
Boone
|
Inactive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CSX
|
|
|
483
|
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
|
Green
Valley
|
Nicholas
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
CSX
|
|
|
847
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
|
|
1996
|
|
|
|
|
Guyandotte
|
Wyoming
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
NS
|
|
|
228
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Independence
|
Boone
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
LW
|
CSX
|
|
|
1,490
|
|
|
|
2,811
|
|
|
|
1994
|
|
|
|
|
Inman
|
Boone
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
CSX
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
Logan
County
|
Logan
|
Active
|
|
|
S/U
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
HW
|
CSX
|
|
|
3,738
|
|
|
|
3,233
|
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
|
Mammoth
|
Kanawha
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
barge/NS
|
|
|
1,688
|
|
|
|
4,465
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
Marfork
|
Raleigh
|
Active
|
|
|
S/U
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
LW/HW
|
CSX
|
|
|
4,244
|
|
|
|
3,925
|
|
|
|
1993
|
|
|
|
|
Nicholas
Energy
|
Nicholas
|
Active
|
|
|
S/U
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
HW
|
NS
|
|
|
2,211
|
|
|
|
2,043
|
|
|
|
1997
|
|
|
|
|
Progress
|
Boone
|
Active
|
|
|
S
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
HW/DL
|
CSX
|
|
|
4,954
|
|
|
|
3,149
|
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
|
Rawl
|
Mingo
|
Active
|
|
|
U
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
NS
|
|
|
999
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1974
|
|
|
|
|
Republic
Energy
|
Raleigh
|
Active
|
|
|
S
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
HW
|
truck
|
|
|
3,367
|
|
|
|
260
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
Stirrat
|
Logan
|
Active
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CSX
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
1.068
|
|
|
|
1993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kentucky
Resource Groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coalgood
Energy
|
Harlan
|
Active
|
|
|
S/U
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
HW
|
CSX
|
|
|
348
|
|
|
|
310
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
Long
Fork
|
Pike
|
Active
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NS
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,513
|
|
|
|
1991
|
|
|
|
|
Martin
County
|
Martin
|
Active
|
|
|
S/U
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
HW
|
NS
|
|
|
1,691
|
|
|
|
1,394
|
|
|
|
1969
|
|
|
|
|
New
Ridge
|
Pike
|
Active
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CSX
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
315
|
|
|
|
1992
|
|
|
|
|
Sidney
|
Pike
|
Active
|
|
|
S/U
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
HW
|
NS
|
|
|
3,447
|
|
|
|
2,219
|
|
|
|
1984
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virginia
Resource Group
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knox
Creek
|
Tazewell
|
Active
|
|
|
S/U
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
HW
|
NS
|
|
|
562
|
|
|
|
551
|
|
|
|
1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,954
|
|
|
|
36,652
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Active mine count as of January 31, 2010
(2) For
purposes of this table, coal production has been allocated to the Resource Group
where the coal is mined, rather than the Resource Group where the coal is
processed and shipped. Production amounts above represent coal extracted from
the ground.
(3) For
purposes of this table, coal shipments have been allocated to the Resource Group
from where the coal is processed and shipped, rather than the Resource Group
where the coal is mined.
S
-surface mine
U
-underground mine
HW -highwall miners
operated in conjunction with surface mines
DL
-dragline
NS
-Norfolk Southern Railway Company
CSX - CSX
Transportation
The
following descriptions of the Resource Groups are current as of January 31,
2010:
West
Virginia Resource Groups
Black Castle.
The Black
Castle complex includes a large surface mine, two highwall miners, the Homer III
direct-ship loadout, a stoker plant, and the Omar preparation plant. Some of the
surface mine coal is trucked to the stoker plant where the coal is crushed and
screened. The stoker product is trucked to river docks for barge delivery or
trucked directly to customers. A portion of the coal is trucked to the Omar
plant, where it is crushed and shipped to customers or, if the coal needs
processing, it is belted to the preparation plant at the Independence Resource
Group for processing and shipment. The direct-ship facility at the preparation
plant can crush 500 tons per hour and the preparation plant can process 800 tons
per hour. The Omar preparation plant serves CSX rail system customers with unit
train shipments of up to 110 railcars. Coal is also trucked to the Homer III
loadout where it is crushed and shipped to customers by rail, trucked to river
docks for barge delivery, or trucked directly to customers. The Homer III
loadout serves CSX rail system customers with unit train shipments of up to 100
railcars. The Omar preparation plant was not utilized for processing coal in
2009.
Delbarton.
The Delbarton
complex includes one underground room and pillar mine and a preparation plant.
Production from the mine is transported to the Delbarton preparation plant via
overland conveyor. The Delbarton preparation plant also processes coal from a
surface mine of the Logan County Resource Group. The Delbarton preparation plant
can process 600 tons per hour. The clean coal product is shipped to customers
via the Norfolk Southern railway in unit trains of up to 110
railcars.
Edwight
. The Edwight complex
includes a surface mine and the Goals preparation plant. Production from the
surface mine is transported via conveyor system to the Goals preparation plant.
The Goals preparation plant can process 800 tons per hour. The rail loading
facility serves CSX railway customers with unit trains of up to 100
railcars.
Elk Run.
The Elk Run complex
produces coal from five underground room and pillar mines, which is belted to
the Elk Run preparation plant. Additionally, Elk Run processes coal produced by
surface mines of the Progress Resource Group and transported via underground
conveyor system. The Elk Run preparation plant has a processing capacity of
2,200 tons per hour. Elk Run also operates a 200 ton per hour stoker facility
that produces screened, small dimension coal for certain of our industrial
customers. Customer shipments are loaded on the CSX rail system in unit trains
of up to 150 railcars.
Endurance
. The Endurance
complex includes an idle surface mine and a direct-ship loadout. When in
production, a portion of the production from the surface mine is loaded for
shipment to customers at the direct-ship loadout and the remainder is trucked to
the preparation plant at the Independence Resource Group for
processing.
Green Valley.
The Green
Valley complex includes three underground room and pillar mines and a
preparation plant. The Green Valley preparation plant, which has a processing
capacity of 600 tons per hour, receives coal from the mines via trucks. The rail
loading facility services customers on the CSX rail system with unit train
shipments of up to 75 railcars.
Guyandotte.
The Guyandotte
complex includes one underground room and pillar mine. The mine belts coal to a
third-party preparation plant for washing and shipment to customers via the
Norfolk Southern railway system.
Independence.
The
Independence complex includes the Revolution longwall mine, two underground room
and pillar mines and a preparation plant. Production from the underground mines
is transported via overland conveyor system to the Independence preparation
plant. The surface mine at the Black Castle Resource Group belts coal requiring
processing to the Independence preparation plant. The Independence plant has a
processing capacity of 2,200 tons per hour. Customers are served via rail
shipments on the CSX rail system in unit trains of up to 150
railcars.
Inman.
The Inman complex
includes one underground room and pillar mine and a preparation plant.
Production from the underground mine is transported via overland conveyor system
to the preparation plant. The Inman plant has a processing capacity of 800 tons
per hour. Coal processed at the preparation plant is trucked to Marfork Resource
Group’s preparation plant where it is loaded and shipped to customers via the
CSX rail system in unit trains of up to 150 railcars.
Logan County.
The Logan
County complex includes a surface mine, a highwall miner and an underground room
and pillar mine. Production from the underground mine is transported via truck
to the preparation plant of the Stirrat Resource Group. The surface
mine and highwall miner production is transported via truck to the Feats Loadout
or the Delbarton Resource Group preparation plant. The Feats Loadout can service
customers via the CSX rail system with unit train shipments of up to 80 cars.
The Logan County Resource Group preparation plant (“Bandmill preparation plant”)
was destroyed by fire in August 2009. A new plant is expected to be completed in
fall of 2010, at which time the production from
the
underground room and pillar mine will go to this new plant. Additionally, upon
completion of the new plant, three surface mines that are currently idle are
expected to be re-started.
Mammoth.
The Mammoth complex
operates four underground room and pillar mines and a preparation plant. Coal is
transported to the preparation plant using a conveyor system. The plant has a
1,200 tons per hour processing facility capacity with barge loading capabilities
on the upper Kanawha River and a rail loading facility that services customers
on the Norfolk Southern railway with unit trains of up to 130
railcars.
Marfork.
The Marfork complex
includes seven underground room and pillar mines, a longwall mine, a surface
mine, a highwall miner and a preparation plant. Production from the longwall
mine and six of the underground mines is belted directly to the Marfork
preparation plant while production from the remaining underground mine is belted
to Edwight Resource Group’s Goals preparation plant. Production from the surface
mine and the highwall miner is trucked to either the Marfork preparation plant
or the Elk Run Resource Group’s preparation plant. The Marfork preparation plant
has a capacity of 2,400 tons per hour. Customers are served via the CSX rail
system with unit trains of up to 150 railcars.
Nicholas Energy.
The Nicholas
Energy complex includes one underground room and pillar mine, a surface mine,
two highwall miners and a preparation plant. Coal from the underground mine is
transported to the preparation plant for processing via conveyor system. Coal
from the highwall miners and the portion of surface mined coal requiring
processing is transported to the preparation plant using off-road trucks. Coal
not requiring processing is transported via off-road trucks to a conveyor system
that moves the coal directly to a rail loadout facility. The plant has a
processing capacity of 1,200 tons per hour. Coal shipments are loaded into rail
cars for delivery via the Norfolk Southern railway in unit trains of up to 140
railcars, or are transported via on-highway trucks to the Mammoth Resource
Group’s barge loading facility.
Progress.
The Progress
complex includes the large Twilight MTR surface mine and a highwall miner. A
dragline is also utilized at the Twilight MTR surface mine. Production from the
Twilight MTR surface mine is transported via underground conveyor to the Elk Run
Resource Group for processing and rail shipment.
Rawl.
The Rawl complex
includes two underground room and pillar mines and a preparation plant.
Production from the mines is transported via truck to the preparation plant of
the Stirrat Resource Group. The Rawl plant, which was idled in December 2006,
has a throughput capacity of 1,450 tons per hour. Customers can be served by the
Rawl plant via the Norfolk Southern railway with unit trains of up to 150
railcars.
Republic Energy.
The Republic
Energy complex consists of two surface mines and a highwall miner. Direct-ship
coal is trucked using on-highway trucks to various docks on the Kanawha River
for barge delivery to customers and to the Marfork Resource Group for rail
delivery to customers. Coal requiring processing is trucked using
on-highway trucks to Mammoth Resource Group’s preparation plant for processing
and barge or train delivery to customers.
Stirrat.
The Stirrat complex
includes a preparation plant and the Superior loadout. The Superior loadout
serves CSX railway customers with unit trains of up to 100 railcars. The Stirrat
preparation plant cleans coal from two adjacent underground room and pillar
mines of the Rawl Resource Group and one underground room and pillar mine of the
Logan County Resource Group. The plant has a rated capacity of 600 tons per
hour. Customers are served via the CSX rail system with unit trains of up to 100
railcars.
Coalgood Energy.
The Coalgood
Energy complex includes one underground room and pillar mine, one surface mine,
one highwall miner, a direct-ship loadout and a preparation plant. The coal from
the surface mine is trucked off-road to the loadout, which serves CSX railway
customers with unit trains of up to 100 railcars. Production from the
underground mine and the highwall miner is transported via truck to the
preparation plant. The Coalgood Energy preparation plant has a throughput
capacity of 800 tons per hour. Coal from this preparation plant is loaded onto
trains from the direct-ship loadout.
Long Fork.
The Long Fork
preparation plant processes coal produced by two underground room and pillar
mines of the Sidney Resource Group. All production is transported via conveyor
system to the Long Fork preparation plant for processing and shipping to
customers. The Long Fork plant has a rated capacity of 1,500 tons per hour. The
rail loading facility services customers on the Norfolk Southern railway with
unit trains of up to 150 railcars.
Martin County
. The Martin
County complex includes two underground room and pillar mines, two surface
mines, a highwall miner and a preparation plant. Direct-ship coal
production from the surface mines is shipped to river docks via truck. Surface
mine and highwall miner coal requiring processing and production from the
underground mines is transported
by
conveyor belt or truck to the preparation plant. Martin County’s preparation
plant has a throughput capacity of 1,500 tons per hour, although the throughput
capacity is limited due to decreased impoundment availability. The coal from the
preparation plant can be shipped either via the Norfolk Southern railway in unit
trains of up to 125 railcars or to river docks via truck.
New Ridge.
The New Ridge
complex loads clean coal that is transported via truck from the preparation
plant of the Sidney Resource Group and coal trucked directly from Sidney’s
surface mine. The New Ridge preparation plant has a capacity of 800 tons per
hour. The preparation plant is currently idle but may be reactivated from time
to time during 2010 as needed. All coal is loaded for shipment to customers via
the CSX rail system in unit trains of up to 100 railcars.
Sidney.
The Sidney complex
includes eight underground room and pillar mines, one surface mine, a highwall
miner and a preparation plant. Four of the underground mines transport coal via
underground conveyor system to the Long Fork Resource Group for processing and
shipment, and the remainder of the underground mines transport production via
underground conveyor system or truck to Sidney’s preparation plant. A portion of
the coal from Sidney’s preparation plant and coal from the surface mines are
trucked to the New Ridge Resource Group for loading into railroad cars. Sidney’s
preparation plant has a capacity of 1,500 tons per hour. The rail loading
facility at the preparation plant serves customers on the Norfolk Southern rail
system with unit trains of up to 140 railcars.
Knox Creek
. The Knox Creek
complex includes one underground room and pillar mine, one surface mine, one
highwall miner and a preparation plant. Production from the underground mine is
belted by conveyor system to the preparation plant, while coal requiring
processing from the surface mine, including coal from the highwall miner, is
trucked to the preparation plant. The preparation plant has a feed capacity of
650 tons per hour. The preparation plant serves customers on the Norfolk
Southern rail system with unit trains of up to 100 railcars.
Coal
Reserves
We
estimate that, as of December 31, 2009, we had total recoverable reserves of
approximately 2.4 billion tons consisting of both proven and probable reserves.
