corresp
July 23, 2010
Securities and Exchange Commission
Division of Corporation Finance
Washington, D.C. 20549-7010
Attention: John Hartz, Senior Assistant Chief Accountant
|
|
|
Re: |
|
Teledyne Technologies Incorporated
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2010
Filed March 2, 2010
Definitive Proxy Statement
Filed March 8, 2010
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period April 4, 2010
Filed May 7, 2010
File No. 1-15295 |
Dear Mr. Hartz:
Teledyne Technologies Incorporated (the Company) hereby responds to the comment letter
dated June 30, 2010, related to the above-referenced filings, as follows. The SEC staff
comment is repeated for reference, followed by the Companys response.
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2010
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, page
39
|
1. |
|
Commensurate with Commission guidance regarding Managements Discussion and Analysis,
we believe you should enhance the disclosure you have provided under Item 303 of
Regulation S-K. In future filings, please expand your MD&A disclosure to include an
executive level Overview section that provides context for the remainder of the MD&A
discussion. Identify the factors that management focuses on in evaluating the financial
condition and operating performance of your business. Please focus the general emphasis
of the overview on the discussion and analysis of known trends, demands, commitments,
events and uncertainties, and specific guidance on disclosures about liquidity, capital
resources and critical accounting estimates. |
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 2
July 23, 2010
RESPONSE:
In future Form 10-K filings, we will expand our MD&A disclosure to include an executive level
Overview section that provides additional context for the remainder of the MD&A discussion.
We will focus our emphasis of the overview on the discussion and analysis of known trends,
demands, commitments, events and uncertainties, and specific guidance on disclosures about
liquidity, capital resources and critical accounting estimates.
Results of Operations, 2009 Compared with 2008, page 41
|
2. |
|
We note that throughout this section you attribute the decrease from 2008 to 2009 in
various line items as due to lower sales. For example, on page 42, you state that the
decrease in sales, segment operating profit, and cost of sales were all due to lower
sales. In future filings, in addition to identifying the factor(s) leading to the
decline, please also analyze the reasons underlying the decline when the reasons are
material and determinable and quantify the impact of these reasons where practicable.
Further, in future filings, discuss whether you believe these factors are the result of a
trend and, if so, whether you expect it to continue and how it may impact your planned
acquisitions, your available liquidity, or any other factors. See Item 303 of Regulation
S-K and SEC Release No. 33-8350. |
RESPONSE:
In future filings, we will more fully identify the factor(s) leading to the year-over-year
variances and will more fully describe the reasons underlying the variances when the reasons
are material and determinable as well as quantify the impact of these reasons where
practicable. In addition, we will discuss whether we believe those factors are the result of a
known trend and, if so, whether we expect it to continue and how it may impact our planned
acquisitions, our available liquidity, or any other factors as appropriate.
Financial Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources, page 49
|
3. |
|
We note on page 49 that your revolving credit agreement requires you to comply
with various financial and operating covenants, including maintaining certain consolidated
leverage and interest coverage ratios, as well as minimum net worth levels and limits on
acquired debt. In addition, we note that you recently entered into a Note Purchase
Agreement in connection with a private placement that contains similar restrictive
covenants. In your next Form 10-Q, please consider the impact of these, or any other,
covenants on your ability to undertake additional debt or equity financing. If the
covenants are reasonable likely to limit your ability to undertake financing to a material
extent, please discuss the covenants in question and the consequences of the limitation to
your financial condition and operating performance. See Item 303 of Regulation S-K and
SEC Release No. 33-8350. |
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 3
July 23, 2010
RESPONSE:
In our next Form 10-Q, to be filed no later than August 13, 2010, we will disclose the impact
of any covenants on our ability to undertake additional debt or equity financing to the extent
material. If the covenants are reasonably likely to limit our ability to undertake financing
to a material extent, we will discuss the covenants in question and the consequences of the
limitation to our financial condition and operating performance.
Critical Accounting Policies, page 57
Accounting for Business Combinations, Goodwill, Acquired Intangible Assets and Other Long-Lived
Assets, page 59
|
4. |
|
To the extent that any of your reporting units have estimated fair values that are
not substantially in excess of their carrying values and goodwill for such reporting
units, in the aggregate or individually, if impaired, could materially impact your results
or total shareholders equity, please identify and provide the following
disclosure for each such reporting unit in future filings: |
|
|
|
The percentage by which fair value exceeds carrying value as of the most-recent
step-one test. |
|
|
|
|
The amount of goodwill allocated to the unit. |
|
|
|
|
A description of the material assumptions that drive estimated fair value. |
|
|
|
|
A discussion of any uncertainties associated with each key assumptions. |
|
|
|
|
A discussion of any potential events, trends and/or circumstances that could
have a negative effect on estimated fair value. |
|
|
If you have determined that estimated fair values substantially exceed the carrying
values of your reporting units, please disclose that determination in future filings.
