The Audit Committee of the Board has appointed Grant Thornton LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2011.2012. During fiscal 2010,2011, Grant Thornton LLP served as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. Representatives of Grant Thornton LLP are expected to attend the annual meeting, where they will be available to respond to appropriate questions and, if they desire, to make a statement.

 

Although the Company is not required to seek ratification of this appointment, the Audit Committee and the Board of Directors believes that it is appropriate to do so. If stockholders do not ratify the appointment of Grant Thornton LLP, the current appointment will stand, but the Audit Committee will consider the stockholder action in determining whether to retain Grant Thornton LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm.

 

 

 

 

The Board of Directors met fivesix times during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.2011. No director attended fewer than 75 percent of the aggregate of all Board meetings and meetings of committees on which he or she served during 2010.2011. Board members are encouraged to attend the Company’s Annual Stockholder Meetings and all Board members were in attendance at last year’s meeting.

The Board of Directors has an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, a Diversity Committee and a Nominating and Governance Committee.

Below is a summary of our committee structure and membership information.

 

 

 

 

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company consists of Henry B. Tippie (Chairman), Wilton Looney, and James B. Williams. It held three meetings during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.2011. The function of the Compensation Committee is to set the base salary and cash based incentive compensation of all of the executive officers. The Compensation Committee also administers the RPC, Inc. Stock Incentive Plans. The Compensation Committee does not have a formal charter, and is not required to have one under the “controlled company” exemption under the NYSE rules, as described in the section titled “Director Independence and NYSE Requirements” below.

 

 

The Diversity Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company consists of Henry B. Tippie (Chairman), Wilton Looney, and James B. Williams. It held one meeting during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.2011. The function of the Diversity Committee is to monitor compliance with applicable non-discrimination laws.

 

 

Under Delaware law, there are no statutory criteria or qualifications for directors. No criteria or qualifications have been prescribed by the Board at this time. The Nominating and Governance Committee does not have a charter or a formal policy with regard to the consideration of director candidates. As such, there is no formal policy relative to diversity, although as noted below, it is one of many factors that the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has the discretion to factor into its decision making. This discretion would extend to how the Committee might define diversity in a particular instance – whether in terms of background, viewpoint, experience, education, race, gender, national origin or other considerations. The Committee acts under the guidance of the Corporate Governance Guidelines approved by the Board of Directors and posted on the Company’s website at www.rpc.net under the Governance section. The Board believes that it should preserve maximum flexibility in order to select directors with sound judgment and other desirable qualities. According to the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Board of Directors will be responsible for selecting nominees for election to the Board of Directors. The Board delegates the screening process to the Nominating and Governance Committee. This Committee is responsible for determining the appropriate skills and characteristics required of Board members in the context of the then current make-up of the Board. This determination takes into account all factors which the Committee considers appropriate, such as independence, experience, strength of character, mature judgment, technical skills, diversity, age and the extent to which the individual would fill a present need on the Board. The Company’s Bylaws provide that nominations for the election of directors may be made by any stockholder entitled to vote for the election of directors. Nominations must comply with an advance notice procedure which generally requires, with respect to nominations for directors for election at an annual meeting, that written notice be addressed to: Secretary, RPC, Inc., 2170 Piedmont Road, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30324, not less than ninety days prior to the anniversary of the prior year’s annual meeting and set forth the name, age, business address and, if known, residence address of the nominee proposed in the notice, the principal occupation or employment of the nominee for the past five years, the class or series and number of shares of capital stock of the Company which are owned beneficially or of record by the person and any other information relating to the person that would be required to be disclosed in a proxy statement or other filings. Other requirements related to the notice are contained in the Company’s Bylaws. The Committee will consider nominations from stockholders who satisfy these requirements. The Committee is responsible for screening the nominees that are selected by the Board of Directors for nomination to the Board and for service on committees of the Board. To date, the Company has not received a recommendation for a director nominee from a stockholder. All of the nominees for directors being voted upon, at the Annual Meeting to be held on April 26, 201124, 2012 are directors standing for re-election.

 

 

The Company has had separate persons serving as its Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer since 2003. Mr. Randall Rollins is our Chairman and chairs our Board meetings. Mr. Richard Hubbell is our President and Chief Executive Officer. We believe that it represents the appropriate structure for us at this time; the Chairman of the Board provides general oversight and strategic planning for the Company while the President focuses on optimizing operational efficiencies. Many authorities on corporate governance are of the view that a company’s principal executive officer should not also be chairman of its board and that it is best to keep board leadership separate from operational management.