“Reserves” are defined by the SEC Industry Guide 7 as that part of a mineral
deposit, which could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the
time of the reserve determination. “Recoverable” reserves means coal that is
economically recoverable using existing equipment and methods under federal and
state laws currently in effect. Approximately 1.5 billion tons of reserves are
classified as proven reserves. “Proven (measured) reserves” are defined by the
SEC Industry Guide 7 as reserves for which (a) quantity is computed from
dimensions revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings or drill holes; grade and/or
quality are computed from the results of detailed sampling and (b) the sites for
inspection, sampling and measurement are spaced so closely and the geologic
character is so well defined that size, shape, depth and mineral content of
reserves are well-established. The remaining approximately 0.9 billion tons of
our reserves are classified as probable reserves. “Probable reserves” are
defined by the SEC Industry Guide 7 as reserves for which quantity and grade
and/or quality are computed from information similar to that used for proven
(measured) reserves, but the sites for inspection, sampling, and measurement are
farther apart or are otherwise less adequately spaced. The degree of assurance,
although lower than that for proven (measured) reserves, is high enough to
assume continuity between points of observation.
Information
about our reserves consists of estimates based on engineering, economic and
geological data assembled and analyzed by our internal engineers, geologists and
finance associates. Reserve estimates are updated annually using geologic data
taken from drill holes, adjacent mine workings, outcrop prospect openings and
other sources. Coal tonnages are categorized according to coal quality, seam
thickness, mineability and location relative to existing mines and
infrastructure. In accordance with applicable industry standards, proven
reserves are those for which reliable data points are spaced no more than 2,700
feet apart. Probable reserves are those for which reliable data points are
spaced 2,700 feet to 7,900 feet apart. Further scrutiny is applied using
geological criteria and other factors related to profitable extraction of the
coal. These criteria include seam height, roof and floor conditions, yield and
marketability.
As with
most coal-producing companies in Central Appalachia, the majority of our coal
reserves are controlled pursuant to leases from third-party landowners. The
leases are generally long-term in nature (original term five to fifty years or
until the mineable and merchantable coal reserves are exhausted), and
substantially all of the leases contain provisions that allow for automatic
extension of the lease term as long as mining continues. These leases convey
mining rights to the coal producer in exchange for a per ton or percentage of
gross sales price royalty payment to the lessor. However, approximately 18% of
our reserve holdings are owned and require no royalty or per ton payment to
other parties. Royalty expense for coal
reserves
from our producing properties (owned and leased) was approximately 4.4% of
Produced coal revenue for the year ended December 31, 2009.
The
following table provides proven and probable reserve data by “status” (i.e.,
location, owned or leased, assigned or unassigned, etc.) as of December 31,
2009:
|
Recoverable Reserves
(1)
|
|
|
Resource
Group
|
Location
(2)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Proven
|
|
|
Probable
|
|
|
Assigned
(3)
|
|
|
Unassigned
(3)
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Leased
|
|
|
(In
Thousands of Tons)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West
Virginia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black
Castle
|
Boone
County
|
|
|
83,440
|
|
|
|
57,364
|
|
|
|
26,076
|
|
|
|
39,297
|
|
|
|
44,143
|
|
|
|
538
|
|
|
|
82,902
|
|
|
Delbarton
|
Mingo
County
|
|
|
285,761
|
|
|
|
120,440
|
|
|
|
165,321
|
|
|
|
140,263
|
|
|
|
145,498
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
285,736
|
|
|
Edwight
|
Raleigh
County
|
|
|
4,851
|
|
|
|
4,851
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,851
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,851
|
|
|
Elk
Run
|
Boone
County
|
|
|
106,756
|
|
|
|
73,963
|
|
|
|
32,793
|
|
|
|
80,734
|
|
|
|
26,022
|
|
|
|
4,660
|
|
|
|
102,096
|
|
|
Endurance
|
Boone
County
|
|
|
20,871
|
|
|
|
20,871
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
20,871
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
20,831
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
Green
Valley
|
Nicholas
County
|
|
|
11,360
|
|
|
|
11,360
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10,417
|
|
|
|
943
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
11,360
|
|
|
Guyandotte
|
Wyoming
County
|
|
|
45,336
|
|
|
|
17,366
|
|
|
|
27,970
|
|
|
|
2,100
|
|
|
|
43,236
|
|
|
|
330
|
|
|
|
45,006
|
|
|
Independence
|
Boone
County
|
|
|
42,881
|
|
|
|
41,571
|
|
|
|
1,310
|
|
|
|
30,293
|
|
|
|
12,588
|
|
|
|
9,482
|
|
|
|
33,399
|
|
|
Inman
|
Boone
County
|
|
|
45,501
|
|
|
|
43,986
|
|
|
|
1,515
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
45,501
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
45,501
|
|
|
Logan
County
|
Logan
County
|
|
|
102,302
|
|
|
|
84,718
|
|
|
|
17,584
|
|
|
|
75,134
|
|
|
|
27,168
|
|
|
|
2,388
|
|
|
|
99,914
|
|
|
Mammoth
|
Kanawha
County
|
|
|
131,628
|
|
|
|
100,705
|
|
|
|
30,923
|
|
|
|
73,881
|
|
|
|
57,747
|
|
|
|
42,596
|
|
|
|
89,032
|
|
|
Marfork
|
Raleigh
County
|
|
|
128,977
|
|
|
|
100,849
|
|
|
|
28,128
|
|
|
|
70,759
|
|
|
|
58,218
|
|
|
|
815
|
|
|
|
128,162
|
|
|
Nicholas
Energy
|
Nicholas
County
|
|
|
86,161
|
|
|
|
48,258
|
|
|
|
37,903
|
|
|
|
43,745
|
|
|
|
42,416
|
|
|
|
33,554
|
|
|
|
52,607
|
|
|
Progress
|
Boone
County
|
|
|
21,860
|
|
|
|
21,860
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
21,860
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
21,860
|
|
|
Rawl
|
Mingo
County
|
|
|
107,853
|
|
|
|
80,623
|
|
|
|
27,230
|
|
|
|
73,985
|
|
|
|
33,868
|
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
|
|
106,520
|
|
|
Republic
Energy
|
Raleigh
County
|
|
|
77,211
|
|
|
|
65,626
|
|
|
|
11,585
|
|
|
|
77,211
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
77,211
|
|
|
Stirrat
|
Logan
County
|
|
|
9,512
|
|
|
|
7,330
|
|
|
|
2,182
|
|
|
|
4,631
|
|
|
|
4,881
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,512
|
|
|
Kentucky
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coalgood
Energy
|
Harlan
County
|
|
|
20,906
|
|
|
|
12,939
|
|
|
|
7,967
|
|
|
|
3,361
|
|
|
|
17,545
|
|
|
|
2,704
|
|
|
|
18,202
|
|
|
Long
Fork
|
Pike
County
|
|
|
4,964
|
|
|
|
2,764
|
|
|
|
2,200
|
|
|
|
264
|
|
|
|
4,700
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,964
|
|
|
Martin
County
|
Martin
County
|
|
|
46,967
|
|
|
|
30,278
|
|
|
|
16,689
|
|
|
|
1,905
|
|
|
|
45,062
|
|
|
|
1,336
|
|
|
|
45,631
|
|
|
New
Ridge
|
Pike
County
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
Sidney
|
Pike
County
|
|
|
120,685
|
|
|
|
70,173
|
|
|
|
50,512
|
|
|
|
120,685
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7,028
|
|
|
|
113,657
|
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knox
Creek
|
Tazewell
County
|
|
|
62,307
|
|
|
|
46,756
|
|
|
|
15,551
|
|
|
|
34,776
|
|
|
|
27,531
|
|
|
|
4,552
|
|
|
|
57,755
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
|
1,568,090
|
|
|
|
1,064,651
|
|
|
|
503,439
|
|
|
|
931,023
|
|
|
|
637,067
|
|
|
|
132,172
|
|
|
|
1,435,918
|
|
|
Land Management
Companies:
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black
King
|
Boone
County, WV
|
|
|
53,536
|
|
|
|
40,804
|
|
|
|
12,732
|
|
|
|
734
|
|
|
|
52,802
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
53,536
|
|
|
Raleigh
County, WV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boone
East
|
Boone
County, WV
|
|
|
138,741
|
|
|
|
101,268
|
|
|
|
37,473
|
|
|
|
4,340
|
|
|
|
134,401
|
|
|
|
61,218
|
|
|
|
77,523
|
|
|
Kanawha
County, WV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boone
West
|
Lincoln
County, WV
|
|
|
241,974
|
|
|
|
92,201
|
|
|
|
149,773
|
|
|
|
10,496
|
|
|
|
231,478
|
|
|
|
65,553
|
|
|
|
176,421
|
|
|
Logan
County, WV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceres
Land
|
Raleigh
County, WV
|
|
|
33,351
|
|
|
|
24,220
|
|
|
|
9,131
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
33,351
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
33,351
|
|
|
Rostraver
Energy
|
Various
counties, PA
|
|
|
94,086
|
|
|
|
44,449
|
|
|
|
49,637
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
94,086
|
|
|
|
65,728
|
|
|
|
28,358
|
|
|
Lauren
Land
|
Mingo
County, WV
|
|
|
171,028
|
|
|
|
104,814
|
|
|
|
66,214
|
|
|
|
11,175
|
|
|
|
159,853
|
|
|
|
17,669
|
|
|
|
153,359
|
|
|
Logan
County, WV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Various
counties, KY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New
Market Land
|
Wyoming
County, WV
|
|
|
5,884
|
|
|
|
2,690
|
|
|
|
3,194
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,884
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
5,782
|
|
|
Raven
Resources
|
Raleigh
County, WV
|
|
|
18,978
|
|
|
|
18,978
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
18,978
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
18,978
|
|
|
Boone
County, WV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tennessee
Consolidated Coal
|
Various
counties, TN
|
|
|
26,907
|
|
|
|
1,332
|
|
|
|
25,575
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
26,907
|
|
|
|
24,054
|
|
|
|
2,853
|
|
|
Subtotal
Land Management
|
|
|
784,485
|
|
|
|
430,756
|
|
|
|
353,729
|
|
|
|
26,745
|
|
|
|
757,740
|
|
|
|
234,324
|
|
|
|
550,161
|
|
|
Other
|
N/A
|
|
|
57,733
|
|
|
|
29,680
|
|
|
|
28,053
|
|
|
|
12,740
|
|
|
|
44,993
|
|
|
|
3,112
|
|
|
|
54,621
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
2,410,308
|
|
|
|
1,525,087
|
|
|
|
885,221
|
|
|
|
970,508
|
|
|
|
1,439,800
|
|
|
|
369,608
|
|
|
|
2,040,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Recoverable reserves represents the amount of proven and probable reserves that
can actually be recovered from the reserve base taking into account all mining
and preparation losses involved in producing a saleable product using existing
methods under current law.
(2)
All of the recoverable reserves listed are in Central Appalachia, except
for the Rostraver reserves, which are located in Northern Appalachia and Lauren
Land reserves, a portion of which are located in the Illinois Basin. The
reserve numbers of each Resource Group contain a moisture factor specific to the
particular reserves of that Resource Group. The moisture factor represents
the average moisture present in our delivered coal.
(3)
Assigned Reserves represent recoverable reserves that are dedicated to a
specific permitted mine; otherwise, the reserves are considered
Unassigned. For Land Management Companies, Assigned Reserves have been
leased to a third-party and are dedicated to a specific permitted mine of the
lessee.
(4)
Land management companies are our subsidiaries whose primary purposes are to
acquire and hold our reserves.
The
categorization of the “quality” (i.e., sulfur content, Btu, coal type, etc.) of
coal reserves is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recoverable Reserves
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recoverable
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sulfur
Content
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avg.
