Greetings, and welcome to the Sterling Construction Company First Quarter 2012 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce your host, Ms. Elizabeth Brumley, Chief Financial Officer for Sterling Construction Company. Thank you. Ms. Brumley, you may begin.

Thank you. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I want to welcome you to the first quarter conference call. I'm joined here with Pat Manning, our Chairman and CEO; Brian Manning, Executive VP of Business Development; and Maarten Hemsley, our Lead Director. I would like to remind you that this call may include certain statements that fall within the definition of forward-looking statements under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including overall economic and market conditions; competitors', customers' and suppliers' actions; the weather conditions; and other risks identified in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated. Any such statements should be considered in light of these risks. Predictions that we may make at any time may not continue to reflect management's beliefs, and we do not undertake to publicly update them. And now going to the heart of the call. The results for the 2012 first quarter were impacted by 2 significant items: our projects continue to be impacted by a number of the issues identified in the fourth quarter of 2011, and changes in estimated revenues and gross margins on certain construction projects resulted in a net charge of $3.9 million included in operating results; and a $2.4 million after-tax charge or $0.15 per share attributable to Sterling common stockholders. Results for the first quarter of 2012 were also impacted by an increase in net income attributable to noncontrolling interest owners, which I will be discussing further. Revenues for the first quarter declined slightly from the 2011 first quarter. As discussed further in our press release, revenues declined for construction projects in Texas and, to a lesser extent, in Utah and Arizona. This decline was partially offset…

Thanks, Liz. As Liz mentioned, revenues were down in Texas, and there were additional write-downs mainly restricted to 4 projects, which have continued to present challenges to our estimated productivity. We have channeled additional resources, especially with regards to management oversight to these areas. Oftentimes, those problem jobs, it's difficult to turn them around, but we are focusing our full attention to these issues. Revenues and productivity were both affected by adverse weather conditions throughout Texas in the first quarter, as well as the stage of work we were performing, and therefore, the revenue recognition on various projects was delayed. We believe the changes in both management and systems that we have made will return us to profitability, but the results will not be achieved overnight. I hope to be able to report on our next quarterly call significant improvement in our operational efficiency. Now in regards to our operations for the second quarter and the balance of 2012. We have begun work on our $78 million project in Turlock, just south of Sacramento, with Myers & Sons, which is scheduled to be completed this year. And our $44 million project in Northern California with RHBCa, which has a 2-year completion time. We will start the $2 million JV with Shimmick in Los Angeles later this quarter and are working through other backlog with Myers & Sons. We have just begun work on our $72 million JV between RLW and Banicki Construction in Phoenix on SR 24, and we continue to pick up CMAR work, airport work in Arizona through our subsidiary, RLW -- through our subsidiary, Banicki. RLW is 73% done with the I-15 CORE project in Utah and still anticipating finishing on schedule, with the substantial completion late this year. We are scheduled to work -- start work…

Thank you, Pat. In Washington, the first meeting of the Surface Transportation Conference Committee was held on Tuesday. Senate and House conferees gave opening remarks on what is anticipated to be one of the final hurdles in passing a transportation bill. The Senate will go to conference with MAP-21, a 2-year, $109 billion bill, which includes a significant number of policy improvements and reforms. The House will go to the conference with a 90-day extension. The Senate is likely to have the upper hand in negotiations because it is entering the conference with a more substantive bill. As Pat mentioned, the current joint venture design-build projects are progressing well. The I-15 CORE project in Utah is approximately 75% complete and our 290 Manor Expressway project in Austin is approximately 25% complete. We have growth opportunity in California as it is a new market for Sterling. We see opportunity in Northern California to the magnitude of $2.6 billion through our partnership in Myers & Sons. Some of this increased activity in Texas is fueled by the Texas Transportation Commission recently allocating an additional $2 billion to communities across Texas. Approximately $500 million of this allocation will be let in 2012, bringing Texas budget for 2012 to approximately $5 billion. There are numerous opportunities, especially in design-build, on large transportation projects with joint venture partners. On the 6- to 9-month horizon, we should see details on large-scale projects in Houston, such as 290, 288, 249 and 2100. These are all major freeway reconstruction and expansion projects. Texas Sterling is currently on shortlisted teams for the Grand Parkway in Houston, I-35E in Dallas, and we are pursuing the MoPac project in Austin for the same client we are building the 290 design-build project for the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority. These projects are design-build. The Grand Parkway and I-35E are each in excess of $1 billion, and the MoPac project is close to $200 million. These design-build projects typically demand higher-margin than traditional design-bid-build projects. In total, we are currently tracking over $5 billion in alternative delivery bid opportunities. Now, I will turn it over to Maarten Hemsley, our Lead Director.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. As Lead Director and Chairman of the company's CEO search committee, I thought I would say a few words about the search in response to questions that we've had from some investors. The qualities that we're seeking in our new CEO candidate includes solid construction experience, either in our historical, heavy civil sector, although we are considering other construction sectors, and we're also looking for a strategic thinker with the leadership skills to integrate all our businesses, in view of the very strong growth that Pat and Joe have achieved over recent years. I'm pleased to say that we've interviewed a number of very suitable, qualified candidates, and we're now in the process of making the final decision. So we hope to be in the position to make the announcement before the end of the second quarter about a new CEO who will continue to develop the company and its culture of superior performance. I'll now turn this over to the operator for any questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is from Tahira Afzal with KeyBanc Capital Markets.

