Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to BWX Technologies First Quarter 2021 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Following the Company’s prepared remarks, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will be given at that time. I’d now like to turn the conference call over to our host, Mark Kratz, BWXT’s Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Todd. Good morning and welcome to BWXT’s first quarter 2021 earnings call. Joining me today are Rex Geveden, President and CEO; and David Black, Senior Vice President and CFO. On today’s call, we will discuss certain matters that constitute forward-looking statements. These statements involve risks and uncertainties, including those described in the Safe Harbor provisions found in yesterday’s earnings release and the Company’s SEC filings. We will also discuss non-GAAP financial measures, which are reconciled to GAAP measures in the quarterly materials that are available on the BWXT website. With that Rex, I will turn the call over to you.

Thank you Mark, and good morning everyone. Yesterday, we’ve reported solid first quarter results with earnings of $0.73 per share on over $0.5 billion revenue and strong operating cash flow. Year-over-year revenue and earnings comparisons are down slightly at the consolidated level given a tough compared to a robust first quarter last year. However, 2021 performance to-date is what we expected and just as we outlined on the last earnings call. BWXT is off to a swift start in 2021 with success on several significant milestones. So let me give you an update on those matters before turning the call over to David to discuss detailed financial results and guidance. The Nuclear Operations Group was awarded $2.2 billion contract for the 2021, 2022 pricing period from the naval nuclear propulsion program. The content for this award includes components and fuel for the continued cadence in the two Virginia class submarines per year, as well as well as incremental Columbia work. Although the President's budget request for 2022 has not been released, we anticipate bipartisan support for the navy's nuclear platforms and shipbuilding accounts. We look forward to additional budget information from the new administration in the coming weeks. Apart from the pricing agreement, we are reasonably facilitated to move to a three Virginia class submarine cadence in non-sequential years if required, similar to the schedule from the navy's most recent 30-year shipbuilding plan assuming some delivery day flexibility. We await an updated 30-year plan and in a scenario where a more condensed third Virginia ordering cadence is planned than a modest amount of incremental capital investment would be required. Outside of Naval Reactors NOG was awarded $57.5 million from the Department of Energy to design and stand up a pilot process for purifying enriched uranium into a safe metal form.…

Thanks, Rex and good morning, everyone. I will start on Slide 4 of the earnings presentation with total company results. First quarter revenue was $528 million down 2.6% primarily from lower energy revenue compared to a robust first quarter last year, which was partially offset by higher MPG revenue. First quarter earnings per share were down 7.6% to $0.73 as a result of less operating segment earnings, higher other expenses and a higher tax rate. Those headwinds were partially offset by higher pension income, foreign exchange gains and lower interest expense. A quarter-over-quarter bridge can be found on Slide 5. Moving to the first quarter segment results on Slide 6. The Nuclear Operations Group generated $402 million of revenue down 5% -- about 5% compared with the prior year period, primarily from long -- lower long lead material production. Energy operating income was $74.4 million down 18% from the prior year period. Operating income was disproportionately lower than revenue due to a combination of lower volume and fewer favorable contract adjustments that were in part driven by negative impacts from COVID absences that we discussed on the February earnings call. This resulted in an 18.5% operating margin for the segment in the first quarter. We do not foresee any change to the typical high teens margin with upside from pension reimbursements for the full year for NOG. And Nuclear Power Group first quarter revenue was $107 million up 22% compared with the first quarter last year, driven primarily from higher field service parts manufacturing and fuel handling activity partially offset by lower component volume. While another significant driver, we note that BWXT medical was up 6.5% as the market continues to show positive signs of recovery following COVID impacts from last year. MPG operating income was up 20% driven by…

Thank you, David. We believe that our new medium-term guidance accurately reflects BWXT’s ability to profitably grow, as it has since the spin in 2015. Our growth targets include the assumption of increases in the base business as well as progress in several key initiatives that have been advancing over the last few years. We anticipate continued growth in the Naval Reactors business and other opportunities to expand NOG’s product and service offerings. Growth also contemplate successful Technetium 99 introduction to the market in 2022 and share gains in that product as well as others over the subsequent years while also expanding margins in the BWXT medical business. The other significant portion of our growth is anticipated to become from new wins in the nuclear services business and continued traction in microreactor programs as they progress from design to demonstration phases. David mentioned we expect to convert more than 85% of net income into free cash flow as we transition to maintenance CapEx levels toward the end of 2022. Our current strategic planning does not anticipate significant capital investment beyond that. But we remain flexible to make those investments which could further support and extend growth in the company. And lastly, we want to make the commitment to return the majority of free cash flow back to investors over the medium-term. We plan to continue to pay a strong dividend and supplement the rest of that commitment in the share repurchase system. We see the commitment of these medium-term financial targets is the first step toward an Investor Day later this year. In the coming quarters, we expect to make significant strides and major milestones across the company, including the new Tech 99 generator product line, and anticipate more visibility and how the growth and nuclear services will unfold. We look forward to sharing more depth and insights about the company with investors sometime this fall. And with that, I will ask the operator to open the line for questions.