Btu as
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resource
Group
|
|
Reserves
|
|
|
|
+1%
(2)
|
|
|
|
-1%
(2)
|
|
|
Compliance
(2)
|
|
|
Received
(3)
|
|
|
Coal Type
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
(In
Thousands of Tons Except Average Btu as Received)
|
|
|
|
|
|
West
Virginia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black
Castle
|
|
|
83,440
|
|
|
|
33,978
|
|
|
|
49,462
|
|
|
|
22,093
|
|
|
|
12,700
|
|
|
Utility
|
|
|
Delbarton
|
|
|
285,761
|
|
|
|
111,954
|
|
|
|
173,807
|
|
|
|
127,073
|
|
|
|
13,350
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Edwight
|
|
|
4,851
|
|
|
|
1,225
|
|
|
|
3,626
|
|
|
|
3,512
|
|
|
|
12,550
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Elk
Run
|
|
|
106,756
|
|
|
|
46,795
|
|
|
|
59,961
|
|
|
|
50,058
|
|
|
|
13,700
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Endurance
|
|
|
20,871
|
|
|
|
6,443
|
|
|
|
14,428
|
|
|
|
6,381
|
|
|
|
11,850
|
|
|
Utility
|
|
|
Green
Valley
|
|
|
11,360
|
|
|
|
2,550
|
|
|
|
8,810
|
|
|
|
9,750
|
|
|
|
13,100
|
|
|
High
Vol Met, Mid Vol Met, and Industrial
|
|
|
Guyandotte
|
|
|
45,336
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
45,336
|
|
|
|
45,336
|
|
|
|
13,850
|
|
|
Low
Vol Met
|
|
|
Independence
|
|
|
42,881
|
|
|
|
16,725
|
|
|
|
26,156
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12,650
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Inman
|
|
|
45,501
|
|
|
|
26,672
|
|
|
|
18,829
|
|
|
|
19,549
|
|
|
|
12,650
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Logan
County
|
|
|
102,302
|
|
|
|
34,899
|
|
|
|
67,403
|
|
|
|
44,840
|
|
|
|
12,050
|
|
|
High
Vol Met, Utility, and Industrial
|
|
|
Mammoth
|
|
|
131,628
|
|
|
|
22,391
|
|
|
|
109,237
|
|
|
|
41,073
|
|
|
|
12,150
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Marfork
|
|
|
128,977
|
|
|
|
51,797
|
|
|
|
77,180
|
|
|
|
38,606
|
|
|
|
14,050
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Nicholas
Energy
|
|
|
86,161
|
|
|
|
38,466
|
|
|
|
47,695
|
|
|
|
28,000
|
|
|
|
12,450
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Progress
|
|
|
21,860
|
|
|
|
9,038
|
|
|
|
12,822
|
|
|
|
12,836
|
|
|
|
12,350
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Rawl
|
|
|
107,853
|
|
|
|
27,658
|
|
|
|
80,195
|
|
|
|
59,378
|
|
|
|
12,350
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Republic
|
|
|
77,211
|
|
|
|
16,576
|
|
|
|
60,635
|
|
|
|
36,980
|
|
|
|
12,450
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Stirrat
|
|
|
9,512
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
|
|
9,308
|
|
|
|
7,492
|
|
|
|
12,300
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Kentucky
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coalgood
Energy
|
|
|
20,906
|
|
|
|
4,708
|
|
|
|
16,198
|
|
|
|
11,680
|
|
|
|
13,100
|
|
|
Utility
and Industrial
|
|
|
Long
Fork
|
|
|
4,964
|
|
|
|
3,500
|
|
|
|
1,464
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12,850
|
|
|
Utility
|
|
|
Martin
County
|
|
|
46,967
|
|
|
|
33,900
|
|
|
|
13,067
|
|
|
|
4,888
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
|
Utility
|
|
|
New
Ridge
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
Sidney
|
|
|
120,685
|
|
|
|
47,878
|
|
|
|
72,807
|
|
|
|
52,545
|
|
|
|
13,200
|
|
|
Utility
|
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knox
Creek
|
|
|
62,307
|
|
|
|
9,193
|
|
|
|
53,114
|
|
|
|
38,491
|
|
|
|
12,350
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
1,568,090
|
|
|
|
546,550
|
|
|
|
1,021,540
|
|
|
|
660,561
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
Management Companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black
King
|
|
|
53,536
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
53,437
|
|
|
|
36,858
|
|
|
|
12,150
|
|
|
Low
Vol Met, High Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Boone
East
|
|
|
138,741
|
|
|
|
34,939
|
|
|
|
103,802
|
|
|
|
36,789
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
|
Low
Vol Met, High Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Boone
West
|
|
|
241,974
|
|
|
|
130,063
|
|
|
|
111,911
|
|
|
|
79,369
|
|
|
|
13,350
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Ceres
Land
|
|
|
33,351
|
|
|
|
5,991
|
|
|
|
27,360
|
|
|
|
12,740
|
|
|
|
12,700
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Rostraver
Energy
|
|
|
94,086
|
|
|
|
94,086
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
14,050
|
|
|
High
Vol Met, Utility, and Industrial
|
|
|
Lauren
Land
|
|
|
171,028
|
|
|
|
88,195
|
|
|
|
82,833
|
|
|
|
62,286
|
|
|
|
12,700
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
New
Market Land
|
|
|
5,884
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,884
|
|
|
|
5,884
|
|
|
|
12,700
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Low Vol Met
|
|
|
Raven
Resources
|
|
|
18,978
|
|
|
|
7,449
|
|
|
|
11,529
|
|
|
|
1,369
|
|
|
|
12,100
|
|
|
High
Vol Met and Utility
|
|
|
Tennessee
Consolidated Coal
|
|
|
26,907
|
|
|
|
20,353
|
|
|
|
6,554
|
|
|
|
4,816
|
|
|
|
13,000
|
|
|
Mid
Volume Met, Utility, and Industrial
|
|
|
Subtotal
Land Management
|
|
|
784,485
|
|
|
|
381,175
|
|
|
|
403,310
|
|
|
|
240,111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
57,733
|
|
|
|
6,638
|
|
|
|
51,095
|
|
|
|
45,948
|
|
|
|
12,800
|
|
|
Various
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2,410,308
|
|
|
|
934,363
|
|
|
|
1,475,945
|
|
|
|
946,620
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
The reserve numbers of each Resource Group contain a moisture factor specific to
the particular reserves of that Resource Group. The moisture factor
represents the average moisture present in our delivered coal.
(2)
+1% or -1% refers to sulfur content as a percentage in coal by
weight. Compliance coal is less than 1% sulfur content by weight and is
included in the -1% column.
(3)
Represents an estimate of the average Btu per pound in our coal, as it is
received by the customer.
(4)
Reserve holdings include metallurgical coal reserves. Although these
metallurgical coal reserves receive the highest selling price in the current
coal market when marketed to steel-making customers, they can also be marketed
as an ultra high Btu, low sulfur utility coal for electricity
generation.
Compliance
compared to non-compliance coal
Coals are
sometimes characterized as compliance or non-compliance coal. The phrase
compliance coal, as it is commonly used in the coal industry, refers to
compliance only with sulfur dioxide emissions standards imposed by Title IV of
the Clean Air Act and indicates that when burned, the coal will produce
emissions that will meet the current standard without further cleanup. A coal
that is considered a compliance coal for meeting sulfur dioxide standards may
not meet an emission standard for a different pollutant such as mercury.
Moreover, the term compliance coal is always used with reference to the then
current regulatory limit. Clean air regulations that further restrict sulfur
dioxide emissions will likely reduce significantly the amount of coal that can
be labeled compliance. Currently, coal classified as compliance will meet the
power plant emission standard of 1.2 pounds of sulfur dioxide per million Btu’s
of fuel consumed. At December 31, 2009, approximately 0.9 billion tons, or 39%,
of our coal reserves met the current standard as compliance coal.
Distribution
We employ
transportation specialists who negotiate freight and terminal agreements with
various providers, including railroads, barge lines, ocean-going vessels, bulk
motor carriers and terminal facilities. Transportation specialists also
coordinate with customers, mining facilities and transportation providers to
establish shipping schedules that meet each customer’s needs.
Our 2009
shipments of 36.7 million tons were loaded from 23 mining complexes. Rail
shipments constituted 89% of total shipments, with 28% loaded on Norfolk
Southern trains and 61% loaded on CSX trains. The balance was shipped from
mining complexes via truck or barge.
Approximately
21% of production was ultimately delivered via the inland waterway system. Coal
is loaded directly into barges, or is transported by rail or truck to docks on
the Ohio, Big Sandy and Kanawha Rivers and then ultimately transported by barge
to electric utilities, integrated steel producers and industrial consumers
served by the inland waterway system. We also moved approximately 5% of our
production to Great Lakes’ ports for transport to various United States and
Canadian customers.
Customers
and Coal Contracts
We have
coal supply commitments with a wide range of electric utilities, steel
manufacturers, industrial customers and energy traders and brokers. By offering
coal of both steam and metallurgical grades, we are able to serve a diverse
customer base. This market diversity allows us to adjust to changing market
conditions and sustain high sales volumes. The majority of our customers
purchase coal for terms of one year or longer, but we also supply coal on a spot
basis for some customers. At December 31, 2009, approximately 61%, 19% and 20%
of Trade receivables represents amounts due from utility customers,
metallurgical customers and industrial customers, respectively, compared with
75%, 13% and 12%, respectively, as of December 31, 2008. During 2009, we had 27
separate, active coal purchase agreements with Constellation Energy Commodities
Group, Inc. (“Constellation”), with terms ranging from one month to two years
which, in the aggregate accounted for approximately 19% of our fiscal year 2009
Produced coal revenue. The largest of the 27 agreements represented less than 2%
of our fiscal year 2009 Produced coal revenue. As a result, we do not consider
our business to be substantially dependent upon any of these agreements,
individually or in the aggregate. No other customer accounted for 10% or more of
fiscal year 2009 Produced coal revenue or produced tons.
As is
customary in the coal industry, we enter into long-term contracts (one year or
more in duration) with many of our customers. These arrangements allow customers
to secure a supply for their future needs and provide us with greater
predictability of sales volume and sales prices. Long-term contracts are a
result of extensive negotiations with customers. As a result, the terms of these
contracts vary with respect to price adjustment mechanisms, pricing terms,
permitted sources of supply, force majeure provisions, quality adjustments and
other parameters. Some of the contracts contain price adjustment mechanisms that
allow for changes to prices based on statistics from the United States
Department of Labor. Coal quality specifications may be especially stringent for
steel customers.
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, approximately 99% of coal sales volume was
pursuant to long-term contracts. We anticipate that in 2010, coal sales volume
percentage pursuant to long-term arrangements will be comparable to 2009. As of
February 17, 2010, we had contractual sales commitments of
approximately 100 million tons, including commitments subject to price
reopener and/or optional tonnage provisions. Remaining contractual terms of our
sales commitments range from one to ten years with an average volume-weighted
remaining term of approximately 2.1 years. Seventy percent of our total
contracted sales tons are priced. As of February 17, 2010, we have committed
most of our expected 2010
production.
In addition, we purchase coal from third-party coal producers from time to time
to supplement production and resell this coal to customers.
Suppliers
The main types of goods we purchase are
mining equipment and replacement parts, explosives, fuel, tires, steel-related
(including roof control) products and lubricants. Although we have many
well-established, strategic relationships with our key suppliers, we do not
believe that we are dependent on any of our individual suppliers, except as
noted below. The supplier base providing mining materials has been relatively
consistent in recent years, although there continues to be some consolidation.
Consolidation of suppliers of explosives has limited the number of sources for
these materials. Although our current supply of explosives is concentrated with
one supplier, some alternative sources are available to us in the regions where
we operate. Further consolidation of underground equipment suppliers has
resulted in a situation where purchases of certain underground mining equipment
are concentrated with one principal supplier; however, supplier competition
continues to develop. In recent years, demand for certain surface and
underground mining equipment and off-the-road tires has increased. As a result,
lead times for certain items have generally increased, although no material
impact is currently expected to our cash flows, results of operations or
financial condition.
Competition
The coal
industry in the United States and overseas is highly competitive, with numerous
producers selling into all markets that use coal. We compete against large and
small producers in the United States and overseas. The NMA estimated that in
2008 there were 28 coal companies in the United States with annual production of
5 million or more tons, which together account for approximately 87% of United
States production. According to the NMA, we were the sixth largest coal company
in terms of tons produced in 2008, exceeded by Peabody Energy Corporation
(“Peabody”), Rio Tinto Energy America, Inc., Arch Coal, Inc. (“Arch”),
Foundation Coal Holdings Inc. (“Foundation”) and CONSOL Energy Inc.
(“CONSOL”).
We
compete with other producers primarily on the basis of price, coal quality,
transportation cost and reliability of supply. Continued demand for coal is also
dependent on factors outside of our control, including demand for electricity
and steel, general economic conditions, environmental and governmental
regulations, weather, technological developments, and the availability and cost
of alternative fuel sources. We sell coal to foreign electricity generators and
to the more specialized metallurgical coal market, both of which are
significantly affected by international demand and competition.
Historically,
global coal markets have responded to increased demand and higher prices for
coal by increasing production and supply. In recent years, however, capacity
expansion has been somewhat limited by the increased costs of mining, high
capital requirements, coal seam degradation, reserve depletion, labor shortages,
transportation issues related to rail, barge and truck shipments, higher costs
related to compliance with new and increasingly stringent regulations, the
difficulty of obtaining permits and bonding and other factors. While these
constraints persist in major coal producing countries and regions, periods of
supply and demand imbalance may be extended and increased pricing volatility may
result.
Other
Related Operations
We have
other related operations and activities in addition to our normal coal
production and sales business. The following business activities are included in
this category:
Coal Handling Joint Venture.
We hold a 50% interest in a joint venture that owns and operates third-party
end-user coal handling facilities. Certain of our subsidiaries currently operate
the coal handling facilities for the joint venture.
Gas Operations.
We hold
interests in operations that produce, gather and market natural gas from shallow
reservoirs in the Appalachian Basin. In the eastern United States, conventional
natural gas reservoirs are located in various types of sedimentary formations at
depths ranging from 2,000 to 15,000 feet. The depths of the reservoirs drilled
and operated by us range from 2,500 to 5,800 feet.
Nearly
all of our gas production is from operations in southern West Virginia. In this
region, we own and operate approximately 160 wells, 200 miles of gathering line,
and various small compression facilities. Our southern West Virginia operations
control approximately 27,000 acres of drilling rights. In addition, we own a
majority working interest in 50 wells operated by others, and minority working
interests in approximately 13 wells operated by others. The December 2009
average daily production, from the 228 wells owned or controlled, was 2.0
million cubic feet per day. We do not consider our current gas production level,
revenues or costs to be material to our cash flows, results of operations or
financial condition.
Other.
From time to time, we
also engage in the sale of certain non-strategic assets such as timber, oil and
gas rights, surface properties and reserves. In addition, we have established
several contractual arrangements with customers where services other than coal
supply are provided on an ongoing basis. None of these contractual arrangements
is considered to be material. Examples of such other services include
arrangements with several metallurgical and industrial customers to coordinate
shipment of coal to their stockpiles, maintain ownership of the coal inventory
on their property and sell tonnage to them as it is consumed. We work closely
with customers to provide other services in response to the current needs of
each individual customer.
Marketing
and Sales
Our
marketing and sales force, based in the corporate office in Richmond, Virginia,
includes sales managers, distribution/traffic managers and administrative
personnel.
During
the year ended December 31, 2009, we sold 36.7 million tons of produced coal for
total Produced coal revenue of $2.3 billion. The breakdown of produced tons sold
by market served was 62% utility, 30% metallurgical and 8% industrial. Sales
were concluded with over 100 customers. Export shipment revenue totaled
approximately $472.1 million, representing approximately 20% of 2009 Produced
coal revenue. In 2009, we exported shipments to customers in 13 countries across
the globe, which included destinations in Europe, Asia, Africa, South America
and North America. Sales are made in United States dollars, which minimizes
foreign currency risk.
Employees
and Labor Relations
As of
December 31, 2009, we had 5,851 employees, including 76 employees affiliated
with the United Mine Workers of America (“UMWA”). Relations with employees are
generally good, and there have been no material work stoppages in the past ten
years.
