XML 40 R27.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.7.0.1
Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)
 12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2016
Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Consolidation, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Principles of Consolidation
 
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of subsidiaries and construction joint ventures in which the Company has a greater than
50%
ownership interest or otherwise controls such entities. For investments in subsidiaries and construction joint ventures that are not wholly-owned, but where the Company exercises control, the equity held by the remaining owners and their portions of net income (loss) are reflected in the balance sheet line item “Noncontrolling interests” in “Equity” and the statement of operations line item “Noncontrolling owners’ interests in earnings of subsidiaries and joint ventures,” respectively. For investments in subsidiaries that are not wholly-owned, but where the Company exercises control and where the Company has a mandatorily redeemable interest, the equity held by the remaining owners and their portion of net income (loss) is reflected in the balance sheet line item “Members’ interest subject to mandatory redemption and undistributed earnings” and the statement of operations line item “Other operating expense (income), net,” respectively. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. For all years presented, the Company had no subsidiaries where its ownership interests were less than
50%.
Refer to Note
4
for further information regarding the Company’s Subsidiaries and Joint Ventures with Noncontrolling Owners’ Interest.
 
Where the Company is a noncontrolling joint venture partner, and otherwise not required to consolidate the joint venture entity, its share of the operations of such construction joint venture is accounted for on a pro rata basis in the consolidated statements of operations and as a single line item (“Receivables from and equity in construction joint ventures”) in the consolidated balance sheets. This method is an acceptable modification of the equity method of accounting which is a common practice in the construction industry. Refer to Note
5
for further information regarding the Company’s construction joint ventures.
 
Under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”), the Company must determine whether each entity, including joint ventures in which it participates, is a variable interest entity (“VIE”). This determination focuses on identifying which owner or joint venture partner, if any, has the power to direct the activities of the entity and the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity disproportionate to its interest in the entity, which could have the effect of requiring the Company to consolidate the entity in which we have a noncontrolling variable interest. Refer to Note
6
for further information regarding the Company’s consolidated VIE.
Use of Estimates, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Use of Estimates
 
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Certain of the Company’s accounting policies require higher degrees of judgment than others in their application. These include the recognition of revenue and earnings from construction contracts under the percentage-of-completion method, the valuation of long-term assets (including goodwill), and income taxes. Management continually evaluates all of its estimates and judgments based on available information and experience; however, actual results could differ from these estimates.
Revenue Recognition, Percentage-of-Completion Method [Policy Text Block]
Revenue Recognition
 
The Company is a general contractor which engages in various types of heavy civil construction projects principally for public (government) owners. Credit risk is minimal with public owners since the Company ascertains that funds have been appropriated by the governmental project owner prior to commencing work on such projects. While most public contracts are subject to termination at the election of the government entity, in the event of termination the Company is entitled to receive the contract price for completed work and reimbursement of termination-related costs. Credit risk with private owners is minimized because of statutory mechanics liens, which give the Company high priority in the event of lien foreclosures following financial difficulties of private owners. Refer to Note
16
for further information regarding the Company’s concentration of risk.
 
Our contracts generally take
12
to
36
months to complete. The Company generally provides a
one
- to
two
-year warranty for workmanship under its contracts when completed. Warranty claims historically have been insignificant.
 
Revenues are recognized on the percentage-of-completion method, measured by the ratio of costs incurred up to a given date to estimated total costs for each contract. This cost-to-cost measure is used because management considers it to be the best available measure of progress on these contracts. Contract costs include all direct material, labor, subcontract and other costs and those indirect costs related to contract performance, such as indirect salaries and wages, equipment repairs and depreciation, insurance and payroll taxes. Administrative and general expenses are charged to expense as incurred. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts are made in the period in which such losses are determined. Changes in job performance, job conditions and estimated profitability, including those changes arising from contract penalty provisions and final contract settlements
may
result in revisions to costs and income and are recognized in the period in which the revisions are determined.
 