Operator?

Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session.[Operator Instructions] We will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. And the first question comes from Robert Spingarn with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning, everybody.

Good morning, Rob.

Good morning, Rob.

Rex, can we just start on the microreactor business? And you've talked a lot about the developments there and it's gaining some momentum. But can we frame this in some kind of time horizon is when this goes from sort of concept to -- your development to production? And when this could get to some kind of a critical mass for you is it five years -- 2025 type of timeframe or is it 2030? How do we think about that?

Yes, so Rob, we have talked about that in the past is that we're going through what I would call sort of technology development for the most part, in some cases designs for demonstration reactors in the cases of nuclear thermal propulsion and then reactor for DOD. And those would transition into demonstration programs and fairly shortly in the case of the [SCO] reactor, it would be next year, so that decision -- if that decision is taken and funded for NASA maybe a little longer term for a demonstration program. So we will start to see demonstration money as early as next year and on into the next few years. And as I have said in the past, these programs for us right now run them in 10s of millions a year. When you get into a demonstration phase, it'll be a few 100 million, let's call it whether that's a terrestrial demonstration or an on-orbit demonstration in the case of NASA. And then production programs would presumably follow that and so the way I think about and those programs, obviously the sales there depends on the production tempo, but those would follow the demonstration and I would think of those as being in the latter part of the decade, 2027, 2028, let's call it, so I think it becomes very interesting part of the business may be in -- that maybe in six or seven years from now, something like that. And as I have said in the past in the ideal case, we're able to construct a new vertical for the business that maybe sort of resembles our Naval Reactors vertical.

Okay. And those numbers you throw out there those for BWXT or would those be total program you'd share some of those revenues?

So those are total program revenues that I threw out there. And it depends on whether you prime or not, for example, we would prime a reactor demonstration program in the case of the DOD on a Space 1 with a spacecraft and launch vehicle, we might be in a subcontractor position on that one, but that those are total program figures.

Okay. And then just one quick one for David on cost inflation in the supply chain. Are you seeing any pressures that we're seeing broadly in the economy? And is there any lag in terms of the recoverability of that in your contracts with customers, such that it can have an impact on margins? Thank you.

So as everyone else is where seeing input prices increase, but we have negotiated in our contracts appropriate levels of, of inflation and using indexes. So this point in time, we feel secure and that we'll still be able to get the margins that we have mentioned.

And in addition to the pricing or price inflation is availability of inputs. satisfactory?

Yes, right now for us, we're not having any problem with the supply chain providing the materials and things that we need in order to get our production in process.

Okay. Thank you both.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Bob Labick with CJS Securities. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and congratulations on a lot of nice milestones across the board.

Thanks, Bob.

Thank you, Bob.

I want to start with – Rex, I think you mentioned a full pilot production program using your Technetium generator with 95%. efficiency. I guess my question is maybe expand on that a little bit? And how is that product that you've done the pilot on different from what you will be submitting to the FDA later this year presumably and what are the biggest hurdles to getting to that point? But is it the same kind of thing you just need some approvals before then or how does that product differ from what you ultimately will submit?

Yes, Bob, so that product is basically identical to what we will be producing. The only difference is we were using sort of -- we were using a BWXT design generator. And we were using material from the Missouri University Research Reactor. But it wasn't running through our plant in Canada, right. It wasn't running through an automated radiochemistry radiopharmacy line. So that'd be the difference. It was more of a manual process. But it's a very important milestone because it tells us how the generator works. And we were able to demonstrate that the illusion efficiency, which is sort of the rate at which you're able to draw that technetium out of the generator was best-in-class. .:

Okay, great. That sounds fantastic. And then just one other one quickly, where does M&A fit into your medium-term or multi-year guidance? And how is the market looking right now or -- I mean, you guys have so much on your plate anyway, are using like looking for M&A opportunities right now or you focused internally?

So we, we didn't pre-emptively bake any M&A into that medium-term guidance. Although you could think about maybe pushing our performance into the top end of that guidance range with by augmenting it with some acquisitions. We do have an active M&A pipeline, and we find something that really fits and that can amplify our strategic intentions then we would do it. But I think you're correct to say that our focus right now is really on like building out these this organic growth that we've been capitalizing and ensuring that we have success on that, but M&A is always is always an option for us.

Thanks so much.

Thank you, Bob.

The next question comes from Peter Arment with Baird. Please go ahead.

Yes. Good morning. Rex, David.