This is Saagar on for Tahira. Quick questions. Looking first at this being a presidential year, typically, historically, what we've seen in the past is as we get closer to November, sometimes our municipalities and state governments cut down spending a little bit as people get distract. Have you guys seen that, or are you expecting anything, building anything in for that going forward?

On the election, I think our biggest anticipation is the transportation bill and how politics will play into the passage of the bill. We are seeing more momentum nationally. Locally, I think it would have less of an effect as the local municipalities already have their budgets set. So I don't see much effect locally.

Okay. We've just seen and heard that people do get distracted by the back-and-forth that goes on. But -- and then second question related to cost estimation. What -- you guys have some additional estimation write-downs in the first quarter. What makes you confident that you won't get that going forward, and what risk is there really in the future?

There's always risk in the construction projects. I think we have done everything we can to make sure that these problems are solved. We're sending additional management to the areas in question. As I mentioned in my script, it's sometimes difficult to turn around bad projects, so we've got to get through them and make sure that they don't turn any worse. But we've got a 30-year history behind us of doing better than we expect. I think we'll return to that.

Our next question is from line of John Rogers with D. A. Davidson.

Couple of things. First of all, the ramp in revenue that you're talking about this year to get to that 25% growth, is it going to be, I mean, every quarter substantial increases? I mean, can you give us a little help there in terms of the -- how seasonality is going to play in that, and what you're thinking about?

Yes, it'll increase over the next 9 months and the next 3 quarters, and those are our best 3 quarters in a lot of areas. I mean, in Nevada, because of the weather, we're starting additional work in Utah. We've obviously brought on, and as I mentioned in my script, the California -- 2 operations in California, which are cranking up large projects, and the projects that we're beginning for the toll road here in Texas. So I think you'll see a significant ramp-up, and I think Liz mentioned in her release that we anticipate doing $565 million of the backlog through the next 9 months.

Yes. And most of that is going to be, because of seasonality, second and third quarter. So you'll see your typical drop off in the fourth quarter barring any revisions, estimates or things of that nature.

Okay. So we will see it, I mean, including the second quarter. I mean, I would think...

Yes. The second quarter should be pretty strong, given the -- where we are on some of these projects.

Okay. And then in terms of the 4 problem projects that you noted in Texas. Is there any commonality that you can point to between these projects? Or I mean, sort of what went wrong, and what would be different about -- in the future?

There are different issues, John. There's -- and it's always the case. It's based mostly around productivity. In one of the jobs, there's a lot of additional rock that we didn't anticipate that we're responsible for. So I mean, it's the typical production issues that we have that weren't handled really very well, so we're -- that's why we're sending more management there.

Okay. And then, Pat, I don't know -- were these projects outside of your -- what I think of as your core Houston, I guess, market?

Not really. I mean, that is stuff we do all the time, I mean, except for -- we're a little, I would say, unfamiliar with the rock excavations that we have in San Antonio. It's not our general line of work.

Okay. And then in terms of the big projects, Brian, that you referred to, the I35 and the Grand Parkway. Who are you partnering with on those, and what's your share of -- in those partnerships?