Reference Item 303 of Regulation S-K. |
RESPONSE:
In future Form 10-K filings, to the extent that any of our reporting units have estimated fair
values that are not substantially in excess of their carrying values and goodwill for such
reporting units, in the aggregate or individually, if impaired, could materially impact our
results or total shareholders equity, we will identify and provide the disclosures noted
above. In addition, if we determine that the estimated fair values substantially exceed the
carrying values of our reporting units, we will disclose that determination.
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 4
July 23, 2010
|
5. |
|
Please revise future filings to include a more specific and comprehensive discussion
regarding how you consider current events and circumstances in determining whether it is
necessary to test your long-lived assets for recoverability. If an analysis is conducted
in a given period, please include a specific and comprehensive discussion regarding the
results of that analysis. |
RESPONSE:
In future Form 10-K filings, we will include a more comprehensive discussion regarding how we
consider current events and circumstances in determining whether it is necessary to test our
long-lived assets for recoverability. If an analysis is conducted in a given period, we will
include a specific and comprehensive discussion regarding the results of that analysis.
Disclosure Controls and Procedures, page 63
|
6. |
|
We note that your Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial officer have concluded
that your disclosure controls and procedures, as of January 3, 2010, are effective.
However, you state that your disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide
reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by [you] in such reports is
accumulated and communicated to the Companys management, including its principal
executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure. In future filings, revise to clarify, if true,
that your officers concluded that your disclosure controls and procedures were effective at
the reasonable assurance level. |
RESPONSE:
In our next Form 10-Q, to be filed no later than August 13, 2010, we will clarify, if true,
that our officers concluded that our disclosure control and procedures were effective at the
reasonable assurance level.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, page 75
|
7. |
|
In future filings, please revise the operating activity section of your statements of
cash flows to begin the reconciliation with consolidated net income as required by ASC
230-10-45-28. |
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 5
July 23, 2010
RESPONSE:
In our next Form 10-Q to be filed no later than August 13, 2010, we will revise the operating
activity section of our statements of cash flows to begin the reconciliation with consolidated
net income as required by ASC 230-10-45-28.
Note 13. Business Segments, page 99
|
8. |
|
Please provide us with a comprehensive discussion regarding the number and nature of
your operating segments and clarify if and how these operating segments are aggregated
into your reportable segments. In addition, please demonstrate to us how you determined
that any aggregation is appropriate and complies with ASC 280-10-50-11. |
RESPONSE:
Teledyne has four operating segments: Electronics and Communications, Engineered Systems,
Aerospace Engines and Components, and Energy and Power Systems. We consider each operating
segment to be a reportable segment. We do not aggregate two or more operating segments into a
single reportable segment.
We consider each of these four components to be an operating segment because:
|
|
|
the operating results of each of these components is regularly reviewed by the
chief operating decision maker to make decisions about resources to be allocated
to the segment and assess its performance; |
|
|
|
|
discrete financial information is available for each component, which is
reviewed by the chief operating decision maker; |
|
|
|
|
each component is managed by a segment manager that is directly accountable to
the chief operating decision maker; and |
|
|
|
|
each component has unique economic characteristics. |
Each operating segment has a segment President (the segment manager) who is directly
accountable to and maintains regular contact with our Chief Executive Officer (the chief
operating decision maker). Each President regularly meets with the Chief Executive Officer to
discuss operating activities, financial results, forecasts and plans for the segment. The
Chief Executive Officer regularly reviews the operating results of each segment to assess the
performance of each segment and to allocate resources to each segment (such as expenditures for
capital outlays, research and development and acquisitions). The monthly financial reporting
package for each operating segment is regularly reviewed by the Chief Executive Officer and
quarterly financial data for each operating segment is presented to our board of directors on a
regular basis.