Good morning Peter.

Hey, David, on the medium-term financial targets. You mentioned kind of the modest improvements in working capital as a percent of sales kind of what -- is that 100 basis points, 200 basis points maybe you could just level set us on how you're thinking of that?

I mean, we haven't defined what that modest is there's going to be some improvement over time. But, we do have fluctuations when you look quarter-to-quarter with our working capital as we build up our contracts and progress and things. So we just think as we look over time, there'll be just some small modest improvements in that in order to provide the additional space force.

Okay. And then just -- and Rex just on the JV with the GMS. Maybe you could just -- what are some of the components of the deal maybe how do you expect to report it in your financial? Thanks?

Yes. So the deal is structured so that our partner would capitalize the investment. So our -- and the way we would participate is to contribute our technology into that special purpose entity, our intellectual property and then we share on the economics and so it comes across as income in future.

Great. Thanks, guys.

Thanks, Peter.

The next question comes from Pete Skibitski with Alembic Global. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning, Rex and David and Mark.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Hey, guys, the COVID related absences at [indiscernible] in the first quarter sounds like there was a negative margin impact there. Is it safe to assume that you're kind of out of the woods there the balance of the year?

Pete, I think we certainly hope so, if you look at the way COVID ran through the business, it looks somewhat like the national curve, and that there were kind of three peaks at the beginning one that early summer, and then it really was most impactful to us in the fall and winter timeframe. We started to see pretty significant impacts around October, worse in November, worse yet in December and it peaked out around the second week of January for us, and then started to roll-off but it bled on into February. And we sort of not our way through the problem and we've been kind of hitting our numbers, but it's absolutely affected production in the plants. We -- what happens there in that case is of course, you get less productivity less product rolling through the shop, and therefore less favorable contract adjustments as a consequence of all that. And to give you a sense of the magnitude. There were times when our largest plant in Lynchburg had over 10% absent either from quarantine or from having to be evacuated from their workstations to do a decontamination exercise following a potential contact. And some of our other large plants, we had 7% or 8% absences, day-to-day at the peak. So it really did roll through the plants in a way that was impactful. Yes, we're certainly seeing much improved rates and much, much lower quarantine numbers at this point. And we're hoping that we follow the trajectory of the U.S. and get out of the woods on this soon.

Okay, okay. Yes, appreciate the color. That's great. And now on the financial targets. It sounds to me like a mid-to-high single-digit adjusted EBITDA that roughly corresponds to the top line growth. But can you maybe clarify on the depreciation, amortization, it sounds like that will play a role. I know guidance is your $65 million David, I mean, does that get to over $100 million by the end of the period or just trying to get a sense of how much D&A kind of contributes to that?

Yes, no, I think, as we look, now-- we're saying that 3.5% to 4% is what our continued maintenance capital is going to be, but your depreciation because of the high capital that we currently have been spending will get us closer to that $100 million towards the end of that period. So we feel that looking at adjusted EBITDA is just a much better picture for us to look at our operations and the underlying business.

Yes, and that makes sense. Last one, for me. Hey, Rex, some of the other companies out there one that DARPA Draco contract. Was that -- did you guys -- I thought maybe you guys were going to plan it. And if you did, was it a surprise? Was it a disappointment? I just want to kind of get your thoughts around that. I know, it's kind of a different mission area. I wanted to be thought about it?

Yes. Yes, that was an interesting one. We were certainly interested in that contract. We do have a continuing relationship with DARPA on that and with some of the spacecraft providers, and so we're kind of in the game, but we were not awarded prime contracts.

Okay, okay. Okay, thanks very much, guys.

Thanks, Pete.

Thank you, Pete.

The next question comes from Michael Ciarmoli with Truist. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking the questions here. Nice results. How you guys doing? Rex just to stay on what Pete was just asking. I'm not that Draco to be clear, it would seem that General Atomics can prime everything and do everything themselves. But maybe Blue Origin or Lockheed could pull you in as a reactor subcontractor is that the right way to kind of look at some not only this opportunity, but maybe even future opportunities where you can get pulled in as a component supplier?

Yes, that's exactly right, Michael.

Okay. David just did say there was a $30 million of increased expenses this year kind of flowing through related a lot to the isotopes and some other development expense programs?

No in our other segment, what we're saying is that that segment is going to increase to $30 million. I think the forecast was $26 million or so. So it's gone up some, because of the additional expenses did not increase $30 million. So it's just gone up 10% or so to cover the additional commercialization costs that we feel we need in the current year to get us to the DA submittal here and then to production next year.