Changes in estimated revenues and gross margin during the year ended
December
31,
2016
resulted in a net charge of
$6.3
million included in operating loss, or
$0.27
per diluted share attributable to Sterling common stockholders, included in net loss attributable to Sterling common stockholders. Changes in estimated revenues and gross margin during the year ended
December
31,
2015
resulted in a net charge of
$9.7
million included in operating loss, or
$0.50
per diluted share attributable to Sterling common stockholders, included in net loss attributable to Sterling common stockholders. Changes in estimated revenues and gross margin during the year ended
December
31,
2014
resulted in a net charge of
$9.1
million included in operating loss, or
$0.50
per diluted share attributable to Sterling common stockholders, included in net loss attributable to Sterling common stockholders.
 
Change orders are modifications of an original contract that effectively change the existing provisions of the contract without adding new provisions or terms. Change orders
may
include changes in specifications or designs, manner of performance, facilities, equipment, materials, sites and period of completion of the work. Either we or our customers
may
initiate change orders.
 
The Company considers unapproved change orders to be contract variations for which we have a change of scope for which we believe we are contractually entitled to additional price but a price change associated with the scope change has not yet been agreed upon with the customer. Costs associated with unapproved change orders are included in the estimated cost to complete the contracts and are treated as project costs as incurred. The Company recognizes revenue equal to costs incurred on unapproved change orders when realization of price approval is probable. Unapproved change orders involve the use of estimates, and it is reasonably possible that revisions to the estimated costs and recoverable amounts
may
be required in future reporting periods to reflect changes in estimates or final agreements with customers. Change orders that are unapproved as to both price and scope are evaluated as claims.
 
The Company considers claims to be amounts in excess of agreed contract prices that we seek to collect from our customers or others for customer-caused delays, errors in specifications and designs, contract terminations, change orders that are either in dispute or are unapproved as to both scope and price, or other causes of unanticipated additional contract costs. Claims are included in the calculation of revenue when realization is probable and amounts can be reliably determined to the extent costs are incurred. To support these requirements, the existence of the following items must be satisfied:
1.
The contract or other evidence provides a legal basis for the claim; or a legal opinion has been obtained, stating that under the circumstances there is a reasonable basis to support the claim;
2.
Additional costs are caused by circumstances that were unforeseen at the contract date and are not the result of deficiencies in the contractor’s performance;
3.
Costs associated with the claim are identifiable or otherwise determinable and are reasonable in view of the work performed; and
4.
The evidence supporting the claim is objective and verifiable, not based on management’s subjective evaluation of the situation or on unsupported representations. Revenues in excess of contract costs incurred on claims is recognized when an agreement is reached with customers as to the value of the claims, which in some instances
may
not occur until after completion of work under the contract. Costs associated with claims are included in the estimated costs to complete the contracts and are treated as project costs when incurred.
 
The Company has projects where we are in the process of negotiating, or awaiting final approval of, unapproved change orders and claims with our customers. The Company is proceeding with its contractual rights to recoup additional costs incurred from its customers based on completing work associated with change orders with pending change order pricing or claims related to significant changes in scope which resulted in substantial delays and additional costs in completing the work. Unapproved change order and claim information has been provided to our customers and negotiations with the customers are ongoing. If additional progress with an acceptable resolution is not reached, legal action
may
be taken.
 
Based upon our review of the provisions of our contracts, specific costs incurred and other related evidence supporting the unapproved change orders, claims and our entitled unpaid project price, together with the views of the Company’s outside claim consultants, we concluded that including the unapproved change order, claim and entitled unpaid project price amounts of
$2.2
million,
$9.2
million and
$3.9
million, respectively, at
December
31,
2016,
and
$1.6
million,
$5.2
million and
$3.9
million, respectively, at
December
31,
2015,
in “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts” on our consolidated balance sheets was in accordance with GAAP.
 
We expect these matters will be resolved without a material adverse effect on our financial statements. However, unapproved change order and claim amounts are subject to negotiations which
may
cause actual results to differ materially from estimated and recorded amounts.
 