Environmental,
Safety and Health Laws and Regulations
The coal
mining industry is subject to regulation by federal, state and local authorities
on matters such as the discharge of materials into the environment, employee
health and safety, permitting and other licensing requirements, reclamation and
restoration of mining properties after mining is completed, management of
materials generated by mining operations, surface subsidence from underground
mining, water pollution, water appropriation and legislatively mandated benefits
for current and retired coal miners, air quality standards, protection of
wetlands, endangered plant and wildlife protection, limitations on land use, and
storage of petroleum products and substances that are regarded as hazardous
under applicable laws. The possibility exists that new legislation or
regulations may be adopted that could have a significant impact on our mining
operations or on our customers’ ability to use coal.
Numerous
governmental permits and approvals are required for mining operations.
Regulations provide that a mining permit or modification can be delayed, refused
or revoked if an officer, director or a stockholder with a 10% or greater
interest in the entity is affiliated with or is in a position to control another
entity that has outstanding permit violations. Thus, past or ongoing violations
of federal and state mining laws by individuals or companies no longer
affiliated with us could provide a basis to revoke existing permits and to deny
the issuance of addition permits. We are required to prepare and present to
federal, state or local authorities data and/or analysis pertaining to the
effect or impact that any proposed exploration for or production of coal may
have upon the environment, public and employee health and safety. All
requirements imposed by such authorities may be costly and time-consuming and
may delay commencement or continuation of exploration or production operations.
Accordingly, the permits we need for our mining and gas operations may not be
issued, or, if issued, may not be issued in a timely fashion. Permits we need
may involve requirements that may be changed or interpreted in a manner that
restricts our ability to conduct our mining operations or to do so profitably.
Future legislation and administrative regulations may increasingly emphasize the
protection of the environment, health and safety and, as a consequence, our
activities may be more closely regulated. Such legislation and regulations, as
well as future interpretations of existing laws, may require substantial
increases in equipment and operating costs, delays, interruptions or a
termination of operations, the extent of which cannot be predicted.
While it
is not possible to quantify the expenditures we incur to maintain compliance
with all applicable federal and state laws, those costs have been and are
expected to continue to be significant. We post surety performance bonds or
letters of credit pursuant to federal and state mining laws and regulations for
the estimated costs of reclamation and mine closing, often including the cost of
treating mine water discharge when necessary. Compliance with these laws has
substantially increased the cost of coal mining for all domestic coal producers.
We endeavor to conduct our mining operations in
compliance
with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. However, even
with our substantial efforts to comply with extensive and comprehensive
regulatory requirements, violations during mining operations occur from time to
time. In 2007, EPA filed suit against us and twenty-seven of our subsidiaries
alleging violations of the Federal Clean Water Act. In January 2008, we
announced that we had agreed with EPA to settle the lawsuit for a payment of $20
million in penalties. In 2009, we spent approximately $14.1 million to comply
with environmental laws and regulations, of which $6.2 million was for
reclamation, including $5.3 million for final reclamation. None of these
expenditures were capitalized. We anticipate spending approximately $50.1
million and $29.9 million in such non-capital expenditures in 2010 and 2011,
respectively. Of these expenditures, $41.2 million and $20.8 million for 2010
and 2011, respectively, are anticipated to be for final
reclamation.
Emission Control Technology
.
We own a majority interest in Coalsolv, LLC (“Coalsolv”), which holds the United
States marketing rights for the coal-fired plant emission control technologies
developed by Cansolv Technologies, Inc. (“Cansolv”). Cansolv’s technologies
remove sulfur dioxide (SO
2
), nitrogen
oxide (NO
x
), mercury,
carbon dioxide (CO
2
), and
other greenhouse gases from flue gas emissions. The Cansolv process has been
utilized at various industrial facilities around the world, with additional
projects underway in China and Canada. Through Coalsolv, we contributed funds
for a pilot plant that has been utilized in the United States and Canada for the
testing and piloting of the Cansolv SO
2
, NO
X
, mercury,
and CO
2
capture
technology on coal-fired power plants.
Mine Safety
and Health
Stringent
health and safety standards have been in effect since Congress enacted the
Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. The Federal Coal Mine Safety
and Health Act of 1977 significantly expanded the enforcement of safety and
health standards and imposed safety and health standards on all aspects of
mining operations. A further expansion occurred in June 2006 with the enactment
of the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006 (“MINER
Act”).
The MINER
Act and related Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) regulatory action
require, among other things, improved emergency response capability, increased
availability of emergency breathable air, enhanced communication and tracking
systems, more available mine rescue teams, increased mine seal strength and
monitoring of sealed areas in underground mines, and larger penalties by MSHA
for noncompliance by mine operators. Coal producing states, including West
Virginia and Kentucky, have passed similar legislation. The bituminous coal
mining industry was actively engaged throughout 2009 in activities to achieve
compliance with these new requirements. These compliance efforts will continue
into 2010.
In
2008, MSHA published final rules implementing Section 4 of the MINER Act that
addressed mine rescue, sealing of abandoned areas, refuge alternatives, fire
prevention and detection, use of air from the belt entry and civil penalty
assessments. MSHA also provided guidance on wireless communication
and electronic tracking systems and new requirements for the plugging of coal
bed methane wells with horizontal branches in coal seams. Two
additional regulations were also published related to measures to achieve
alcohol and drug free mines and the use of coal mine dust personal monitors. In
February 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit held that the 2008 rules were not sufficient to satisfy the requirements
of the Miner Act in certain respects, and remanded those portions of the rules
to MSHA for reconsideration. New rules issued by the MSHA will likely contain
more stringent provisions regarding training of rescue teams.
All of
the states in which we operate have state programs for mine safety and health
regulation and enforcement. Collectively, federal and state safety and health
regulation in the coal mining industry is perhaps the most comprehensive and
pervasive system for protection of employee health and safety affecting any
segment of industry in the United States. While regulation has a significant
effect on our operating costs, our United States competitors are subject to the
same regulation.
We
measure our success in this area primarily through the use of occupational
injury and illness frequency rates. We believe that a superior safety and health
regime is inherently tied to achieving productivity and financial goals, with
overarching benefits for our shareholders, the community and the
environment.
Black Lung.
Under federal
black lung benefits legislation, each coal mine operator is required to make
payments of black lung benefits or contributions to: (i) current and former coal
miners totally disabled from black lung disease; and (ii) certain survivors of a
miner who dies from black lung disease. The Black Lung Disability Trust Fund, to
which we must make certain tax payments based on tonnage sold, provides for the
payment of medical expenses to claimants whose last mine employment was before
January 1, 1970 and to claimants employed after such date, where no responsible
coal mine operator has been identified for claims or where the responsible coal
mine operator has defaulted on the payment of such
benefits.
In addition to federal acts, we are also liable under various state statutes for
black lung claims. Federal benefits are offset by any state benefits
paid.
Workers’ Compensation
. We are
liable for workers’ compensation benefits for traumatic injuries under state
workers’ compensation laws in the states in which we have operations. Workers’
compensation laws are administered by state agencies with each state having its
own set of rules and regulations regarding compensation owed to an employee
injured in the course of employment.
Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit
Act of 1992 and Tax Relief and Retiree Health Care Act of 2006.
The Coal
Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 (“Coal Act”) provides for the
funding of health benefits for certain UMWA retirees. The Coal Act established
the Combined Benefit Fund (“CBF”) into which “signatory operators” and “related
persons” are obligated to pay annual premiums for covered beneficiaries. The
Coal Act also created a second benefit fund, the 1992 Benefit Plan, for miners
who retired between July 21, 1992 and September 30, 1994 and whose former
employers are no longer in business. On December 20, 2006, President Bush signed
the Tax Relief and Retiree Health Care Act of 2006. This legislation includes
important changes to the Coal Act that impacts all companies required to
contribute to the CBF. Effective October 1, 2007, the SSA revoked all
beneficiary assignments made to companies that did not sign a 1988 UMWA contract
(“reachback companies”), but phased-in their premium relief. As a pre-1988
signatory, our related reachback companies received the applicable premium
relief. Effective October 1, 2007, reachback companies paid only 55% of their
plan year 2008 assessed premiums, 40% of their plan year 2009 assessed premiums,
and will pay 15% of their plan year 2010 assessed premiums. General United
States Treasury money will be transferred to the CBF to make up the difference.
After 2010, reachback companies will have no further obligations to the CBF, and
transfers from the United States Treasury will cover all of the health care
costs for retirees and dependents previously assigned to reachback
companies.
Pension Protection Act.
The
Pension Protection Act of 2006 (“Pension Act”) has simplified and transformed
the rules governing the funding of defined benefit plans, accelerated funding
obligations of employers, made permanent certain provisions of the Economic
Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, made permanent the
diversification rights and investment education provisions for plan participants
and encouraged automatic enrollment in defined contribution 401(k) plans.
In general, most provisions of the Pension Act took effect for plan years
beginning on or after December 31, 2007. Plans generally are required to
set a funding target of 100% of the present value of accrued benefits and
sponsors are required to amortize unfunded liabilities over a 7-year period. The
Pension Act included a funding target phase-in provision consisting of a 92%
funding target in 2008, 94% in 2009, 96% in 2010, and 100% thereafter. Plans
with a funded ratio of less than 80%, or less than 70% using special
assumptions, are deemed to be “at risk” and are subject to additional funding
requirements. As of December 31, 2009, our pension plan was underfunded by $55.6
million. We currently expect to make voluntary contributions in 2010
of approximately $20 million. The funded status at the end of fiscal year 2010,
and the need for additional future required contributions, will depend primarily
on the actual return on assets during the year and the discount rate at the end
of the year.
Environmental
Laws
Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act
. The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act,
(“SMCRA”), which is administered by the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement (“OSM”), establishes mining, environmental protection and
reclamation standards for all aspects of surface mining as well as many aspects
of deep mining. The SMCRA and similar state statutes require, among other
things, the restoration of mined property in accordance with specified standards
and an approved reclamation plan. In addition, the Abandoned Mine Land Fund,
which is part of the SMCRA, imposes a fee on all current mining operations, the
proceeds of which are used to restore mines closed before 1977. The maximum tax
is $0.315 per ton on surface-mined coal and $0.135 per ton on deep-mined coal. A
mine operator must submit a bond or otherwise secure the performance of its
reclamation obligations. Mine operators must receive permits and permit renewals
for surface mining operations from the OSM or, where state regulatory agencies
have adopted federally approved state programs under the act, the appropriate
state regulatory authority. We accrue for reclamation and mine-closing
liabilities in accordance with accounting principals generally accepted in the
United States (“GAAP”). See Note 9 to the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Clean Water Act
. Section 301
of the Clean Water Act prohibits the discharge of a pollutant from a point
source into navigable waters of the United States except in accordance with a
permit issued under either Section 402 or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Navigable waters are broadly defined to include streams, even those that are not
navigable in fact, and may include wetlands. All mining operations in Appalachia
generate excess material, which are typically placed in fills in adjacent
valleys and hollows. Likewise, coal refuse disposal areas and coal processing
slurry impoundments are located in valleys and hollows. These areas frequently
contain intermittent or perennial streams, which are considered navigable waters
under the Clean Water Act. An operator must secure a Clean Water Act permit
before filling such streams. For approximately
the past
twenty-five years, operators have secured Section 404 fill permits that
authorize the filling of navigable waters with material from various forms of
coal mining. Operators have also obtained permits under Section 404 for the
construction of slurry impoundments. Discharges from these structures require
permits under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. Section 402 discharge permits
are generally not suitable for authorizing the construction of fills in
navigable waters.
Clean Air Act
. Coal contains
impurities, including sulfur, mercury, chlorine, nitrogen oxide and other
elements or compounds, many of which are released into the air when coal is
burned. The Clean Air Act and corresponding state laws extensively regulate
emissions into the air of particulate matter and other substances, including
sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury. Although these regulations apply
directly to impose certain requirements for the permitting and operation of our
mining facilities, by far their greatest impact on us and the coal industry
generally is the effect of emission limitations on utilities and other
customers. Owners of coal-fired power plants and industrial boilers have been
required to expend considerable resources to comply with these air pollution
standards. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has imposed
or attempted to impose tighter emission restrictions in a number of areas, some
of which are currently subject to litigation. The general effect of such tighter
restrictions could be to reduce demand for coal. This in turn may result in
decreased production and a corresponding decrease in revenue and profits.
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
Ozone is produced by a combination of two precursor
pollutants: volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxide, a by-product of coal
combustion. Particulate matter is emitted by sources burning coal as fuel,
including coal fired power plants. States are required to submit to EPA
revisions to their State Implementation Plans (“SIPs”) that demonstrate the
manner in which the states will attain National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(“NAAQS”) every time a NAAQS is revised by EPA. In 2006, EPA adopted a new NAAQS
for fine particulate matter, which a number of states and environmental advocacy
groups challenged as not sufficiently stringent to satisfy Clean Air Act
requirements; in February 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit agreed that EPA had inadequately explained its
decision regarding several aspects of the NAAQS and remanded those to EPA for
reconsideration, a process that could lead to more stringent NAAQS for fine
particulate matter. EPA also adopted a more stringent ozone NAAQS on March
27, 2008. In addition, in 2009 and early 2010, EPA has proposed even more
stringent NAAQS for ozone, SO
2
, and NO
2
. Revised SIPs for
ozone, SO
2
, NO
2
, and fine
particulates could require electric power generators to further reduce
particulate, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions. In addition to the SIP
process, the Clean Air Act permits states to assert claims against sources in
other “upwind” states alleging that emission sources including coal fired power
plants in the upwind states are preventing the “downwind” states from attaining
a NAAQS. The new NAAQS for ozone and fine particulates, as well as claims
by affected states, could result in additional controls being required of coal
fired power plants and we are unable to predict the effect on markets for our
coal.
Acid Rain Control Provisions.
The acid rain control provisions promulgated as part of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 in Title IV of the Clean Air Act (“Acid Rain program”)
required reductions of sulfur dioxide emissions from power plants. The Acid Rain
program is now a mature program and we believe that any market impacts of the
required controls have likely been factored into the price of coal in the
national coal market.