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 6
July 23, 2010
Each operating segment has distinct economic characteristics, product characteristics and
customer bases. As a result, we do not believe any two or more of the four operating segments
should be aggregated into a single reportable segment. Additionally, we have determined that
there are no components below the operating segment level because the business activities
comprising each operating segment have similar economic characteristics, product
characteristics and customer bases. In making these determinations, we considered the
following characteristics:
|
|
|
the nature of the products and services; |
|
|
|
|
the nature of the production processes; |
|
|
|
|
the type or class of customer for products and services; |
|
|
|
|
the methods used to distribute products or provide services; |
|
|
|
|
the nature of the applicable regulatory environment; and |
|
|
|
|
the manner in which an entity operates its business and the nature of those
operations. |
The assessment of the above characteristics is a matter of judgment and is based more on
qualitative than quantitative factors.
|
9. |
|
Please revise future filings to disclose revenue by product line as required by ASC
280-10-50-40. |
RESPONSE:
In our next Form 10-Q to be filed no later than August 13, 2010, we will provide revenue by the
following three product lines for the Electronics and Communications segment: Defense
Electronics; Electronic Instruments; and Other Commercial Electronics. We have determined that
there is no product line data for any of the other three segments.
Exhibits, page 106
|
10. |
|
We note that you incorporate the Credit Agreement, Exhibit 10.23, by reference to a
previously filed Exchange Act filing. However, it does not appear that you filed all the
exhibits and schedules to the agreement when you initially filed it. If these exhibits
and schedules have been filed previously, please advise us as to where they are located.
Otherwise, in your next Exchange Act filing, please file the full Credit Agreement,
including all exhibits and schedules. Refer to Rule 601(b)(10) of the Regulation S-K.
Please note that Item 601 (b)(2) of Regulation S-K provides a carve-out for schedules or
attachments that are not material to an investment decision, but Item 601(b)(10) does not
include a similar provision. |
RESPONSE:
In our next Form 10-Q to be filed no later than August 13, 2010, we will file the full Credit
Agreement, including all exhibits and schedules.
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 7
July 23, 2010
Definitive Proxy Statement
Risks Related to Compensation Policies and Practices, page 5
|
11. |
|
We note your disclosure in response to Item 402(s) of Regulation S-K. Please
describe the process you undertook to reach the conclusion that disclosure is not
necessary. |
RESPONSE:
Following the adoption of Release 33-9089 (Proxy Disclosure Enhancements) by the SEC in
December 2009, at the direction of the Companys Chairman, President and Chief Executive
Officer, representatives of the Companys legal and human resources department analyzed the
Companys compensation polices in light of Item 402(s) of Regulation S-K. As a threshold
matter, these representatives focused on the non-exhaustive list of situations outlined in the
adopting release that the SEC identified as having the potential to pose material
compensation-related risks to companies. These representatives determined that these situations
either did not apply to the Company or that the Company had in place sufficient legal and
financial controls to mitigate any compensation-related risks arising from these situations.
Further, the representatives considered the Companys compensation policies in light of the
most significant risks facing the Company, which risks were identified by a study generated by
the Companys Audit Committee that resulted in the formation of the Companys Enterprise Risk
Management Committee. The Enterprise Risk Management Committee is made up of executive
officers and other employees. The representatives, together with members of the Enterprise
Risk Management Committee, determined that the Companys compensation policies did not
materially increase these risks.
These findings were presented to the Companys Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
and Personnel and Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors at the regularly scheduled
meeting of the Personnel and Compensation Committee on January 19, 2010. At this meeting, the
Personnel and Compensation Committee, together with Companys Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer, reviewed these findings and also reviewed the structure of the Companys
compensation policies and procedures. As disclosed in the Proxy Statement, the Committee
determined that features such as the mix of long-and short-term compensation and the stock
ownership policies for management employees appropriately mitigated compensation related risk.
In particular, the Personnel and Compensation Committee determined that the Companys principal
short-term incentive policy, the Annual Incentive Plan (AIP), did not encourage excessive risk
taking because AIP targets for the Company and individual business units were based on the
Companys business plan, which, as disclosed in the Proxy Statement, the
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 8
July 23, 2010
Personnel and Compensation Committee regarded as establishing an appropriate level of risk
taking.
Based on the foregoing, the Company determined that it had no compensation policies and
procedures that required disclosure pursuant to Item 402(s). Following the meeting of the
Personnel and Compensation Committee on January 19, 2010, the members of the Committee reviewed
the disclosure on risks related to compensation policies that is set forth on page 5 of the
Proxy Statement and recommended its inclusion in the Proxy Statement.