 

Our Board’s oversight of risk has not been delegated to any Board Committee. “Risk” is an extremely broad concept that extends to multiple functional areas and crosses multiple disciplines. As such, risk may be addressed from time to time by the full Board or by one or more of our Committees. Senior management is responsible for identifying and managing material risks that we face while insurable risks and litigation risks are handled primarily by the risk management department. Senior management provides the Board with a summary of insurance coverage annually and updates as deemed necessary. Liquidity risk, credit risk and risks associated with our credit facilities and cash management are handled primarily by our finance department which regularly provides a financial report to both the Audit Committee and to the full Board. Operational, business, regulatory and political risks are handled primarily by senior executive management which regularly provides various operational reports to, among others, the full Board or to the Executive Committee.

 

 

 

The Company is not required by law or NYSE listing requirements to have a Nominating or Compensation Committee composed of independent directors, nor to have a Board of Directors, the majority of which are independent. Because the Company is a “controlled corporation,” as defined by NYSE Rule 303A.00, the Company is exempt from NYSE Rules 303A.01, 303A.04 and 303A.05 and does not undertake compliance with those provisions. The Company is a “controlled corporation” because a group that includes the Company’s Chairman of the Board, R. Randall Rollins, his brother Gary W. Rollins who is also a director and certain companies under their control, possesses in excess of fifty percent of the Company’s voting power.

 

The Company’s Audit Committee is composed of four “independent” directors as defined by the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the NYSE rules, the Exchange Act, SEC regulations there under,thereunder, and the Company’s Audit Committee Charter. All of the members of the Compensation, Diversity and Nominating and Governance Committees are also independent directors. The independent directors of the Company are Henry B. Tippie, Wilton Looney, James B. Williams, Bill J. Dismuke, and Larry L. Prince.

 

 

Under NYSE listing standards, to be considered independent, a director must be determined to have no material relationship with the Company other than as a director. The NYSE standards set forth a nonexclusive list of relationships which are conclusively deemed material.

 

The Company’s Independence Guidelines (Appendix A to the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines) are posted on the Company’s website at www.rpc.net under the Governance section. These independence guidelines provide that to be independent, a director must not have any relationship that would be considered material under NYSE standards and that, except in special circumstances as determined by a majority of the Board, the following relationships are not material:

 

 

In accordance with the NYSE corporate governance listing standards, Mr. Henry B. Tippie was elected as the Presiding Director. The Company’s non-management directors meet at regularly scheduled executive sessions without management. Mr. Tippie presides during these executive sessions.

 

 

We have adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines to promote better understanding of our policies and procedures. At least annually, the Board reviews these guidelines. As required by the rules of the New York Stock Exchange, our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that our non-management directors meet in at least two regularly scheduled executive sessions per year without management.

 

At the Company’s website at www.rpc.net, under the Governance section, you may access a copy of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, our Audit Committee Charter, our Code of Business Conduct and our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for Directors and Executive Officers and Related Party Transactions Policy.

 

 

The Company has adopted a Code of Business Conduct applicable to all directors, officers and employees generally, as well as a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for Directors and Executive Officers and Related Party Transactions Policy applicable to the principal executive officer, principal financial officer, and directors. Both codes are available on the Company’s website at www.rpc.net under the Governance section.

 

 

The Company also has a process for interested parties, including stockholders, to send communications to the Board of Directors, Presiding Director, any of the Board Committees or the non-management directors as a group. Such communications should be addressed as follows:

 

 

 

None of the directors named above who serve on the Company’s Compensation Committee are or have ever been an employee of the Company. There are no Compensation Committee interlocks requiring disclosure.

 

The following table sets forth compensation to the Company’s directors for services rendered as a director for 2010.2011. Three of the directors, Messrs. R. Randall Rollins, Richard A. Hubbell and Ms. Linda H. Graham are employees of the Company. Their compensation is set forth in the Summary Compensation Table under Executive Compensation. The directors listed below have never been employed by the Company or paid a salary or bonus by the Company, have never been granted any options or other stock-based awards, and do not participate in any Company sponsored retirement plans, with the exception of Mr. James A. Lane, Jr. who was an employee of the Company until the spin-off of Marine Products in 2001.

 

Under current compensation arrangements effective since January 1, 2011, non-management directors each receive an annual retainer fee of $26,000. In addition, the Chairman of the Audit Committee receives an annual retainer of $20,000, the Chairman of the Compensation Committee receives an annual retainer of $10,000, and the Chairman of each of the Nominating and Governance Committee and Diversity Committee receives an annual retainer of $6,000. A director that chairs more than one committee receives a retainer with respect to each committee he chairs. All of the retainers are paid on a quarterly basis. Per meeting fees for non-management directors are as follows:

 

All non-management directors are also entitled to reimbursement of expenses for all services as a director, including committee participation or special assignments. There have been no changes to the director compensation arrangements for 2012.