Regional Haze Program.
EPA
promulgated a regional haze program designed to protect and to improve
visibility at and around so-called Class I Areas, which are generally National
Parks, National Wilderness Areas and International Parks. This program may
restrict the construction of new coal-fired power plants whose operation may
impair visibility at and around the Class I Areas. Moreover, the program
requires certain existing coal-fired power plants to install additional control
measures designed to limit haze-causing emissions, such as sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen oxide and particulate matter. States were required to submit Regional
Haze SIPs to EPA by December 17, 2007. Many states did not meet the December 17,
2007, deadline and we are unable to predict the impact on the coal market of the
failure to submit Regional Haze SIPs by the deadline or of any subsequent
submissions deadlines.
New Source Review Program.
Under the Clean Air Act, new and modified sources of air pollution must meet
certain new source standards (“New Source Review Program”). In the late 1990s,
EPA filed lawsuits against many coal-fired plants in the eastern United States
alleging that the owners performed non-routine maintenance, causing increased
emissions that should have triggered the application of these new source
standards. Some of these lawsuits have been settled, with the owners agreeing to
install additional pollution control devices in their coal-fired plants. The
remaining litigation and the uncertainty around the New Source Review Program
rules could adversely impact utilities’ demand for coal in general or coal with
certain specifications, including the coal we produce.
Multi-Pollutant Strategies
.
In March 2005, EPA issued two closely related rules designed to significantly
reduce levels of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury: the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (“CAIR”) and the Clean Air Mercury Rule (“CAMR”). CAIR sets a
“cap-and-trade” program in 28 states and the District of Columbia to establish
emissions limits for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, by allowing utilities to
buy and sell credits to assist in achieving compliance with the
NAAQS for
8-hour ozone and fine particulates. CAMR as promulgated will cut mercury
emissions nearly 70% by 2018 through a “cap-and-trade” program. Both rules were
challenged in numerous lawsuits and the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit vacated CAMR and remanded it to EPA for
reconsideration on February 8, 2008. The same court vacated the CAIR on July 11,
2008, but subsequently revised its remedy to a remand to EPA for reconsideration
on December 23, 2008. EPA is preparing its response to the remand, but the court
did not impose a response date. Regardless of the outcome of litigation on
either rule, stricter controls on emissions of SO
2,
NO
X
and
mercury
are
likely in some form. Any such controls may have an impact on the demand for our
coal. The EPA Administrator announced in December 2009 that EPA will propose a
new air toxics Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standard for power
plants in 2010 and finalize it in 2011. The new rule will regulate several air
toxics in addition to mercury and will likely have a significant impact on the
levels of controls required on power plants. Such rules and controls may have a
significant, but undetermined, impact on the demand for coal.
Global
Climate Change
Global
climate change continues to attract considerable public and scientific
attention. Widely publicized scientific reports, such as the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in 2007, have
also engendered widespread concern about the impacts of human activity,
especially fossil fuel combustion, on global climate change. A considerable and
increasing amount of attention in the United States is being paid to global
climate change and to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, particularly from coal
combustion by power plants. According to the EIA report, “Emissions of
Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2007,” coal combustion accounts for 30% of
man-made greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Legislation was
introduced in Congress in the past several years to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in the United States and, although no bills to reduce such emissions
have yet to pass both houses of Congress, bills to reduce such emissions
remain pending and others are likely to be introduced. President Obama
campaigned in favor of a “cap-and-trade” program to require mandatory greenhouse
gas emissions reductions and since his election has continued to express support
for such legislation, contrary to the previous administration.
The
issue of greenhouse gasses has been the subject of a number of recent court
cases. Most recently, in the case of Massachusetts v. EPA, the United States
Supreme Court (“Supreme Court”) found that greenhouse gases are air pollutants
covered by the Clean Air Act. The Supreme Court held that the
administrator of the EPA must determine whether emissions of greenhouse gases
from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably
be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is
too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. The Supreme Court decision
resulted from a petition for rulemaking under section 202(a) of the Clean Air
Act filed by more than a dozen environmental, renewable energy, and other
organizations. On December 7, 2009, the EPA Administrator signed two distinct
findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.
One finding is that the current and projected concentrations of the six key
well-mixed greenhouse gases--carbon dioxide (CO
2
),
methane (CH
4
),
nitrous oxide (N
2
O),
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride
(SF
6
)--in
the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future
generations. The second finding is that the combined emissions of these
well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle
engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health
and welfare. These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on
industry or other entities. However, this action is a prerequisite to
finalizing the EPA’s proposed greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty
vehicles, which were jointly proposed by EPA and the Department of
Transportation’s National Highway Safety Administration on September 15, 2009.
In addition, these findings may trigger permitting and other requirements for
stationary sources regarding CO
2
and other greenhouse gasses. Such requirements may have a significant, but
undetermined impact on the ability to mine and use coal.
In
December 2009, 192 countries attended the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit to
discuss actions to be taken to combat global climate change. Leaders from more
than two dozen countries representing over 80 percent of the world’s SO
2
emissions negotiated the Copenhagen Accord, which puts a non-binding expectation
on all of the major emitting countries to officially record their commitments to
reduce SO
2
emissions by January 31, 2010. The United States participated in the conference
and stated a goal to reduce emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005
levels by 2020, 42 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83 percent below 2005
levels by 2050, which is substantially in line with the energy and climate
legislation passed by the United States House of Representatives in
2009. The ultimate outcome of the Copenhagen Accord and any treaty or
other arrangement ultimately adopted by the United States or other countries,
may have a material adverse impact on the global supply and demand for coal.
This is particularly true if cost effective technology for the capture and
sequestration of carbon dioxide is not sufficiently developed. Technologies that
may significantly reduce emissions into the atmosphere of greenhouse gases from
coal combustion, such as carbon capture and sequestration (which captures carbon
dioxide at major sources such as power plants and subsequently stores it in
nonatmospheric reservoirs such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs, unmineable
coal seams, deep saline formations, or the deep ocean) have attracted and
continue to attract the attention of policy makers, industry participants, and
the public. For example, in July 2008, EPA proposed rules that would establish,
for the first time, requirements specifically for wells used to inject carbon
dioxide into geologic formations. No regulations have been promulgated yet, but
the issue of carbon sequestration results in considerable uncertainty, not only
regarding rules that may become applicable to carbon dioxide injection wells but
also concerning liability for potential impacts of injection, such as
groundwater contamination or seismic activity. In addition, technical,
environmental, economic, or other factors may delay, limit, or preclude
large-scale commercial deployment of such technologies, which could ultimately
provide little or no significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from coal
combustion.
Global
climate change continues to attract considerable public and scientific attention
and a considerable amount of legislative attention in the United States is being
paid to global climate change and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions,
particularly from coal combustion by power plants. Enactment of laws
and passage of regulations regarding greenhouse gas emissions by the United
States or some of its states, or other actions to limit carbon dioxide
emissions, could result in electric generators switching from coal to other fuel
sources.
Permitting
and Compliance
Our
operations are principally regulated under surface mining permits issued
pursuant to the SMCRA and state counterpart laws. Such permits are issued for
terms of five years with the right of successive renewal. We currently have over
500 surface mining permits. In conjunction with the surface mining permits, most
operations hold national pollutant discharge elimination system permits pursuant
to the Clean Water Act and state counterpart water pollution control laws for
the discharge of pollutants to waters. These permits are issued for terms of
five years. Additionally, the Clean Water Act requires permits for operations
that fill waters of the United States. Valley fills and refuse impoundments are
authorized under permits issued under the Clean Water Act by the United States
Army Corps of Engineers. Additionally, certain surface mines and preparation
plants have permits issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act and state counterpart
clean air laws allowing and controlling the discharge of air pollutants. These
permits are primarily permits allowing initial construction (not operation) and
they do not have expiration dates.
We
believe we have obtained all permits required for current operations under the
SMCRA, Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act and corresponding state laws. We
believe that we are in compliance in all material respects with such permits,
and
routinely correct violations in a timely fashion in the normal course of
operations. The expiration dates of the permits are largely immaterial as the
law provides for a right of successive renewal. The cost of obtaining surface
mining, clean water and air permits can vary widely depending on the scientific
and technical demonstrations that must be made to obtain the permits. However,
our cost of obtaining a permit is rarely more than $500,000 and our cost of
obtaining a renewal is rarely more than $5,000. It is impossible to predict the
full impact of future judicial, legislative or regulatory developments on our
operations, because the standards to be met, as well as the technology and
length of time available to meet those standards, continue to develop and
change.
We
believe, based upon present information available to us, that accruals with
respect to future environmental costs are adequate. For further discussion of
our costs, see Note 9 to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
However, the imposition of more stringent requirements under environmental laws
or regulations, new developments or changes regarding site cleanup costs or the
allocation of such costs among potentially responsible parties, or a
determination that we are potentially responsible for the release of hazardous
substances at sites other than those currently identified, could result in
additional expenditures or the provision of additional accruals in expectation
of such expenditures.
Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
The
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”),
and similar state laws affect coal mining operations by, among other things,
imposing cleanup requirements for threatened or actual releases of hazardous
substances that may endanger public health or welfare or the environment. Under
CERCLA and similar state laws, joint and several liability may be imposed on
waste generators, site owners and lessees and others regardless of fault or the
legality of the original disposal activity. Although EPA excludes most wastes
generated by coal mining and processing operations from the hazardous waste
laws, such wastes can, in certain circumstances, constitute hazardous substances
for the purposes of CERCLA. In addition, the disposal, release or spilling of
some products used by coal companies in operations, such as chemicals, could
implicate the liability provisions of the statute. Under EPA’s Toxic Release
Inventory process, companies are required annually to report the use,
manufacture or processing of listed toxic materials that exceed defined
thresholds, including chemicals used in equipment maintenance, reclamation,
water treatment and ash received for mine placement from power generation
customers. Our current and former coal mining operations incur, and will
continue to incur, expenditures associated with the investigation and
remediation of facilities and environmental conditions under
CERCLA.
Endangered
Species Act
The
federal Endangered Species Act and counterpart state legislation protect species
threatened with possible extinction. Protection of endangered species may have
the effect of prohibiting or delaying us from obtaining mining permits and may
include restrictions on timber harvesting, road building and other mining or
agricultural activities in areas containing the affected species. Based on the
species that have been identified on our properties to date and the current
application of applicable laws and regulations, we do not believe there are any
species protected under the Endangered Species Act that would materially and
adversely affect our ability to mine coal from our properties in accordance with
current mining plans.
Available
Information
We make
available, free of charge through our Internet website, www.masseyenergyco.com,
our annual report, quarterly reports, current reports, proxy statements, Section
16 reports and other information (and any amendments thereto) as soon as
practicable after filing or furnishing the material to the SEC, in addition to,
our Corporate Governance Guidelines, codes of ethics and the charters of the
Audit, Compensation, Executive, Finance, Governance and Nominating, and Safety,
Environmental, and Public Policy Committees. These materials also may be
requested at no cost by telephone at (866) 814-6512 or by mail at: Massey Energy
Company, Post Office Box 26765, Richmond, Virginia 23261, Attention: Investor
Relations.
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
Incorporated
by reference into this Part I is the information set forth in Part III, Item 10
under the caption “Executive Officers of the Registrant” (included herein
pursuant to Item 401(b) of Regulation S-K).
********************
GLOSSARY
OF SELECTED TERMS
Ash.
Impurities consisting of
iron, aluminum and other incombustible matter that are contained in coal. Since
ash increases the weight of coal, it adds to the cost of handling and can affect
the burning characteristics of coal.
Bituminous coal.
The most
common type of coal with moisture content less than 20% by weight and heating
value of 10,500 to 14,000 Btu per pound.
British thermal unit, or
“Btu.”
A measure of the thermal energy required to raise the temperature
of one pound of pure liquid water one degree Fahrenheit at the temperature at
which water has its greatest density (39 degrees Fahrenheit).
Central Appalachia.
Coal
producing states and regions of eastern Kentucky, eastern Tennessee, western
Virginia and southern West Virginia.
Coal seam.
Coal deposits
occur in layers. Each layer is called a “seam.”
Coke.
A hard, dry carbon
substance produced by heating coal to a very high temperature in the absence of
air. Coke is used in the manufacture of iron and steel. Its production results
in a number of useful byproducts.
Compliance coal.
Described in
Item 1. Business, under the heading “Coal Reserves.”
Continuous miner.
A mining
machine with a continuously rolling cutting cylinder used in underground and
highwall mining to cut coal from the seam and load it onto conveyors or into
shuttle cars in a continuous operation.
Direct-ship coal
. Coal that
is shipped without first being processed in a preparation plant.
Deep mine.
An underground
coal mine.
Dragline
. A large machine
used in the surface mining process to remove the overburden, or layers of earth
and rock covering a coal seam. The dragline has a large bucket suspended from
the end of a long boom. The bucket, which is suspended by cables, is able to
scoop up substantial amounts of overburden as it is dragged across the
excavation area.
Fossil fuel.
Fuel such as
coal, petroleum or natural gas formed from the fossil remains of organic
material.
Highwall mining.
Described in
Item 1. Business, under the heading “Mining Methods.”
High vol met coal
. Coal that
averages approximately 35% volatile matter. Volatile matter refers to the
impurities that become gaseous when heated to certain temperatures.
Illinois Basin.
The Illinois
Basin consists of the coal producing areas in Illinois, Indiana and western
Kentucky.
Industrial coal
. Coal used by
industrial steam boilers to produce electricity or process steam. It generally
is lower in Btu heat content and higher in volatile matter than metallurgical
coal.
Long-term contracts
.
Contracts with terms of one year or longer.
Longwall mining.
Described in
Item 1. Business, under the heading “Mining Methods.”
Low vol met coal
. Coal that
averages approximately 20% volatile matter. Volatile matter refers to the
impurities that become gaseous when heated to certain temperatures.
Metallurgical coal.