John, for competitive reasons right now, I probably won't reveal that. But just to say that they're significant partners, and we share 20% in -- approximately 20% in each of the JVs.

Okay. That's helpful. I just wanted to understand sort of the opportunity there. And given these projects, and I guess there's another big one in Houston as well, is that a lot of -- is that going to distort the market, especially in Texas, I mean, in terms of tightening it up this year over the next couple of years? Or is it going to bring in more capacity into the market, too? Just how do you think about that.

We're viewing it as a positive, because we're well positioned here and have great capability. So we are sought after as a partner. So for Sterling, we view it as a good thing. There are -- the projects are very large, so it does tend to draw large players in. But having that local advantage and being able to pick our teams is certainly a nice position to be in.

Okay. And lastly, in terms of the backlog ramp that you're already seeing. Can you give us any comment or confidence that the margins on that work -- what they look like relative to what we've seen recently? Obviously, you don't have the project revisions, but still, margins are below where they've been historically.

I do think taking out those revisions helps you get a better idea as to what the margins would have been if we hadn't had the write-downs, and I think that can be helpful, John.

Yes. We have write-downs which hurt us very badly, and I don't -- and hopefully, we won't see those going forward.

But is there -- I mean, given the mix of business that you have now, is there any possibility in the near term, or well, even in long term that we can get back up over the 10% margin -- project margin levels?

I would certainly hope so, especially on these large joint venture projects. The market is still compressed. You won't see 10% tomorrow morning, but obviously, we want to get back there.

John, following up on your question, and I'm looking at something that is published. On I-35, I can tell you that our partners are Ferrovial, Webber and Texas Sterling rounds out that team.

Our next question is from line of Avi Fisher with BMO Capital Markets.

Liz, on the minority interest with RLW, I guess I've been curious to what changed from the end of the year to now. Is this a function of fairness or trying to be fair with the subsidiary not charging them the sins of the parents, or what's going on there?

Yes. I think that's a pretty fair assessment, that it's looking at -- I mean, as you may recall, we got in -- we talked about how the goodwill impairment was driven based on an evaluation that's done on the company as a whole because we have one reporting unit. But for accounting purposes, you've got to allocate that write-down to your subsidiaries, and it was then simply pro rata. It was not a reflection of the performance of those subsidiaries at all. And so when we looked at how distributions of net income were going to be made, it just didn't seem appropriate to tag RLW with the $6.7 million of write-downs for purposes of making those distributions.

And is it cash distribution? I mean, does the balance sheet reflect that distribution already?

Actually, because we were talking about it subsequent to filing the 10-K, the distributions for the first quarter that normally would hit didn't hit until April. So you'll see those coming through in the second quarter Q. But yes, it's -- to the noncontrolling interest holders, it's a cash distribution.

It's reflected in our shared gross numbers.

The obligation is, yes.

The obligation is, but the cash out hasn't been.

The cash will go out the door in April. Normally, it would go out right after the filing of the 10-K.

Right. So you had this change?

We had this change, and it was something that we thought about long and hard.

Kind of what pushed you over the edge?

The fact is this -- the allocation was just simply because -- RLW's performance has been very good. I mean, we've been very pleased with the results from those operations. And they got tagged with some of the goodwill write-down, and it just didn't seem appropriate.

It's basically a fairness issue.

Okay. Regarding the CEO search, and, Maarten, I appreciate the update, I don't know if you would be able to say this, but have you put out offers that have been rejected?

I wouldn't normally comment on that, but no, we're still in the process of coming up with a short list. So we haven't made offers at this stage.

Okay. I appreciate the color there. On the backlog number, this may be a small thing, but if you just go and add in the -- I think the $194 million you disclosed in the press release, whatever the number you disclosed in the press release, take out the revenues, it doesn't fit.

The piece that you're missing is the backlog we picked up in connection with the Aggregate Industries transaction. So there's a subsequent footnote, an event footnote in the 10-Q that talks about that. It's on Page 18 of the 10-Q. And in January, we assume $25 million of revenues related to 7 contracts.

Got you. So it's acquired backlog?

It's acquired backlog as opposed to awarded backlog, which we -- I think the awarded is more of an indicator as to what is truly happening in the market. So that's why we focused on that number as opposed to the acquired backlog.

I appreciate that. Just need to make a calculation for -- to get the awards. A few other very quick questions, and -- John kind of touch on these. On the projects, the 4 projects, when do they complete? When are they expected to complete?