The asset, “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts” represents revenues recognized in excess of amounts billed on these contracts and will be billed at a later date, usually due to contract terms. In addition, revenue associated with unapproved change orders and claims is also included when realization is probable and amounts can be reliably determined. The liability, “Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts” represents billings in excess of revenues recognized on these contracts.
Reclassification, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Reclassification
 
Certain amounts in prior years’ financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the presentation used in the year ended
December
31,
2016.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Financial Instruments
 
The fair value of financial instruments is the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties. The Company’s financial instruments are cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash used as collateral for a letter of credit and restricted cash maintained in an escrow account, short-term and long-term contracts receivable, accounts payable, notes payable, a revolving loan (the “Revolving Loan”) with Nations Fund I, LLC and Nations Equipment Finance, LLC, as administrative agent and collateral agent for the lender (“Nations”), a term loan (the “Term Loan”) with Nations (combined, the “Equipment-based Facility”), and an earn-out liability related to the acquisition of JBC.
 
The recorded values of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, short-term contracts receivable and accounts payable approximate their fair values based on their liquidity and/or short-term nature. The recorded value of the long-term contract receivable was based on the amount of future cash flows discounted using the creditor’s borrowing rate and such recorded value approximated fair value.
 
The Company provides credit in the normal course of business, principally to public (government) owners, and performs ongoing credit evaluations, as deemed necessary, but generally does not require collateral to support such receivables. In an effort to reduce its credit exposure, as well as accelerate its cash flows, in
August
2015,
the Company completed the sale, on a non-recourse basis, of its only long-term contract receivable pursuant to a factoring agreement with a related party. The Company received approximately
$7.1
 million upon the closing of this transaction and recorded a loss of approximately
$1.4
million in “Other operating (expense) income, net.”  As such, we did not have a long-term contract receivable at
December
31,
2015.
 
The Company has an earn-out agreement with JBC’s former owner. This earn-out liability is classified as a Level
3
fair value measurement and the unobservable input is the forecasted earnings before interest taxes depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) for the periods after the period being reported through
December
31,
2017.
Whenever forecasted EBITDA is above the benchmarks set there is an earn-out liability recorded. In
2016,
we noted that forecasted EBITDA was surpassing the benchmarks which resulted in an earn-out expense of
$1.2
million recorded in “Other operating (expense) income, net” on the consolidated statements of operations. This liability is included in other current liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. There was no earn-out earned in
2015,
thus no liability was recorded at
December
31,
2015.
 
The Company has the Revolving Loan and the Term Loan and also has long-term notes payable of
$2.7
million at
December
31,
2016
related to machinery and equipment purchased which have payment terms ranging from
3
to
5
years and associated interest rates ranging from
3.12%
to
6.92%
(Refer to Note
9).
The fair value of these notes payable approximates their book value. The Company does not have any off-balance sheet financial instruments other than operating leases (Refer to Note
10).
 
In order to assess the fair value of the Company’s financial instruments, the Company uses the fair value hierarchy established by GAAP which prioritizes the inputs used in valuation techniques into the following
three
levels:
 
Level
1
Inputs – Based upon quoted prices for identical assets in active markets that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date.
 
 
Level
2
Inputs – Based upon quoted prices (other than Level
1)
in active markets for similar assets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset such as interest rates, yield curves, volatilities and default rates and inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data.
 
 
Level
3
Inputs – Based on unobservable inputs reflecting the Company’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset based on the best information available.
 
 
For each financial instrument, the Company uses the highest priority level input that is available in order to appropriately value that particular instrument. In certain instances, Level
1
inputs are not available and the Company must use Level
2
or Level
3
inputs. In these cases, the Company provides a description of the valuation techniques used and the inputs used in the fair value measurement.
Receivables, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Contracts Receivable
 
Contracts receivable are generally based on amounts billed to the customer. At
December
31,
2016
and
2015,
contracts receivable included
$23.4
million and
$19.8
million of retainage, respectively, discussed below, which is being withheld by customers until completion of the contracts. At
December
31,
2016
and
2015,
there were no unbilled receivables on contracts completed or substantially complete. Contracts receivable includes only balances approved for payment by the customer.
 