The
various grades of coal suitable for carbonization to make coke for steel
manufacture. Also known as “met” coal, it possesses four important qualities:
volatility, which affects coke yield; the level of impurities, which affects
coke quality; composition, which affects coke strength; and basic
characteristics, which affect coke oven safety. Met coal has a particularly high
Btu heat content, but low ash content.
Mine.
A mine consists of
those operating assets necessary to produce coal from surface or underground
locations.
Nitrogen oxide (NOx).
Nitrogen oxide is produced as a gaseous by-product of coal
combustion.
Northern Appalachia.
Northern
Appalachia consists of the bituminous coal producing areas in the states of
Pennsylvania, Ohio and Maryland and in the northern part of West
Virginia.
Overburden.
Layers of earth
and rock covering a coal seam. In surface mining operations, overburden is
removed prior to coal extraction.
Overburden ratio.
The amount
of overburden that must be removed to excavate a given quantity of coal. It is
commonly expressed in cubic yards per ton of coal or as a ratio comparing the
thickness of the overburden with the thickness of the coal bed.
Pillar.
An area of coal left
to support the overlying strata in an underground mine, sometimes left
permanently to support surface structures.
Powder River Basin.
The
Powder River Basin consists of the coal producing areas in southeast Montana and
northeast Wyoming.
Preparation plant.
A
preparation plant is a facility for crushing, sizing and washing coal to remove
rock and other impurities to prepare it for use by a particular customer.
Preparation plants are usually located on a mine site, although one plant may
serve several mines. The washing process has the added benefit of removing some
of the coal’s sulfur content.
Probable reserves.
Described
in Item 1. Business, under the heading “Coal Reserves.”
Proven reserves.
Described in
Item 1. Business, under the heading “Coal Reserves.”
Reclamation.
The process of
restoring land and the environment to their approximate original state following
mining activities. The process commonly includes “recontouring” or reshaping the
land to its approximate original appearance, restoring topsoil and planting
native grass and ground covers. Reclamation operations are usually underway
before the mining of a particular site is completed. Reclamation is closely
regulated by both state and federal law.
Reserve.
Described in Item 1.
Business, under the heading “Coal Reserves.”
Resource Group.
An
organizational unit, generally located within a specific geographic locale, that
contains one or more of the following operations related to the mining,
processing or shipping of coal: underground mine, surface mine,
preparation plant or load-out facility.
Roof.
The stratum of rock or
other mineral above a coal seam; the overhead surface of a coal working
place.
Room and pillar mining.
Described in Item 1. Business, under the heading “Mining Methods.”
Scrubber (flue gas desulfurization
unit).
Any of several forms of chemical/physical devices that operate to
neutralize sulfur and other greenhouse gases formed during coal combustion.
These devices combine the sulfur in gaseous emissions with other chemicals to
form inert compounds, such as gypsum, that must then be removed for disposal.
Although effective in substantially reducing sulfur from combustion gases,
scrubbers require about 6% to 7% of a power plant’s electrical output and
thousands of gallons of water to operate.
Steam coal
. Coal used by
power plants and industrial steam boilers to produce electricity or process
steam. It generally is lower in Btu heat content and higher in volatile matter
than metallurgical coal. Also known as utility coal.
Stoker coal
. Coal that is
sized to a specific, standard range. Stoker coal is typically one quarter inch
by one and one quarter to one and three quarter inch.
Sulfur.
One of the elements
present in varying quantities in coal that reacts with air when coal is burned
to form sulfur dioxide.
Sulfur content.
Coal is
commonly described by its sulfur content due to the importance of sulfur in
environmental regulations. “Low sulfur” coal has a variety of definitions, but
typically is used to describe coal consisting of 1.0% or less
sulfur.
Sulfur dioxide (SO
2
)
. Sulfur dioxide is produced
as a gaseous by-product of coal combustion.
Surface mining.
Described in
Item 1. Business, under the heading “Mining Methods.”
Tons.
A “short” or net ton is
equal to 2,000 pounds. A “long” or British ton is approximately 2,240 pounds; a
“metric” ton is approximately 2,205 pounds. The short ton is the unit of measure
referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Underground mine.
Also known
as a “deep” mine. Usually located several hundred feet below the earth’s
surface, an underground mine’s coal is removed mechanically and transferred by
shuttle car or conveyor to the surface.
Unit train.
A railroad train
of a specified number of railroad cars carrying only coal. A typical unit train
can carry at least 10,000 tons of coal in a single shipment.
Utility coal
. Coal used by
power plants to produce electricity or process steam. It generally is lower in
Btu heat content and higher in volatile matter than metallurgical coal. Also
known as steam coal.
********************
Item
1A. Risk Factors
We are
subject to a variety of risks, including, but not limited to, those risk factors
set forth below and those referenced herein to other Items contained in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K, including Item 1. Business, under the headings
“Customers and Coal Contracts,” “Competition,” “Environmental, Safety and Health
Laws and Regulations,” Item 3. Legal Proceedings and Item 7. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(“MD&A”), under the headings “Critical Accounting Estimates and
Assumptions,” “Certain Trends and Uncertainties” and elsewhere in
MD&A.
We
could be negatively impacted by the competitiveness of the markets in which we
compete and declines in the market demand for coal.
We
compete with coal producers in various regions of the United States and overseas
for domestic and international sales. Continued domestic demand for our coal and
the prices that we will be able to obtain primarily will depend upon coal
consumption patterns of the domestic electric utility industry and the domestic
steel industry. Consumption by the domestic utility industry is affected by the
demand for electricity, environmental and other governmental regulations,
technological developments and the price of competing coal and alternative fuel
supplies including nuclear, natural gas, oil and renewable energy sources,
including hydroelectric power. Consumption by the domestic steel industry is
primarily affected by economic growth and the demand for steel used in
construction as well as appliances and automobiles. In recent years, the
competitive environment for coal was impacted by sustained growth in a number of
the largest markets in the world, including the United States, China, Japan and
India, where demand for both electricity and steel supported pricing for steam
and metallurgical coal. The economic stability of these markets has a
significant effect on the demand for coal and the level of competition in
supplying these markets. The cost of ocean transportation and the value of the
United States dollar in relation to foreign currencies significantly impact the
relative attractiveness of our coal as we compete on price with other foreign
coal producing sources. During the last several years, the United States coal
industry has experienced increased consolidation, which has contributed to the
industry becoming more competitive. Increased competition by competing coal
producers or producers of alternate fuels in the markets in which we serve could
cause a decrease in demand and/or pricing for our coal, adversely impacting our
cash flows, results of operations or financial condition.
Portions
of our coal reserves possess quality characteristics that enable us to mine,
process and market them as either metallurgical coal or high quality steam coal,
depending on the prevailing conditions in the markets for metallurgical and
steam coal. A decline in the metallurgical market relative to the steam market
could cause us to shift coal from the metallurgical market to the steam market,
potentially reducing the price we could obtain for this coal and adversely
impacting our cash flows, results of operations or financial
condition.
Demand
for our coal depends on its price and quality and the cost of transporting it to
our customers.
Coal
prices are influenced by a number of factors and may vary dramatically by
region. The two principal components of the price of coal are the price of coal
at the mine, which is influenced by mine operating costs and coal quality, and
the cost of transporting coal from the mine to the point of use. The cost of
mining the coal is influenced by geologic characteristics such as seam
thickness, overburden ratios and depth of underground reserves. Underground
mining is generally more expensive than surface mining as a result of higher
costs for labor (including reserves for future costs associated with labor
benefits and health care) and capital costs (including costs for mining
equipment and construction of extensive ventilation systems). As of January 31,
2010, we operated 42 active underground mines, including two which employ both
room and pillar and longwall mining, and 14 active surface mines, with 12
highwall miners.
Transportation
costs represent a significant portion of the delivered cost of coal and, as a
result, the cost of delivery is a critical factor in a customer’s purchasing
decision. Increases in transportation costs could make coal a less competitive
source of energy. Such increases could have a material impact on our ability to
compete with other energy sources and on our cash flows, results of operations
or financial condition. Conversely, significant decreases in transportation
costs could result in increased competition from coal producers in other parts
of the country or the world, including coal imported into the United States. For
instance, coal mines in the western United States could become an increasingly
attractive source of coal to consumers in the eastern part of the United States
if the costs of transporting coal from the west were significantly reduced
and/or rail capacity was increased.
A
significant decline in coal prices in general could adversely affect our
operating results and cash flows.
Our
results are highly dependent upon the prices we receive for our coal. Decreased
demand for coal, both domestically and internationally, could cause spot prices
and the prices we are able to negotiate on long-term contracts to decline. The
lower
prices could negatively affect our cash flows, results of operations or
financial condition, if we are unable to increase productivity and/or decrease
costs in order to maintain our margins.
We
depend on continued demand from our customers.
Reduced
demand from or the loss of our largest customers could have an adverse impact on
our ability to achieve projected revenue. Decreases in demand may result from,
among other things, a reduction in consumption by the electric generation
industry and/or the steel industry, the availability of other sources of fuel at
cheaper costs and a general slow-down in the economy. When our contracts with
customers expire, there can be no assurance that the customers either will
extend or enter into new long-term contracts or, in the absence of long-term
contracts, that they will continue to purchase the same amount of coal as they
have in the past or on terms, including pricing terms, as favorable as under
existing arrangements. In the event that a large customer account is lost or a
long-term contract is not renewed, profits could suffer if alternative buyers
are not willing to purchase our coal on comparable terms.
There
may be adverse changes in price, volume or terms of our existing coal supply
agreements.
Many of
our coal supply agreements contain provisions that permit the parties to adjust
the contract price upward or downward at specified times. These contracts may be
adjusted based on inflation or deflation and/or changes in the factors affecting
the cost of producing coal, such as taxes, fees, royalties and changes in the
laws regulating the mining, production, sale or use of coal. In a limited number
of contracts, failure of the parties to agree on a price under those provisions
may allow either party to terminate the contract. Coal supply agreements also
typically contain force majeure provisions allowing temporary suspension of
performance by us or the customer for the duration of specified events beyond
the control of the affected party. Most coal supply agreements contain
provisions requiring us to deliver coal meeting quality thresholds for certain
characteristics such as Btu, sulfur content, ash content, grindability and ash
fusion temperature. Failure to meet these specifications could result in
economic penalties, including price adjustments, the rejection of deliveries or
termination of the contracts.
Our
financial condition may be adversely affected if we are required by some of our
customers to provide performance assurances for certain below-market sales
contracts.
Contracts
covering a significant portion of our contracted sales tons contain provisions
that could require us to provide performance assurances if we experience a
material adverse change or, under certain other contracts, if the customer
believes our creditworthiness has become unsatisfactory. Generally, under such
contracts, performance assurances are only required if the contract price per
ton of coal is below the current market price of the coal. In addition, we may
from time to time enter into coal sale agreements that require a posting of
collateral to the extent we are “out of the money” on the total contracted sales
in excess of $15 million (as of December 31, 2009, no posting was required).
Certain of the contracts limit the amount of performance assurance to a per ton
amount in excess of the contract price, while others have no limit. The
performance assurances are generally provided by the posting of a letter of
credit, cash collateral, other security, or a guaranty from a creditworthy
guarantor. As of December 31, 2009, we have not received any requests from any
of our customers to provide performance assurances. If we are required to post
performance assurances on some or all of our contracts with performance
assurances provisions, there could be a material adverse impact on our cash
flows, results of operations or financial condition.
The
level of our indebtedness could adversely affect our ability to grow and compete
and prevent us from fulfilling our obligations under our contracts and
agreements.
At
December 31, 2009, we had $1,319.1 million of total indebtedness outstanding,
which represented 51.2% of our total book capitalization. We have significant
debt, lease and royalty obligations. Our ability to satisfy debt service, lease
and royalty obligations and to effect any refinancing of indebtedness will
depend upon future operating performance, which will be affected by prevailing
economic conditions in the markets that we serve as well as financial, business
and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. We may be unable to
generate sufficient cash flow from operations and future borrowings, or other
financings may be unavailable in an amount sufficient to enable us to fund our
debt service, lease and royalty payment obligations or our other liquidity
needs. We also may be able to incur substantial additional
indebtedness in the future under the terms of our $175 million asset-based loan
credit facility (“ABL Facility”) or by other means. Our ABL Facility
provides for a revolving line of credit of up to $175.0 million, of which
$98.4 million was available as of December 31, 2009. The addition of
new debt to our current debt levels could increase the related risks that we now
face.
Our
relative amount of debt could have material consequences to our business,
including, but not limited to: (i) making it more difficult to satisfy debt
covenants and debt service, lease payments and other obligations; (ii) making it
more difficult
to pay
quarterly dividends as we have in the past; (iii) increasing our vulnerability
to general adverse economic and industry conditions; (iv) limiting our ability
to obtain additional financing to fund future acquisitions, working capital,
capital expenditures or other general corporate requirements; (v) reducing the
availability of cash flows from operations to fund acquisitions, working
capital, capital expenditures or other general corporate purposes; (vi) limiting
our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in the business and the
industry in which we compete; or (vii) placing us at a competitive disadvantage
with competitors with relatively lower amounts of debt. Any of the above-listed
factors could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations and our ability to meet our debt payment
obligations.
The
covenants in our credit facility and the indentures governing debt instruments
impose restrictions that may limit our operating and financial
flexibility.
Our ABL
Facility contains a number of significant restrictions and covenants that may
limit our ability and our subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things: (1)
incur additional indebtedness; (2) increase common stock dividends above
specified levels; (3) make loans and investments; (4) prepay, redeem or
repurchase debt; (5) engage in mergers, consolidations and asset dispositions;
(6) engage in affiliate transactions; (7) create any lien or security interest
in any real property or equipment; (8) engage in sale and leaseback
transactions; and (9) make distributions from subsidiaries. A decline in our
operating results or other adverse factors, including a significant increase in
interest rates, could result in us being unable to comply with certain covenants
contained in the ABL Facility, which become operative only when our Average
Excess Availability (as defined in the ABL Facility) is less than $30 million.
These financial covenants include a Minimum Consolidated Fixed Charge Ratio of
1.00 to 1.00 and a minimum Consolidated Net Worth of $550 million under the
terms of the ABL Facility (currently approximately $400 million as adjusted for
Accounting Changes).