Annual Incentive Plan, page 26
|
12. |
|
Please explain how you determined the size of the pool that funds the awards under
the AIP. |
RESPONSE:
The AIP is not funded by a pool of funds with a predetermined size. As disclosed in the Proxy
Statement, the AIP awards are based on predetermined performance measures. Other than personal
goals, which account for 20% of the AIP, these performance targets are based on financial
performance measures recommended by senior management and approved by the Personnel and
Compensation Committee. Typically, the targets correspond to the operating plan for the
Company or the applicable business unit for the fiscal year. Each employee that participates
in the program is awarded a percentage of his or her base annual salary earned during the plan
year in the event the target performance is achieved. The percentages vary from 10% of base
annual salary to 100% of base annual salary. The AIP award for each employee as a
percentage of salary will go up or down depending on the extent to which actual financial
performance of the Company or the applicable business unit is less than or greater than the
predetermined operating plan targets. The maximum AIP award as a percentage of salary for each
participant is two times the participants target percentage. The size of the final AIP pool
therefore primarily depends on the financial performance of the Company or applicable business
unit versus these targets and the size of the base annual salaries of the employee
participants. The aggregate payout of all AIP awards may not exceed 11% of the Companys
operating profit. In addition, no AIP awards are payable if the operating profit at the
Company, or the applicable business unit, is less than 75% of the operating plan target (after
accruing for the bonus payments).
We will provide disclosure similar to the foregoing in future versions of Compensation
Disclosure & Analysis filed with the SEC.
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 9
July 23, 2010
|
13. |
|
Please provide a clear explanation of how the Personnel and Compensation Committee
determined actual payouts under the AIP. Explain the correlation between performance, as
determined through application of the various components and methodologies utilized for
purposes of determining awards under AIP, and the payouts actually made to each of the
named executive officers. Consider the use of an illustrative example to demonstrate how
the Personnel and Compensation Committee derives the payouts reported in column (g) of the
Summary Compensation Table. |
RESPONSE:
The AIP award is tied to the achievement of predetermined levels of operating profit, revenue,
accounts receivable and inventory as a percentage of revenue (ARIS) and the achievement of
specific individual performance goals. The AIP components are weighted as follows for
corporate executives and business segment presidents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate Executives: |
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Presidents: |
|
|
Award Component |
|
Weighting |
|
Award Component |
|
Weighting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Profit
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
Total Company Operating Profit
|
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
25 |
% |
|
Operating Profit at Business Segment
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ARIS
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
Total Company Revenue
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Objectives
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
Revenue at Business Segment
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
ARIS (Total Company)
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ARIS (Business Segment)
|
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Performance Objectives
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100 |
% |
The above referenced percentages are then adjusted to reflect the extent to which actual
performance is greater or less than the target. This is done by multiplying the component
percentage by factor ranging from 0 to 2 in the manner set forth below:
|
|
|
For Operating Profit, if actual performance equals or exceeds 120% of the target
the component is weighted by multiplying the percentage by 2 (200%). If actual
performance is less than 75% of target, the component is given a weighting of 0%. To
the extent actual performance falls between 75% and 120% of target, the multiplying
factor is adjusted proportionally. |
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 10
July 23, 2010
|
|
|
For Revenue, if actual performance equals or exceeds 120% of the target the
component is weighted by multiplying the percentage by 2 (200%). If actual
performance is less than 67% of target, the component is given a weighting of 0%. To
the extent actual performance falls between 67% and 120% of target, the multiplying
factor is adjusted proportionally. |
|
|
|
|
For ARIS, if actual performance is greater than 105% of the target the component is
weighted by multiplying the percentage by 2 (200%). If actual performance is equal to
or less than 95% of target, the component is given a weighting of 0%. To the extent
actual performance falls between 95% and 105%, the multiplying factor is adjusted
proportionally. |
|
|
|
|
Individual Performance Objectives are weighted proportionally on a scale of 0% to
200%. |
The sum of the components, after being weighted for performance, is then multiplied by the
executives target AIP award as a percent of base annual salary to arrive at the executives
performance adjusted AIP percentage. To this amount the Personnel and Compensation Committee
may make an upward discretionary adjustment of up to 20%, provided the aggregate of all upward
discretionary adjustment s may not exceed 5% of the total AIP bonus.