Many of the contracts under which the Company performs work contain retainage provisions. Retainage refers to that portion of billings made by the Company but held for payment by the customer pending satisfactory completion of the project. Unless reserved, the Company assumes that all amounts retained by customers under such provisions are fully collectible. Retainage on active contracts is classified as a current asset regardless of the term of the contract and is generally collected within
one
year of the completion of a contract.
 
There are certain contracts that are completed in advance of full payment. When the receivable will not be collected within our normal operating cycle, we consider it a long-term contract receivable and it is recorded in “Other assets, net” in our balance sheet. In
August
2015,
the Company completed the sale, on a non-recourse basis, of its only long-term contract receivable pursuant to a factoring agreement with a related party. As such, there was no outstanding long-term contract receivable at
December
31,
2015.
We considered the credit quality of the borrower to assess the appropriate discount rate applied and continuously monitored the borrower’s credit quality. The long-term contract receivable was historically discounted at
4.25%
and recorded at fair value. Interest income related to this receivable was
$0.2
million and
$0.4
million for the years ended
December
31,
2015
and
2014,
respectively.
 
Contracts receivable are written off based on individual credit evaluation and specific circumstances of the customer, when such treatment is warranted. There was no bad debt expense recorded in
2016
and
2014
and a minimal amount of bad debt expense recorded in
2015.
 
At year-end, the Company performs a review of outstanding contracts receivable, historical collection information and existing economic conditions to determine if there are potential uncollectible receivables. At
December
31,
2016
and
2015,
our allowance for doubtful accounts against contracts receivable was
zero
and immaterial, respectively.
 
As is customary, we have agreed to indemnify our bonding company for all losses incurred by it in connection with bonds that are issued, and we have granted our bonding company a security interest in certain assets, including accounts receivable, as collateral for such obligation.
Inventory, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Inventories
 
The Company’s inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market as determined by the average cost method. Inventories at
December
31,
2016
and
2015
were
$3.7
million and
$2.5
million, respectively. Inventories consist primarily of concrete, aggregate and millings which are primarily expected to be utilized on construction projects in the future. A small portion is sold to
third
parties. The cost of inventory includes labor, trucking and other equipment costs.
Property, Plant and Equipment, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Property and Equipment
 
Property and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation and amortization are computed using the straight-line method. The estimated useful lives used for computing depreciation and amortizations are as follows:
 
  Buildings (in years)
 
39
 
  Construction equipment (in years)
5
-
15
  Land improvements (in years)
5
-
15
  Office furniture and fixtures (in years)
3
-
10
  Leasehold improvements (in years or lease period, if shorter)
3
-
10
  Transportation equipment (in years)
 
5
 
 
Depreciation expense was
$15.7
million,
$16.2
million and
$18.2
million in
2016,
2015
and
2014,
respectively.
Lease, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Leases
 
We lease property and equipment in the ordinary course of our business. Our leases have varying terms. Some
may
include renewal options, escalation clauses, restrictions, penalties or other obligations that we consider in determining minimum lease payments. The leases are classified as either operating leases or capital leases, as appropriate.
 
Equipment under Capital Leases
 
The Company’s policy is to account for capital leases, which transfer substantially all the benefits and risks incident to the ownership of the leased property to the Company, as the acquisition of an asset and the incurrence of an obligation. Under this method of accounting, the recorded value of the leased asset is amortized principally using the straight-line method over its estimated useful life and the obligation, including interest thereon, is reduced through payments over the life of the lease. Depreciation expense on equipment subject to capital leases and the related accumulated depreciation is included with that of owned equipment. The Company had
two
capital leases totaling
$0.4
million at
December
31,
2016
and
one
capital lease at
December
31,
2015
with
$0.5
million recorded in “Long-term debt, net of current maturities” and “Current maturities of long-term debt,” as applicable, in our consolidated balance sheets.
Deferred Charges, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Deferred Loan Costs
 