The
indentures governing certain of our senior notes also contain a number of
significant restrictions and covenants that may limit our ability and our
subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things: (1) incur additional indebtedness;
(2) subordinate indebtedness to other indebtedness unless such subordinated
indebtedness is also subordinated to the notes; (3) pay dividends or make other
distributions or repurchase or redeem our stock or subordinated indebtedness;
(4) make investments; (5) sell assets and issue capital stock of restricted
subsidiaries; (6) incur liens; (7) enter into agreements restricting our
subsidiaries’ ability to pay dividends; (8) enter into sale and leaseback
transactions; (9) enter into transactions with affiliates; and (10) consolidate,
merge or sell all or substantially all of our assets. If we violate these
covenants and are unable to obtain waivers from our lenders, our debt under
these agreements would be in default and could be accelerated by the lenders
and, in the case of an event of default under our ABL Facility, it could permit
the lenders to foreclose on our assets securing the loans under the ABL
Facility. If the indebtedness is accelerated, we may not be able to repay our
debt or borrow sufficient funds to refinance it. Even if we are able to obtain
new financing, it may not be on commercially reasonable terms or on terms that
are acceptable to us. If our debt is in default for any reason, our cash flows,
results of operations or financial condition could be materially and adversely
affected. In addition, complying with these covenants may also cause us to take
actions that are not favorable to our shareholders and holders of our senior
notes and may make it more difficult for us to successfully execute our business
strategy and compete against companies that are not subject to such
restrictions.
We
are subject to being adversely affected by the potential inability to renew or
obtain surety bonds.
Federal
and state laws require bonds to secure our obligations to reclaim lands used for
mining, to pay federal and state workers’ compensation and to satisfy other
miscellaneous obligations. These bonds are typically renewable annually. Surety
bond issuers and holders may not continue to renew the bonds or may demand
additional collateral upon those renewals. We are also subject to increases in
the amount of surety bonds required by federal and state laws as these laws
change or the interpretation of these laws changes. Our failure to maintain, or
inability to acquire, surety bonds that are required by state and federal law
would have a material adverse impact on us, possibly by prohibiting us from
developing properties that we desire to develop. That failure could result from
a variety of factors including the following: (i) lack of availability,
higher expense or unfavorable market terms of new bonds; (ii) restrictions
on availability of collateral for current and future third-party surety bond
issuers under the terms of our senior notes or revolving credit facilities;
(iii) our inability to meet certain financial tests with respect to a
portion of the post-mining reclamation bonds; and (iv) the exercise by
third-party surety bond issuers of their right to refuse to renew or issue new
bonds.
We
depend on our ability to continue acquiring and developing economically
recoverable coal reserves.
A key
component of our future success is our ability to continue acquiring coal
reserves for development that have the geological characteristics that allow
them to be economically mined. Replacement reserves may not be available or, if
available, may not be capable of being mined at costs comparable to those
characteristics of the depleting mines. An inability to continue acquiring
economically recoverable coal reserves could have a material impact on our cash
flows, results of operations or financial condition.
We
face numerous uncertainties in estimating economically recoverable coal
reserves, and inaccuracies in estimates could result in lower than expected
revenues, higher than expected costs and decreased profitability.
There are
numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities and values of
economically recoverable coal reserves, including many factors beyond our
control. As a result, estimates of economically recoverable coal reserves are by
their nature uncertain. Information about our reserves consists of estimates
based on engineering, economic and geological data assembled and analyzed by us.
Some of the factors and assumptions that impact economically recoverable reserve
estimates include: (1) geological conditions; (2) historical
production from the area compared with production from other producing areas;
(3) the effects of regulations and taxes by governmental agencies;
(4) future prices; and (5) future operating costs.
Each of
these factors may vary considerably from the assumptions used in estimating
reserves. For these reasons, estimates of the economically recoverable
quantities of coal attributable to a particular group of properties may vary
substantially. As a result, our estimates may not accurately reflect our actual
reserves. Actual production, revenues and expenditures with respect to reserves
will likely vary from estimates, and these variances may be
material.
Mining
in Central Appalachia is more complex and involves more regulatory constraints
than mining in other areas of the United States, which could affect our mining
operations and cost structures in these areas.
The
geological characteristics of Central Appalachian coal reserves, such as depth
of overburden and coal seam thickness, make them complex and costly to mine. As
mines become depleted, replacement reserves may not be available when required
or, if available, may not be capable of being mined at costs comparable to those
characteristic of the depleting mines. In addition, as compared to mines in
other regions, permitting, licensing and other environmental and regulatory
requirements are more costly and time consuming to satisfy. These factors could
materially adversely affect the mining operations and cost structures of, and
our customers' ability to use coal produced by, our mines in Central
Appalachia.
Defects
in title or loss of any leasehold interests in our properties could limit our
ability to mine our properties or result in significant unanticipated
costs.
A
significant portion of our mining operations occurs on properties that we lease.
Title defects or the loss of leases could adversely affect our ability to mine
the reserves covered by those leases. Our current practice is to obtain a title
review from a licensed attorney prior to leasing property. We generally have not
obtained title insurance in connection with acquisitions of coal reserves. In
some cases, the seller or lessor warrants property title. Separate title
confirmation sometimes is not required when leasing reserves where mining has
occurred previously. Our right to mine some of our reserves may be adversely
affected if defects in title or boundaries exist. In order to obtain leases to
conduct our mining operations on property where these defects exist, we may have
to incur unanticipated costs. In addition, we may not be able to successfully
negotiate new leases for properties containing additional reserves, or maintain
our leasehold interests in properties where we have not commenced mining
operations during the term of the lease.
If
the coal industry experiences overcapacity in the future, our profitability
could be impaired.
An
increase in the demand for coal could attract new investors to the coal
industry, which could spur the development of new mines, and result in added
production capacity throughout the industry. Higher price levels of coal could
also encourage the development of expanded capacity by new or existing coal
producers. Any resulting increases in capacity could reduce coal prices and
reduce our margins.
An
inability of brokerage sources or contract miners to fulfill the delivery terms
of their contracts with us could reduce our profitability.
We
sometimes obtain coal from brokerage sources and contract miners to fulfill
deliveries under our coal supply agreements. Some of our brokerage sources
and contract miners may experience adverse geologic mining, escalated operating
costs and/or financial difficulties that make their delivery of coal to us at
the contracted price difficult or uncertain. Our profitability or exposure to
loss on transactions or relationships such as these may be affected based upon
the reliability of the supply or the ability to substitute, when economical,
third-party coal sources, with internal production or coal purchased in the
market and other factors.
Decreased
availability or increased costs of key equipment, supplies or commodities such
as diesel fuel, steel, explosives, magnetite and tires could decrease our
profitability.
Our
operations are dependant on reliable supplies of mining equipment, replacement
parts, explosives, diesel fuel, tires, magnetite and steel-related products
(including roof bolts). If the cost of any mining equipment or key supplies
increases significantly, or if they should become unavailable due to higher
industry-wide demand or less production by suppliers, there could be an adverse
impact on our cash flows, results of operations or financial condition. The
supplier base providing mining materials and equipment has been relatively
consistent in recent years, although there continues to be consolidation. This
consolidation has resulted in a situation where purchases of explosives and
certain underground mining equipment are concentrated with single suppliers. In
recent years, mining industry demand growth has exceeded supply growth for
certain surface and underground mining equipment and heavy equipment tires. As a
result, lead times for certain items have generally increased.
Transportation
disruptions could impair our ability to sell coal.
We are
dependent on our transportation providers to provide access to markets.
Disruption of transportation services because of weather-related problems,
strikes, lockouts, fuel shortages or other events could temporarily impair our
ability to supply coal to customers. Our ability to ship coal could be
negatively impacted by a reduction in available and timely rail service. Lack of
sufficient resources to meet a rapid increase in demand, a greater demand for
transportation to export terminals and rail line congestion all could contribute
to a disruption and slowdown in rail service. We continue to experience rail
service delays and disruptions in service which are negatively impacting our
ability to deliver coal to customers and which may adversely affect our results
of operations.
Severe
weather may affect our ability to mine and deliver coal.
Severe
weather, including flooding and excessive ice or snowfall, when it occurs, can
adversely affect our ability to produce, load and transport coal, which may
negatively impact our cash flows, results of operations or financial
condition.
Federal,
state and local laws and government regulations applicable to operations
increase costs and may make our coal less competitive than other coal
producers.
We incur
substantial costs and liabilities under increasingly strict federal, state and
local environmental, health and safety and endangered species laws, regulations
and enforcement policies. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may
result in the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties, the
imposition of cleanup and site restoration costs and liens, the issuance of
injunctions to limit or cease operations, the suspension or revocation of
permits and other enforcement measures that could have the effect of limiting
production from our operations. The costs of compliance with applicable
regulations and liabilities assessed for compliance failure could have a
material adverse impact on our cash flows, results of operations or financial
condition.
New
legislation and new regulations may be adopted which could materially adversely
affect our mining operations, cost structure or our customers’ ability to use
coal. New legislation and new regulations may also require us, as well as our
customers, to change operations significantly or incur increased costs. The
United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) has undertaken broad
initiatives to increase compliance with emissions standards and to provide
incentives to our customers to decrease their emissions, often by switching to
an alternative fuel source or by installing scrubbers or other expensive
emissions reduction equipment at their coal-fired plants.
Concerns
about the environmental impacts of coal combustion, including perceived impacts
on global climate change, are resulting in increased regulation of coal
combustion in many jurisdictions, and interest in further regulation, which
could significantly affect demand for our products.
The Clean
Air Act and similar state and local laws extensively regulate the amount of
sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides and other compounds emitted
into the air from electric power plants, which are the largest end-users of our
coal. Such regulation may require significant emissions control expenditures for
many coal-fired power plants. As a result, the generators may switch to other
fuels that generate less of these emissions or install more effective pollution
control equipment, possibly reducing future demand for coal and the construction
of coal-fired power plants. The majority of our coal supply agreements contain
provisions that allow a purchaser to terminate its contract if legislation is
passed that either restricts the use or type of coal permissible at the
purchaser’s plant or results in specified increases in the cost of coal or its
use.
Global
climate change continues to attract considerable public and scientific
attention. Widely publicized scientific reports, such as the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in 2007, have
also engendered widespread concern about the impacts of human activity,
especially fossil fuel combustion, on global climate change. A considerable and
increasing amount of attention in the United States is being paid to global
climate change and to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, particularly from coal
combustion by power plants. According to the EIA report, “Emissions of
Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2007,” coal combustion accounts for 30% of
man-made greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Legislation was
introduced in Congress in the past several years to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in the United States and, although no bills to reduce such emissions
have yet to pass both houses of Congress, bills to reduce such emissions
remain pending and others are likely to be introduced. President Obama
campaigned in favor of a “cap-and-trade” program to require mandatory greenhouse
gas emissions reductions and since his election has continued to express support
for such legislation, contrary to the previous administration. The United
States Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in
Massachusetts v. Environmental
Protection Agency
ruled that EPA improperly declined to address carbon
dioxide impacts on climate change in a rulemaking related to new motor vehicles.
The reasoning of the court decision could affect other federal regulatory
programs, including those that directly relate to coal use. In July 2008, EPA
published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) seeking comments
regarding the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions; and in February 2009 the
newly appointed administrator of EPA granted a petition by environmental
advocacy groups to reconsider an interpretive memorandum by her predecessor in
December 2008 that concluded the Clean Air Act’s Prevention of Significant
Deterioration program does not extend to carbon dioxide emissions, a decision
that could lead to carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants being a
consideration in permitting decisions. In addition, a growing number of states
in the United States are taking steps to require greenhouse gas emissions
reductions from coal-fired power plants. Enactment of laws and promulgation of
regulations regarding greenhouse gas emissions by the United States or some of
its states, or other actions to limit carbon dioxide emissions, could result in
electric generators switching from coal to other fuel sources.
In
December 2009, 192 countries attended the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit to
discuss actions to be taken to combat global climate change. Leaders from more
than two dozen countries representing over 80 percent of the world’s SO
2
emissions
negotiated the Copenhagen Accord, which puts a non-binding expectation on all of
the major emitting countries to officially record their commitments to reduce
SO
2
emissions by January 31, 2010. The United States participated in the conference
and stated a goal to reduce emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005
levels by 2020, 42 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83 percent below 2005
levels by 2050, which is substantially in line with the energy and climate
legislation passed by the United States House of Representatives in
2009. The ultimate outcome of the Copenhagen Accord and any treaty or
other arrangement ultimately adopted by the United States or other countries,
may have a material adverse impact on the global supply and demand for coal.
This is particularly true if cost effective technology for the capture and
sequestration of carbon dioxide is not sufficiently developed. Technologies that
may significantly reduce emissions into the atmosphere of greenhouse gases from
coal combustion, such as carbon capture and sequestration (which captures carbon
dioxide at major sources such as power plants and subsequently stores it in
nonatmospheric reservoirs such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs, unmineable
coal seams, deep saline formations, or the deep ocean) have attracted and
continue to attract the attention of policy makers, industry participants, and
the public. For example, in July 2008, EPA proposed rules that would establish,
for the first time, requirements specifically for wells used to inject carbon
dioxide into geologic formations. No regulations have been promulgated yet, but
the issue of carbon sequestration results in considerable uncertainty, not only
regarding rules that may become applicable to carbon dioxide injection wells but
also concerning liability for potential impacts of injection, such as
groundwater contamination or seismic activity. In addition, technical,
environmental, economic, or other factors may delay, limit, or preclude
large-scale commercial deployment of such technologies, which could ultimately
provide little or no significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from coal
combustion.
Further
developments in connection with legislation, regulations or other limits on
greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts from coal combustion,
both in the United States and in other countries where we sell coal, could have
a material adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations or financial
condition.
Our
operations may adversely impact the environment which could result in material
liabilities to us.