The following is an illustration of the AIP award calculation using the example of a
hypothetical corporate executive with a salary of $300,000 and a target AIP award of 60%:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance |
|
Actual |
|
Weighting of |
|
Adjusted |
|
|
Goal as % of |
|
Performance as a |
|
Performance |
|
Performance Goal as |
Performance Goal |
|
AIP Award |
|
% of Target |
|
Goal (multiplier) |
|
a % of AIP Award |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Profit |
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
105 |
% |
|
|
125 |
% |
|
|
50% [40% *1.25] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
120 |
% |
|
|
200 |
% |
|
|
50% [25%* 2.0] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ARIS |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
98.5 |
% |
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
10.5% [15%*0.7] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Objectives |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
20% [20%*1.0] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance Weighing of AIP Award |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130.5% |
|
Assuming no discretionary adjustment by the Personnel and Compensation Committee, the
hypothetical executives performance adjusted AIP award would be 78.3% of salary (60% *1.305),
or $234,900.
We will provide disclosure similar to the foregoing in future versions of Compensation
Disclosure & Analysis filed with the SEC.
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 11
July 23, 2010
|
14. |
|
We note your disclosure on page 28 that the Personnel and Compensation Committee made
upward discretionary adjustments to the Annual Incentive Plan awards for certain named
executive officers, but that others, such as Mr. Geveden, did not receive an upward
discretionary adjustment. Please provide more detail regarding the factors the Personnel
and Compensation Committee considered in determining whether to make upward discretionary
adjustments. See Item 402(b)(2)(v)-(vi) of Regulation S-K. |
RESPONSE:
The Personnel and Compensation Committee considers a number of factors in deciding whether to
make an upward discretionary adjustment for a particular executive and in determining the
amount of the adjustment. By their nature, these adjustments are not formulaic and factors
considered may vary from year to year and among executives. Some factors that have been
considered in the past include: exceeding a performance goal by an extraordinary amount (to the
extent not fully recognized by the AIP formula); individual excellence on particular projects
(to the extent not fully recognized in the AIP individual goals component); individual efforts
resulting in extraordinarily favorable outcomes for the Company; and the economic performance
of the Company or business unit in light of challenging economic environments. The Committee
may also consider current and past compensation in determining whether to make a discretionary
adjustment. For example, as disclosed in the Proxy Statement, the Committee did not make an
upward discretionary adjustment to the 2009 AIP award for Robert Mehrabian, the Companys
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Office, because his AIP target percentage was increased
in 2009.
We will provide disclosure similar to the foregoing in future versions of Compensation
Disclosure & Analysis filed with the SEC.
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 12
July 23, 2010
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended April 4, 2010
Financial Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources, page 17
|
15. |
|
We note that your credit facility and the Notes Purchase Agreement you refer to in
your Form 8-K dated May 12, 2010 contain financial covenants. Please revise future
filings to present, for your most significant and restrictive covenants, actual ratios and
other actual amounts versus the minimum/maximum ratios/amounts permitted as of each
reporting date. Such a presentation may allow investors to more easily understand your
current status and future ability to meet your covenants. See Sections I.D. and IV.C of
the SEC Interpretive Release No. 33-8350. |
RESPONSE:
In our next Form 10-Q to be filed no later than August 13, 2010, we will present, for our most
significant and restrictive covenants, actual ratios and other actual amounts versus the
minimum/maximum ratios/amounts permitted as of each reporting date to the extent material.
The Company hereby acknowledges that: (a) the Company is responsible for the adequacy and
accuracy of the disclosure in its filings; (b) staff comments or changes to disclosure in
response to staff comments do not foreclose the Commission from taking any action with respect
to the filing; and (c) the Company may not assert staff comments as a defense in any proceeding
initiated by the Commission or any person under the federal securities laws of the United
States.
Securities and Exchange Commission
Page 13
July 23, 2010
If you have any questions regarding this response letter, please contact the undersigned at
(805) 373-4611 or, in my absence, Susan L. Main, Vice President and Controller of the Company,
at (805) 373-4720.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sincerely,
|
|
|
/s/ Dale A. Schnittjer
|
|
|
Dale A. Schnittjer |
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
cc: |
|
F.V. Cahouet Director and Chairman of the Audit Committee, Teledyne Technologies
Incorporated
R. Mehrabian Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer Teledyne Technologies
Incorporated
J. T. Kuelbs Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary- Teledyne
Technologies Incorporated
|