Deferred loan costs represent loan origination fees paid to the lender and related professional fees such as legal fees related to drafting of loan agreements. In
2015,
the Company capitalized
$1.3
million in loan fees paid to Nations in connection with incurring the new debt, discussed further in Note
9.
These capitalized fees are amortized on a straight-line basis over the term of the Equipment-based Facility. Unamortized costs were
$0.8
million and
$1.1
million at
December
31,
2016
and
2015,
respectively, and are attributable to the Equipment-based Facility. Loan cost amortization expense for the years ended
December
31,
2016,
2015
and
2014
was
$0.3
million,
$0.3
million and
$0.2
million, respectively. In
2016,
we adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”)
2015
-
03
as noted below, a new standard of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), which simplifies the presentation of debt issuance costs. In accordance with the new standard, we now reflect debt issuance costs as a reduction from the face amount of debt on our consolidated balance sheets.
Goodwill and Intangible Assets, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Goodwill and Intangibles
 
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of companies acquired over the fair value of their net assets at the dates of acquisition. GAAP requires that:
(1)
goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets not be amortized,
(2)
goodwill is to be tested for impairment at least annually at the reporting unit level and
(3)
intangible assets deemed to have an indefinite life are to be tested for impairment at least annually by comparing the fair value of these assets with their recorded amounts. Refer to Note
8
for our disclosure regarding goodwill impairment testing.
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Evaluating Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
 
When events or changes in circumstances indicate that long-lived assets
may
be impaired, an evaluation is performed. The evaluation would be based on estimated undiscounted cash flows associated with the assets as compared to the asset’s carrying amount to determine if a write-down to fair value is required. There was no impairment in
2016,
an immaterial impairment in
2015
and no impairment in
2014.
Management believes that there are no additional events or changes in circumstances which have indicated that other long-lived assets
may
be impaired. See Note
7
for more information regarding our immaterial impairment charge in
2015.
Segment Reporting, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Segment reporting
 
We operate in
one
operating segment and have only
one
reportable segment and
one
reporting unit component, which is heavy civil construction. In making this determination, the Company considered the discrete financial information used by our Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”). Based on this approach, the Company noted that the CODM organizes, evaluates and manages the financial information around each heavy civil construction project when making operating decisions and assessing the Company’s overall performance. The service provided by the Company, in all instances of our construction projects, is heavy civil construction. Furthermore, we considered that each heavy civil construction project has similar characteristics, includes similar services, has similar types of customers and is subject to similar economic and regulatory environments which would allow aggregation of individual operating segments into
one
reportable segment if multiple operating segments existed.
 
The Company noted that even if our local offices were to be considered separate components of our heavy civil construction operating segment, those components could be aggregated into a single reporting unit for purposes of testing goodwill for impairment under Accounting Standards Codification
280
and EITF D-
101
because our local offices all have similar economic characteristics and are similar in all of the following areas:
 