 

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in any of the Company’s previous filings under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that might incorporate future filings, including the Proxy Statement, in whole or in part, the Report of the Audit Committee shall not be incorporated by reference into any such filings.

 

 

Management is responsible for the Company’s internal controls, assessing the effectiveness of these controls and the financial reporting process. The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for performing independent audits of the Company’s consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and for issuing reports thereon. The Audit Committee’s responsibility is generally to monitor and oversee these processes, as described in the Audit Committee Charter. It is not the duty of the Audit Committee to plan or conduct audits or to determine that the Company’s financial statements are complete and accurate and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; that is the responsibility of management.

In fulfilling its oversight responsibilities with respect to the year ended December 31, 2010,2011, the Audit Committee:

 

Based upon the review and discussions referred to above, the Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited consolidated financial statements of the Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 20102011 and 20092010 and for the three years ended December 31, 20102011 be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20102011 and for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

In giving its recommendation to the Board of Directors, the Audit Committee has relied on (i) management’s representation that such financial statements have been prepared with integrity and objectivity and in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and (ii) the report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm with respect to such financial statements.

 

Submitted by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

 

 

 

 

During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010,2011, the members of our Compensation Committee held primary responsibility for determining executive compensation levels. The Committee is composed of three of our non-management directors who do not participate in the Company’s compensation plans. The Committee determines the compensation and administers the performance-based incentive cash compensation plan for our executive officers. In addition, the Committee also administers our Stock Incentive Plan for all the employees.

 

The members of our Compensation Committee have extensive and varied experience with various public and private corporations - as investors and stockholders, as senior executives, and as directors charged with the oversight of management and the setting of executive compensation levels. Henry B. Tippie, the Chairman of the Compensation Committee, has served on the board of directors of twelve different publicly traded companies and has been involved in setting executive compensation levels at all of these companies. Messrs. Wilton Looney and James B. Williams have served on the board of directors of several different publicly traded companies and have similarly been involved in setting executive compensation levels at many of these companies.

 

The Compensation Committee has authority to engage attorneys, accountants and consultants, including executive compensation consultants, to solicit input from management concerning compensation matters, and to delegate any of its responsibilities to one or more directors or members of management where it deems such delegation appropriate and permitted under applicable law. The Committee has not used the services of any compensation consultants in determining or recommending the amount or form of executive compensation.

 

The Compensation Committee believes that determinations relative to executive compensation levels are best left to the discretion of the Committee. In addition to the extensive experience and expertise of the Committee’s members and their familiarity with the Company’s performance and the performance of our executive officers, the Committee is able to draw on the experience of other Directors and on various legal and accounting executives employed by the Company, and the Committee has access to readily available public information relative to structuring executive compensation programs and setting appropriate compensation levels. The Committee also believes that the structure of our executive compensation programs should not become overly complicated or difficult to understand. The Committee solicits input from our Chairman with respect to the performance of our executive officers and their compensation levels.

 

 

The Company is engaged in a highly competitive industry. The success of the Company depends on its ability to attract and retain highly qualified and motivated executives. In order to accomplish this objective, the Company structures the executive compensation in a fashion that takes into account the Company’s overall performance and the individual performance of the executive.

The Compensation Committee endorses the philosophy that executive compensation should reflect Company performance and the contribution of executive officers to that performance. The Company’s compensation policy 14 is designed to achieve three fundamental objectives: (i) attract and retain qualified executives, (ii) motivate performance to achieve Company objectives, and (iii) align the interests of our executives with the long-term interests of the Company’s stockholders. The Committee recognizes that there are many intangibles involved in evaluating performance and in motivating performance, and that determining an appropriate compensation level is a highly subjective endeavor. The analysis of the Committee is not based upon a structured formula and the objectives referred to above are not weighted in any formal manner.

 

 

Pursuant to the Company’s compensation philosophy, the total annual compensation of its executive officers is primarily made upcomprised of base salary, performance-based incentive cash compensation and stock-based incentive compensation. In addition, the Company provides retirement compensation plans, group welfare benefits and certain perquisites.

 

We believe a competitive base salary is important to attract, retain and motivate top executives. We believe a performance-based incentive cash compensation plan is valuable in recognizing and rewarding individual achievement. Finally, we believe stock-based incentives make executives “think like owners” and, therefore, align their interests with those of our stockholders.

 

The Company does not have any formal stock ownership requirements for its executive officers but notes that its current directors and executive officers are stockholders of the Company, as is disclosed elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. The Company is mindful of the stock ownership of our directors and executive officers but does not believe that it is appropriate to provide a mechanism or formula to take stock ownership (or gains from prior option or stock awards) into account when setting compensation levels. The Company provides in its insider trading policies that directors and executive officers may not sell Company securities short and may not sell puts, calls or other derivative securities tied to our Common Stock.