The
processes required to mine coal may cause certain impacts or generate certain
materials that might adversely affect the environment from time to time. The
mining processes we use could cause us to become subject to claims for toxic
torts, natural resource damages and other damages as well as for the
investigation and clean up of soil, surface water, groundwater, and other media.
Such claims may arise, for example, out of conditions at sites that we currently
own or operate, as well as at sites that we previously owned or operated, or may
acquire. Our liability for such claims may be joint and several, so that we may
be held responsible for more than our share of the contamination or other
damages, or even for the entire share.
Certain
coal that we mine needs to be cleaned at preparation plants, which generally
require coal refuse areas and/or slurry impoundments. Such areas and
impoundments are subject to extensive regulation and monitoring. Slurry
impoundments have been known to fail, releasing large volumes of coal slurry
into nearby surface waters and property, resulting in damage to the environment
and natural resources, as well as injuries to wildlife. We maintain coal refuse
areas and slurry impoundments at a number of our mining complexes. If one of our
impoundments were to fail, we could be subject to substantial claims for the
resulting environmental impact and associated liability, as well as for fines
and penalties.
Drainage
flowing from or caused by mining activities can be acidic with elevated levels
of dissolved metals, a condition referred to as acid mine drainage
(“AMD”). Although we do not currently face material costs associated
with AMD, it is possible that we could incur significant costs in the
future.
These and
other similar unforeseen impacts that our operations may have on the
environment, as well as exposures to certain substances or wastes associated
with our operations, could result in costs and liabilities that could materially
and adversely affect us and could have a material adverse impact on our cash
flows, results of operations or financial condition.
The
Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) or other federal or state
regulatory agencies may order certain of our mines to be temporarily or
permanently closed, which could adversely affect our ability to meet our
customers’ demands.
MSHA or
other federal or state regulatory agencies may order certain of our mines to be
temporarily or permanently closed. Our customers may challenge our issuance of
force majeure notices in connection with such closures. If these challenges are
successful, we may have to purchase coal from third-party sources to satisfy
those challenges; negotiate settlements with customers, which may include price
reductions, the reduction of commitments or the extension of the time for
delivery, terminate customers’ contracts or face claims initiated by our
customers against us. The resolution of these challenges could have a material
adverse impact on our cash flows, results of operations or financial
condition.
We
must obtain governmental permits and approvals for mining operations, which can
be a costly and time-consuming process, can result in restrictions on our
operations, and is subject to litigation that may delay or prevent us from
obtaining necessary permits.
Our
operations are principally regulated under surface mining permits issued
pursuant to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (the “SMCRA”) and
state counterpart laws. Such permits are issued for terms of five years with the
right of successive renewal. Additionally, the Clean Water Act requires permits
for operations that discharge into waters of the United States. Valley fills and
refuse impoundments are authorized under permits issued by the United States
Army Corps of Engineers. Such permitting under the Clean Water Act has been a
frequent subject of litigation by environmental advocacy groups that has
resulted in periodic declines in such permits issued by the United States Army
Corps of Engineers. Additionally, certain surface mines and preparation plants
have permits issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act and state counterpart laws
allowing and controlling the discharge of air pollutants. Regulatory authorities
exercise considerable discretion in the timing of permit issuance. Requirements
imposed by these authorities may be costly and time-consuming and may result in
delays in, or in some instances preclude, the commencement or continuation of
development or production operations. Adverse outcomes in lawsuits challenging
permits or failure to comply with applicable regulations could result in the
suspension, denial or revocation of required permits, which could have a
material adverse impact on our cash flows, results of operations or financial
condition.
The
loss of key personnel or the failure to attract qualified personnel could affect
our ability to operate the Company effectively.
The
successful management of our business is dependent on a number of key personnel.
Our future success will be affected by our continued ability to attract and
retain highly skilled and qualified personnel. There are no assurances that key
personnel will continue to be employed by us or that we will be able to attract
and retain qualified personnel in the future. Failure to retain or attract key
personnel could have an adverse affect on our cash flows, results of operations
or financial condition.
Shortages of skilled labor in the
Central Appalachian coal industry may pose a risk in achieving high levels of
productivity at competitive costs.
Coal
mining continues to be a labor-intensive industry. From time to time, we have
encountered a shortage of experienced mine workers when the demand and prices
for all specifications of coal we mine increased appreciably. During those
periods, the hiring of these less experienced workers negatively impacted our
productivity and cash costs. A lack of
skilled
miners could have an adverse impact on our labor productivity and cost and our
ability to meet current production requirements to fulfill existing sales
commitments or to expand production to meet the increased demand for
coal.
Union
represented labor creates an increased risk of work stoppages and higher labor
costs.
At
December 31, 2009, approximately 1.3% of our total workforce was represented by
the United Mine Workers of America (the “UMWA”). Our unionized workforce is
spread out amongst five of our coal preparation plants. In 2009, these
preparation plants handled approximately 15.8% of our coal production. We are
currently in the process of negotiating successor collective bargaining
agreements for ones that have expired. In connection with these negotiations and
with respect to our unionized operations generally, there may be an increased
risk of strikes and other labor disputes, as well as higher labor costs. If some
or all of our current open shop operations were to become unionized, we could be
subject to additional risk of work stoppages, other labor disputes and higher
labor costs, which could adversely affect the stability of production and reduce
net income.
Legislation
has been proposed to the United States Congress to enact a law allowing for
workers to choose union representation solely by signing election cards (“Card
Check”), which would eliminate the use of secret ballots to elect union
representation. While the impact is uncertain, if Card Check legislation is
enacted into law, it will be administratively easier for the UMWA to unionize
coal mines and may lead to more coal mines becoming unionized.
Inflationary
pressures on supplies and labor may adversely affect our profit
margins.
Although
inflation in the United States has been relatively low in recent years, over the
course of the last two to three years, we have been significantly impacted by
price inflation in many of the components of our cost of produced coal revenue,
such as fuel, steel and labor. If the prices for which we sell our coal do not
increase in step with rising costs or if these costs do not decline
sufficiently, our profit margins would be reduced and our cash flows, results of
operations or financial condition would be adversely affected.
We
are subject to various legal proceedings, which may have a material effect on
our business.
We are
parties to a number of legal proceedings incident to normal business activities.
Some of the allegations brought against us are with merit, while others are not.
There is always the potential that an individual matter or the aggregation of
many matters could have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, results of
operations or financial position. See Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements.
We
have significant reclamation and mine closure obligations. If the assumptions
underlying our accruals are materially inaccurate, we could be required to
expend greater amounts than anticipated.
SMCRA
establishes operational, reclamation and closure standards for all aspects of
surface mining as well as most aspects of deep mining. Estimates of our total
reclamation and mine-closing liabilities are based upon permit requirements and
our engineering expertise related to these requirements. The estimate of
ultimate reclamation liability is reviewed periodically by management and
engineers. The estimated liability can change significantly if actual costs vary
from assumptions or if governmental regulations change
significantly.
Our
future expenditures for postretirement benefit and pension obligations could be
materially higher than we have predicted if our underlying assumptions are
incorrect.
We are
subject to long-term liabilities under a variety of benefit plans and other
arrangements with current and former employees. These obligations have been
estimated based on actuarial assumptions, including actuarial estimates, assumed
discount rates, estimates of life expectancy, expected returns on pension plan
assets and changes in healthcare costs.
If our
assumptions relating to these benefits change in the future or are incorrect, we
may be required to record additional expenses, which would reduce our
profitability. In addition, future regulatory and accounting changes relating to
these benefits could result in increased obligations or additional costs, which
could also have a material adverse impact on our cash flows, results of
operations or financial condition. See also Notes 5, 10 and 11 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion.
Our
pension plans are currently underfunded and we may have to make significant cash
payments to the plans, reducing the cash available for our
business.
We
sponsor a qualified non-contributory defined benefit pension plan, which covers
substantially all administrative and non-union employees. We
currently expect to make voluntary contributions in 2010 of approximately $20
million. If the performance of the assets in our pension plans does not meet our
expectations, or if other actuarial assumptions are modified, our contributions
could be higher than we expect.
The value
of the assets held in our pension plans has been adversely affected by the
recent disruptions in the financial markets, and the applicable discount rates
applied in determining our pension liabilities have also been negatively
affected by the crisis in the financial markets. As a result, as of
December 31, 2009, our annual measurement date, our pension plan was
underfunded by $55.6 million (based on the actuarial assumptions used in the
application of GAAP). Our pension plans are subject to the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). Under ERISA, the Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation, or PBGC, has the authority to terminate an underfunded pension plan
under limited circumstances. In the event our pension plan is terminated for any
reason while the plan is underfunded, we will incur a liability to the PBGC that
may be equal to the entire amount of the underfunding.
Provisions
in our restated certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws, the agreements
governing our indebtedness and Delaware law may discourage a takeover attempt
even if doing so might be beneficial to our shareholders.
Provisions
contained in our restated certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws could
impose impediments to the ability of a third-party to acquire us even if a
change of control would be beneficial to our shareholders. Provisions of our
restated certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws impose various
procedural and other requirements, which could make it more difficult for
stockholders to effect certain corporate actions. For example, our restated
certificate of incorporation authorizes our Board of Directors to determine the
rights, preferences, privileges and restrictions of unissued series of preferred
stock, without any vote or action by our stockholders. Thus, our Board of
Directors can authorize and issue shares of preferred stock with voting or
conversion rights that could adversely affect the voting or other rights of
holders of Common Stock. We are also subject to provisions of Delaware law that
prohibit us from engaging in any business combination with any “interested
stockholder,” meaning, generally, that a stockholder who beneficially owns more
than 15% of Common Stock cannot acquire us for a period of three years from the
date this person became an interested stockholder unless various conditions are
met, such as approval of the transaction by our Board of Directors. These
provisions may have the effect of delaying or deterring a change of control of
our Company, and could limit the price that certain investors might be willing
to pay in the future for shares of Common Stock.
If a
“fundamental change” (as defined in the indenture governing the 3.25%
convertible senior notes due 2015 (“3.25% Notes”)) occurs, holders of the 3.25%
Notes will have the right, at their option, either to convert their 3.25% Notes
or require us to repurchase all or a portion of their 3.25% Notes, and holders
of the 2.25% convertible senior notes due 2024 (“2.25% Notes”) will have the
right to require us to repurchase all or a portion of their notes. In the event
of a “make-whole fundamental change” (as defined in the indenture governing the
3.25% Notes), we also may be required to increase the conversion rate applicable
to any 3.25% Notes surrendered for conversion. In addition, the indentures for
the convertible notes prohibit us from engaging in certain mergers or
acquisitions unless, among other things, the surviving entity is a
U.S. entity that assumes our obligations under the convertible notes.
Certain of our debt instruments impose similar restrictions on us, including
with respect to mergers or consolidations with other companies and the sale of
substantially all of our assets. These provisions could prevent or deter a
third-party from acquiring us even where the acquisition could be beneficial to
you.
We
may not realize all or any of the anticipated benefits from acquisitions we
undertake, as acquisitions entail a number of inherent risks.
From time
to time we expand our business and reserve position through acquisitions of
businesses and assets, mergers, joint ventures or other transactions. Such
transactions involve various inherent risks, such as:
|
§
|
uncertainties
in assessing the value, strengths and potential profitability of, and
identifying the extent of all weaknesses, risks, contingent and other
liabilities (including environmental liabilities) of, acquisition or other
transaction candidates;
|
|
§
|
the
potential loss of key customers, management and employees of an acquired
business;
|
|
§
|
the
ability to achieve identified operating and financial synergies
anticipated to result from an acquisition or other
transaction;
|
|
§
|
problems
that could arise from the integration of the acquired
business;
|
|
§
|
the
risk of obtaining mining permits for acquired coal assets;
and
|
|
§
|
unanticipated
changes in business, industry or general economic conditions that affect
the assumptions underlying the acquisition or other transaction
rationale.
|
Any one
or more of these and other factors could cause us not to realize the benefits
anticipated to result from the acquisition of businesses or assets or could
result in unexpected liabilities associated with these
acquisitions.
Foreign
currency fluctuations could adversely affect the competitiveness of our coal
abroad.
We rely
on customers in other countries for a portion of our sales, with shipments to
countries in North America, South America, Europe, Asia and Africa. We compete
in these international markets against coal produced in other countries. Coal is
sold internationally in United States dollars. As a result, mining costs in
competing producing countries may be reduced in United States dollar terms based
on currency exchange rates, providing an advantage to foreign coal producers.
Currency fluctuations among countries purchasing and selling coal could
adversely affect the competitiveness of our coal in international
markets.
Terrorist
attacks and threats, escalation of military activity in response to such attacks
or acts of war may negatively affect our cash flows, results of operations or
financial condition.
Our
business is affected by general economic conditions, fluctuations in consumer
confidence and spending, and market liquidity, which can decline as a result of
numerous factors outside of our control, such as terrorist attacks and acts of
war. Future terrorist attacks against United States targets, rumors or threats
of war, actual conflicts involving the United States or its allies, or military
or trade disruptions affecting customers may materially adversely affect
operations. As a result, there could be delays or losses in transportation and
deliveries of coal to customers, decreased sales of coal and extension of time
for payment of accounts receivable from customers. Strategic targets such as
energy-related assets may be at greater risk of future terrorist attacks than
other targets in the United States. In addition, such disruption may lead to
significant increases in energy prices that could result in government-imposed
price controls. It is possible that any, or a combination, of these occurrences
could have a material impact on cash flows, results of operations or financial
condition.
Coal
mining is subject to inherent risks, some for which we maintain third-party
insurance and some for which we self-insure.
Our
operations are subject to certain events and conditions that could disrupt
operations, including fires and explosions, accidental mine water discharges,
coal slurry releases and impoundment failures, natural disasters, equipment
failures, maintenance problems and flooding. We maintain insurance policies that
provide limited coverage for some, but not all, of these risks. Even where
insurance coverage applies, there can be no assurance that these risks would be
fully covered by insurance policies and insurers may contest their obligations
to make payments. Failures by insurers to make payments could have a material
adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations or financial condition.
We self-insure our highwall miners and underground equipment, including our
longwalls. We do not currently carry business interruption
insurance.