·
 The nature of the products and services — each of our local offices perform similar construction projects — they build, reconstruct and repair roads, highways, bridges, airfields, ports, light rail and water, waste water and storm drainage systems.
·
 The nature of the production processes — our heavy civil construction services rendered in the construction process for each of our construction projects performed by each local office is the same — they excavate dirt, remove existing pavement and pipe, lay aggregate or concrete pavement, pipe and rail and build bridges and similar large structures in order to complete our projects.
·
 The type or class of customer for products and services — substantially all of our customers are federal and state departments of transportation, cities, counties, and regional water, rail and toll-road authorities. A substantial portion of the funding for the state departments of transportation to finance the projects we construct is furnished by the federal government.
·
 The methods used to distribute products or provide services — the heavy civil construction services rendered on our projects are performed by our hired sub-contractors or with our own field work crews (laborers, equipment operators and supervisors) and equipment (backhoes, loaders, dozers, graders, cranes, pug mills, crushers, and concrete and asphalt plants).
·
 The nature of the regulatory environment — we perform substantially all of our projects for federal, state and municipal governmental agencies, and all of the projects that we perform are subject to substantially similar regulation under U.S. and state department of transportation rules, including prevailing wage and hour laws; codes established by the federal government and municipalities regarding water and waste water systems installation; and laws and regulations relating to workplace safety and worker health of the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration and to the employment of immigrants of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
While profit margin objectives included in contract bids have some variability from contract to contract, our profit margin objectives are not differentiated by our CODM or our office management based on local office location. Instead, the projects undertaken by each local office are primarily competitively-bid, fixed unit or negotiated lump sum price contracts, all of which are bid based on achieving gross margin objectives that reflect the relevant skills required, the contract size and duration, the availability of our personnel and equipment, the makeup and level of our existing backlog, our competitive advantages and disadvantages, prior experience, the contracting agency or customer, the source of contract funding, anticipated start and completion dates, construction risks, penalties or incentives and general economic conditions.
Income Tax, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Federal and State Income Taxes
 
We determine deferred income tax assets and liabilities using the balance sheet method. Under this method, the net deferred tax asset or liability is determined based on the tax effects of the temporary differences between the book and tax bases of the various balance sheet assets and liabilities and gives current recognition to changes in tax rates and laws. Valuation allowances are established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized. We recognize the financial statement benefit of a tax position only after determining that the relevant tax authority would more likely than not sustain the position following an audit. For tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not threshold, the amount recognized in the financial statements is the largest benefit that has a greater than
50
percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement with the relevant tax authority. Refer to Note
12
for further information regarding our federal and state income taxes.
Share-based Compensation, Option and Incentive Plans Policy [Policy Text Block]
Stock-Based Compensation
 
The Company’s stock-based incentive plan is administered by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. The Compensation Committee
may
reward employees and non-employees with various types of awards including, but not limited to, warrants, stock options, common stock, and unvested common stock (or restricted stock) vesting on service, performance or market criteria. The Company recognizes expense based on the grant-date fair value of the service award and amortizes the award based on accelerated or straight line methods. Awards based on performance vesting are subsequently remeasured at each reporting date through the settlement date. Awards that vest based on market criteria are valued using a valuation model that incorporates the probability of the Company meeting the stated criteria, such as the Monte-Carlo simulation, and the expense is amortized on a straight line basis over the term of the agreement.
 
Upon the vesting of unvested common stock the Company
may
withhold shares, based on the employee’s election, in order to satisfy federal tax withholdings. The shares held by the Company are considered constructively retired and are retired shortly after withholding. The Company then remits the withholding taxes required. Refer to Note
14
for further information regarding the stock-based incentive plans.
New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy [Policy Text Block]
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
 
In
March
2016,
the FASB issued its new stock compensation guidance in ASU No.
2016
-
09
(Topic
718).
First, under the new guidance, companies will be required to recognize the income tax effects of share-based awards in the income statement when the awards vest or are settled (i.e., additional paid-in capital (“APIC”) or APIC pools will be eliminated). In addition, the new guidance allows a withholding amount of awarded shares with a fair value up to the amount of tax owed using the maximum, instead of the minimum, statutory tax rate without triggering liability classification for the award. Lastly, the new guidance allows companies to elect whether to account for forfeitures of share-based payments by
(1)
recognizing forfeitures of awards as they occur or
(2)
estimating the number of awards expected to be forfeited and adjusting the estimate when it is likely to change, as is currently required. The new standard is effective for annual periods beginning after
December
15,
2016,
including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Company has chosen to early adopt this guidance and has chosen to account for forfeitures of share-based payments by recognizing forfeitures of awards as they occur. The result of adopting this guidance was immaterial to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
 
In
April
2015,
the
FASB
issued
ASU
2015
-
03,
“Interest - Imputation of Interest: Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs.” The guidance, which is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after
December
15,
2015
and interim periods within annual periods beginning after
December
15,
2015,
requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The Company adopted this guidance as required in the
first
quarter of
2016
and changed the presentation of our consolidated balance sheets and related debt disclosures.
 