Those projects as well as the other projects that we had challenges on in the fourth quarter, most of that is going to roll off in the second and the third quarter of this year. There'll be some impact later on, but substantially all of it, I mean, as you would expect, because you've got such a large piece of our backlog rolling off this year.

Okay, that's great. When we back out the gross -- the charges, we end up with a gross margin about 6%. That's kind of -- obviously, below the 8%. Is some of that due to weather? Because you did call out bad weather in the quarter.

Yes. Certainly, due to weather. I don't know that -- Liz cautions me that it might not be worse weather than it was year-over-year, but we still have some significant rain. I was talking to our Vice President this morning in Dallas, and he said all of the lake levels in Dallas are back up to normal after being significantly low over the course of last year, so.

I mean, January was an extremely wet month. As you may recall, last year, with the Super Bowl, we had horrible freezes and snow in Dallas, and so first quarter last year was a challenge with weather.

Okay. Is the 6% margin outside of these -- excluding these projects. Is that, at the very least, in the normal rate of 8% at the bottom? I mean, would you be bidding below that?

No. We are -- I would rather, I guess, not go into exactly what we're bidding at, but we are trying to raise margins. And certainly, we're trying to get them back up into the 10% range. I mean, there could be a project that we might bid below 6%, depending on where it was and what the timing was and what the -- there's a lot of factors that go into it.

Potential upside.

Potential upside for change orders and things like that.

And speaking of upside, is there an award when the Utah project completes, with Fluor?

Is there what?

Are there any sort of contingency harvesting when the project completes?

There's is the potential for completing it ahead of the schedule that we gave them. There are certainly contingencies built into that work that we don't know if we have to use yet. So there may be a plus.

Just 2 other quick questions. The tax rate, you said it was 34% in the quarter. Is that what we should model in for the year?

I would model somewhere between 30% and 34%. The kind of the red herring is the relative amount of nontaxable interest income versus the rest of the earnings. And I think we break the nontaxable interest income out separately in the footnote, in the right -- in the rate reconciliation in the footnote. So just caution on that.

Okay. I will flip through that. And finally, I'm curious about what you're seeing with material costs. You mentioned an asphalt project. It seems like asphalt prices are growing fairly rapidly. Curious across-the-board asphalt, labor, concrete, diesel.

Obviously, the diesel and the gasoline prices have been up in the short run, but they're trending down right now. And what we're seeing for the futures market is they will continue to trend that way. Obviously, that's very volatile with what we have going on in the Mid East. Other products are becoming a little short supply in Texas, due to all the Eagle Ford Shale and the work we have on the -- in the oil patches in the different parts of the state. So aggregates are becoming a little bit short, not so much because of the price of the aggregates but because of the price of the trucking. Labor, so far has stayed relatively steady.

Our next question is from line of Nick Coppola with Thompson Research.

So I'll ask a little bit more about the competitive environment. Are there any signals you could talk to us about, in terms of any -- are bid lists getting any shorter? Are you seeing any less irrational bidders out there?

Yes, I would say bid lists are getting some shorter. So on any given project, you could still see the 10 to 12 bidders, but a lot of the projects are getting less bidders. The volume of work coming out of different spots seems to be a little bigger. We're spread across the country, so it's different for different markets. I'm most familiar with here in Houston because I live here. And for the first time in 3 years, I'm starting to see various building projects going on, strip centers, a couple of office buildings, FedEx building, things like that. So it seems to me the economy is picking up.

We are seeing pick up on the private side, which is relieving some of the pressure on the public projects that we did.

Okay. And for PPP in Texas, what kind of opportunities are you tracking? Is there an ability to move the needle with alternative funding mechanisms in lieu of, I guess, a long-term highway bill?

The way PPP has gone so far in Texas is they've run them as dual procurement. So they've had a public/private partnership option and a design-build option. And on recent short lists, they've been going design-build. So Texas has been able to find the funds to build the projects or enter into a cooperative agreement with counties in order to build projects. On a go forward basis for some of these projects, and we're talking about projects in excess of $1 billion, there will certainly be some more activity on PPP.

[Operator Instructions] We have no further questions in queue at this time.

Thank you, everybody. We all look forward to speaking to you in the next quarter call.

Ladies and gentlemen, this does concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.