West Griffin
Analyst · Wells Fargo
Thanks, Tim. On slide eight, you can see that our specialty products adjusted EBITDA of $37.7 million was down compared to our reported result of $45.6 million in the first quarter of last year, but up sequentially compared to $30.8 million in the fourth quarter. There are two primary drivers of this year-over-year decline. First, as Tim mentioned, we had a fair amount of turnaround activity at Shreveport that affected our lubricants business. Secondly, we report $4 million in one-time charges associated with acquisition costs. So, without these special costs, our specialty adjusted EBITDA would have been nearly flat year-over-year. The quarterly gross profit declined year-over-year due to the impact of turnaround and maintenance activity. Our gross profit per barrel of $33.11 was an improvement compared to $31.85 in the first quarter of last year and the $30.07 captured in the sequential quarter. Our margin performance on a per barrel basis overcame pressure from rising crude prices as WTI increased over 21% over where we were in last year's first quarter. Despite this pressure, our margin improvement was driven by stronger mix, including the continued strength and contribution from our high-margin branded products division and several product pricing adjustments that were taken early in the quarter in response to an elevated crude price environment. Slide nine shows that while our quarterly EBITDA margin can often fluctuate, our margins exhibit strength and stability when viewed on a trailing 12-month basis. This demonstrates the consistency and stability of our base business. Individual quarterly results reflect both the natural lag in adjusting to changes in crude prices, turnaround activity as well as the seasonality in our business. When crude prices change during a period, we have delays in adjusting prices which affect our quarterly adjusted EBITDA margins. But on a trailing 12-month basis, our margins are very stable, reflecting our ability to make those adjustments to changes in our costs. In addition, our first and second quarters tend to be the strongest quarters in our specialty business, which is reflected in the recovery in the first quarter 2018 EBITDA margin versus the fourth quarter 2017 margin in spite of continued increases in crude prices. Our fuels segment performance on slide 10 shows that we generated quarterly adjusted EBITDA of $38.7 million, which was an improvement compared to the as-reported results of $36.8 million from the first quarter of last year in spite of not having Superior in the numbers this year. When adjusted for the divestiture of the Superior refinery, our current fuels asset base generated adjusted EBITDA that more than doubled that was captured in last year's first quarter, reflecting the stronger business environment this quarter compared to that of the year ago. This stronger business environment was partially offset by turnaround and maintenance activity at both Shreveport and Great Falls, as well as $2.1 million in hedging activity. The segment's gross profit per barrel performance of $7.49 marks a 44% increase to the $5.19 per barrel captured in the first quarter of last year. Growth in our gross profit per barrel was driven by a combination of a number of contributing factors including, first, the year-over-year improvement in crack spreads. The Gulf Coast 211 was about 14% higher than last year. Secondly, record-setting premium gasoline sales volume from Shreveport. Thirdly, the margin uplift from processing greater amounts of discounted crudes, both WCS as well as midland WTI. And fourth, reduced costs due to lower RINs prices and the reduction in RINs obligations. Crude optimization has been a key component of our profit improvement efforts. For example, during the first quarter, we processed approximately 23,000 barrels per day of our advantaged heavy Western Canadian Select Crude or WCS. Additionally, we processed approximately 6,500 barrels per day of cost advantaged midland WTI priced crudes. Each of these have helped to improve our gross profit capture and Tim will talk more about how we're looking for new ways to continue to optimize discounted crude in a few moments. Slide 11 shows our hedge schedule as of March 31. We ended the second quarter unhedged for 2018. We have, however, put in place some diesel WCS crack spreads for calendar 2019 and we'll continue to evaluate our program in the context of the market as we move forward. Our self-help initiatives have realized a little over $8 million in benefit so far this year as you can see on slide 12. These EBITDA contributions were driven by improved crude sourcing and logistics efforts, the benefits of new product introductions and product upgrades and the additional capturing of efficiencies within our supply chain. We have now officially exceeded the low end of our original $150 million to $200 million three-year goal with just nine quarters. Consistent with the guidance we gave last quarter, we continue to expect that full-year 2018 results from our self-help program would deliver between $40 million to $50 million in total adjusted EBITDA. This includes contributions from our new isomerate unit at San Antonio and the naphtha upgrade project at Great Falls, both of which are just now starting up. In addition to these growth-oriented capital projects, we expect to see continued growth within our high-margin branded products division. Lastly, I want to spend a little time providing a little more context on our ERP implementation. We have made significant progress. All shipping backlogs have been eliminated. While we have addressed many of the issues on the front-end that caused our original backlog in shipping, the transition to the new ERP system has also raised issues that will make it difficult to complete our accounting close and, therefore, cause delays in our financial reporting. While we're still working through the effects of these issues, we're cautiously optimistic that the back-office impacts will be largely addressed by the end of the second quarter, so that the company can pivot to realizing the benefits from the ERP system. While we cannot assure that we will fall within the normal timeline, we are very encouraged by the progress made today. You should see us continue to make solid progress when we close the book for the second quarter. The $3.7 million that we spend on ERP cost this quarter was less than the fourth quarter's expense of $6.9 million, reflecting the diminishing effort on both the front-end of the shipped product as well as the back end to complete our accounting. We expect our full-year ERP spend to be less than the $18.6 million realized in the full year 2017. Looking forward, we expect to realize significant benefits from the ERP system to drive further self-help improvements. For example, when we went live on our ERP system, we had anticipated having all our transportation centrally arranged and coordinated to further drive our transportation cost down. We had to delay the full implementation of this initiative and are just now turning on this part of the system on a plant by plant basis in the second quarter. And we anticipate that we will start to realize benefits as we roll it out during the remainder of this year. While we are disappointed that we're not further along today, we strongly believe that this will be a good long-term investment for the company and for our shareholders. Before I turn the call back to Tim, I wanted to take a moment to reference our credit metrics on slide 13. As Tim mentioned earlier, we have made significant headway in the first quarter, securing the new five-year term for our revolver as well as formally calling our senior secured notes. Our liquidity continues to exhibit stability and incremental improvement. However, you will see projected liquidity levels decrease next quarter as we use some of the cash on our balance sheet to fully redeem the secured notes early in the second quarter. This will have a modest effect on our leverage metric as measured by net debt to trailing 12 months EBITDA, as well as our total liquidity, given that the call included about $46 million in call premium. With that, I'll turn the call back to Tim for closing comments. Tim?