In
August
2014,
the FASB issued ASU
2014
-
14,
“Presentation of Financial Statement – Going Concern.” The guidance, which is effective for annual reporting periods ending after
December
15,
2016
and interim periods within annual periods beginning after
December
15,
2016,
requires management to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. The Company adopted this guidance as required in the
fourth
quarter of
2016.
No changes to the presentation of our financial statements or related disclosures were required.
 
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
 
In
January
2017,
the FASB issued guidance in ASU No.
2017
-
04
“Intangibles-Goodwill and Other” (Topic
350)
which simplifies and eliminates step
2
of the current
two
step goodwill impairment test. This guidance is effective for public business entities for annual or any interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after
December
15,
2019.
Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after
January
1,
2017.
The Company intends to early adopt in
2017
and does not expect a material impact to our consolidated financial statements upon adoption.
 
In
November
2016,
the FASB issued guidance in ASU No.
2016
-
18
“Statement of Cash Flows” (Topic
230):
Restricted Cash (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). The amendments in this Update require that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Therefore, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. This guidance is effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after
December
15,
2017,
and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. T
he Company expects to adopt this guidance as required and does not expect a material impact to the Company’s consolidated financial statements other than to the presentation of restricted cash on our consolidated statements of cash flows.
 
In
August
2016,
the FASB issued guidance in ASU No.
2016
-
15
(Topic
230):
“Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments. This update addresses specific cash flow issues with the objective of reducing existing diversity in practice.” Early adoption is permitted for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after
December
15,
2018.
The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of this guidance to the Company’s consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
 
In
February
2016,
the FASB issued its new lease accounting guidance in ASU No.
2016
-
02,
“Leases” (Topic
842).
Under the new guidance, lessees will be required to recognize for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases) a lease liability, which is a lessee’s obligation to make lease payments arising from a lease, measured on a discounted basis and a right-of-use asset, which is an asset that represents the lessee’s right to use, or control the use of, a specified asset for the lease term. The new standard is effective for annual periods beginning after
December
15,
2018,
including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of this ASU to the Company’s consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
 
In
May
2014,
the FASB issued ASU
2014
-
09,
“Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Under the new guidance, an entity is required to perform the following
five
steps:
(1)
identify the contract(s) with a customer;
(2)
identify the performance obligations in the contract;
(3)
determine the transaction price;
(4)
allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and
(5)
recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. In
August
2015,
the FASB issued ASU
2015
-
14
which deferred the effective date of ASU
2014
-
09
by
one
year. As a result, the amendments in ASU
2014
-
09
are effective for public companies for annual reporting periods beginning after
December
15,
2017,
including interim periods within that reporting period. Additional ASUs have been issued that are part of the overall new revenue guidance including: ASU No.
2016
-
08,
“Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net),” ASU No.
2016
-
10,
“Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” and ASU
2016
-
12,
“Narrow Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients.”
 
The new revenue recognition standard prescribes a
five
-step model that focuses on transfer of control and entitlement to payment when determining the amount of revenue to be recognized. The new model requires companies to identify contractual performance obligations and determine whether revenue should be recognized at a point in time or over time for each of these obligations. We expect that revenue generated from our fixed unit price contracts, which represent a significant portion of our total contracts, will continue to be recognized over time utilizing the cost-to-cost measure of progress consistent with our current practice. We also expect our revenue recognition disclosures to significantly expand due to the new qualitative and quantitative requirements under the standard. The Company is currently determining the impact of the new standard on our lump-sum, cost-plus and other than fixed unit price contracts. Because the standards will impact our business processes, systems and controls, the Company is also developing a comprehensive change management project plan to guide the implementation. We will adopt the requirements of the new standard effective
January
1,
2018
and intend to use the modified retrospective adoption approach, but will not make a final decision on the adoption method until later in
2017.