Got it. So then how do we think about as you get into production and maybe then tying into the to the medium-term targets, you'll presumably get a roll-off of these expenses. And I don't think you put a fine pencil on it yet. But the margins presumably in the isotopes, I think we're always going to be accretive to NOG but should we think about once everything comes online seeing a pretty big tailwind to some margins obviously, you'll have the core Naval Reactor, which is a pretty mature margin, but maybe how should we think about the margins as they trend in that segment into next year once you get into production?

So Michael, I'll take that one. So certainly in the -- that's the way to think about that business, that product line in the long-term, it's going to be margin accretive certainly. In the intermediate term, let's call it as we ramp up into production, we'll be bearing some pretty heavy expenses, and ramping to what will ultimately -- be our ultimate production level over the first year or two in that product line. So I wouldn't anticipate a lot of pop, a lot of tailwind until we we've gotten into let me call it full stride on production. We intend to give you much more color around that when we get to the Investor Day later this fall. So that you can see more transparently how we expect that business to unfold into grow.

Got it. Got it. Perfect. And then just last one for me, the MPG, you had a really strong quarter on the top line good growth and it sounded like you're still waiting for that business to kind of start to normalize from COVID. But the revenue growth decelerates for the rest of the year. Is that just normal seasonality outage and timing or what's happening in there with MPG for the remainder of the year?

Yes, you have that right. It's just some natural cyclicality of the business.

Got it. Thanks, Rex. I'll jump back in the queue.

Thank you, Mike.

[Operator Instructions] Next question comes from Ron Epstein with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Yes, I got a couple of questions for you.

Hey, Ron.

Hey, Ron.

How was the American rescue plan changed your pension considerations in terms of cash recoveries and funding and so on and so forth?

Ron really has not done a lot for us. I think that, we got our pension plan into a period of fully fund -- I mean from an [indiscernible] standpoint, we're funded enough. So from a cash standpoint we still anticipate that, we have the additional plus ups for us from a cash basis out to 24. But right now, our funding is under $20 million a year. So we don't see an impact of delaying, a lot of funding payments. I think what we're more interested in is trying to show up that pension and annuitize what we can, when we can. So we can knock-off the liability eventually.

Got it. How does the change in R&D consideration under the tax law unless it's reversed impact you guys, you have to amortize it now over five years versus taking it all at once?

Yes, I mean, remember, our R&D right now is less than 1% actually 0.6%, I think this year. So the impact to us is going to be very small, we do take advantage of any tax benefit we can get. But the change in benefits going to be very small.

Got it. On the midterm guidance, why is the cash conversion only 85%, I would have thought kind of a company in your position. It would be higher than that?

No, I mean, once again, we -- as we grow our business, we've got to have the ability to fluctuate with working capital, we also have some pension payments is still have to exist in the out years. So right now, we feel that the 85% is a good measure. There'll be times that were at -- more than that in times maybe a little less, but, we feel that as a measurement period or a measurement going forward that that's a good basis to start from.

Got it. And then maybe one last final one. On the -- on your EBITDA growth target, how much of that's predicated on just kind of the core business? And how much of that is predicated on new businesses? I mean, broadly speaking, is it sort of like two-thirds core business one-thirds new businesses? I'm just trying to get a sense on how much in that you're banking on things like the medical business growing and so on and so forth?

So Ron, I'll take that one. I'd say that -- maybe I answer a slightly different question than you asked if I could. The way that we're thinking about it is if you wanted to get into the upper range of our guidance, then the strategic initiatives need to pan out appropriately and our base business needs to do what we anticipate it's going to do. So kind of in the high scenario, navy business does what you want it to do, the isotopes story unfold. So the way that we expect, which is the moly project is successful, and we gained the market share that we expect. We win a good share of this Department of Energy technical services opportunities, and we get continued to have some traction with the microreactor demonstration programs. That would -- as we think about it, sort of get you in the high end of the mid-term EBITDA guidance, medium-term EBITDA guidance and so that's how we're thinking about it. Now, if we didn't hit on all of those four cylinders, and we were succeeding on two or three of those, you might be able to get back up into that high end of the guidance range with an acquisition or something like that. So that's how we're thinking about it internally.

And, and I would add to that, Ron, that, as we look at the NOG business, we show and continue to show the growth of Colombia in that business. We do have two items out there that we're always aware of and that one is this [indiscernible] differential and the pension. The other thing that we don't talk a lot about is the reloads. The [indiscernible] reloads are going away, the forward reloads won't start again, until a specific time in the future. The government doesn't really lay-out a schedule there. And as I've said in the past, we do not talk a lot about those because, the government likes to use those to fill our shops in times of need. So but those are some impacts there as well as we go forward.

Got it. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Ron.

As we have no further questions, this concludes our question and answer session. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Mark Kratz for any closing remarks.

Thanks, Todd. And that concludes today's conference call. If you have further questions, please call me at 980-365-4300. Thank you for joining us this morning. Bye.

The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.