 

The Company does not have a formal policy relative to the adjustment or recovery of incentives or awards in the event that the performance measures upon which incentives or awards were based are later restated or otherwise adjusted in a manner that would have reduced the size of an incentive or award. However, as all incentives and awards remain within the discretion of the Compensation Committee, the Committee retains the ability to take any such restatements or adjustments into account in subsequent years. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires in the case of accounting restatements that result from material non-compliance with SEC financial reporting requirements, that Chief Executive Officers and Chief Financial Officers must disgorge bonuses and other incentive-based compensation and profits on stock sales, if the non-compliance results from misconduct.

 

 

The salary of each executive officer is determined by the Compensation Committee. In making its determinations, the Committee gives consideration to the recent financial performance of the Company, the magnitude of responsibilities, the scope of the position, individual performance and compensation paid by Marine Products. The Committee solicits input from our Chairman with respect to the performance of our executive officers and their compensation levels. During 2009, in light of the difficult operating environment faced by the Company, the executive officers voluntarily reduced their base salaries by 15 percent. During 2010, in light of the improved performance of the Company,2011, the base salaries of theour executive officers were restoredincreased to the following amounts, effective April 16, 2010:amounts: Mr. Richard A. Hubbell: $700,000;$800,000 ($100,000 increase from 2010); Mr. Ben M. Palmer: $250,000;$300,000 ($50,000 increase from 2010); Mr. R. Randall Rollins: $600,000;$700,000 ($100,000 increase from 2010); and Ms. Linda H. Graham: $165,000. On January 26, 2011, the Committee approved for its executive officers the following base salaries for 2011: Mr. Richard A. Hubbell: $800,000; Mr. Ben M. Palmer: $300,000; Mr. R. Randall Rollins: $700,000; and Ms. Linda H. Graham: $200,000.$200,000 ($35,000 increase from 2010). These increases were subjectively based on growth in revenues, recent profit performance of the Company and return on invested capital. On January 24, 2012, the Committee approved for its executive officers the following base salary for 2012: Mr. Richard A. Hubbell: $900,000; Mr. Ben M. Palmer: $375,000; Mr. R. Randall Rollins: $800,000; and Ms. Linda H. Graham: $250,000.

 

 

The Company implemented the Performance-Based Incentive Cash Compensation Plan (the “Management Incentive Plan”) for the executive officers in 2006. Under the Management Incentive Plan, the Compensation Committee establishes performance goals annually within ninety days after the commencement of the performance period to which such goals relate. Performance goals for each participant may be based on corporate, business unit/function or individual performance, or a combination of one or more such measures.

 

 

 

For 2010,2011, the Compensation Committee established the target incentive award under the Management Incentive Plan for the Chief Executive Officer and for the other members of executive management at the amounts shown in the table below. The target awards that could be earned under the Management Incentive Plan for 20102011 were the same as for the prior year.

The maximum bonus award for each participant under the Plan for 20102011 and prior years was established at 150 percent of such participant’s base salary. The performance criteria applicable to the participants under the Management Incentive Plan for 20102011 were determined based solely on corporate performance. The Compensation Committee established corporate performance goals for 20102011 under the Management Incentive Plan based on cash flow return on invested capital. Return on invested capital (“ROIC”) is a widely used financial performance measure that typically correlates with long term change in stockholder value. The Company has used ROIC as the sole performance goal under the Management Incentive Plan for several years. ROIC is computed as the ratio of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) to invested capital. Invested capital is generally equal to the aggregate of stockholders’ equity, accumulated depreciation and other long-term liabilities. For 2010,2011 year, the target performance goal established by the CommitteeCompany is in excess of the comparable historical average ROIC of our peers, is in excess of the Company’s weighted average cost of capital, and is an amount which the CommitteeCompany believes represents outstanding financial performance. Under the Management Incentive Plan, the Company must achieve at least 80 percent of the target performance goal for executive officers to be eligible for any bonus award. Bonus awards under the Management Incentive Plan are determined on a sliding scale between the threshold performance level and a superior performance level, which corresponds to 175 percent of the target performance goal. To be eligible for the bonus award under the Management Incentive Plan, the ROIC must be in the range of 16 percent to 35 percent. The Company has consistently followed the same method to compute ROIC, and the Compensation Committee has not exercised discretion to waive the performance goals based on difficult industry conditions or other factors.

 

 

For 2010,2011, the executive officers earned awards that were higher than target but lower than the superior performance level which qualified the officers to receive bonus awards up to 164200 percent of the target incentive award, limited to 150 percent of base compensation. Performance-based incentive cash compensation earned under the Management Incentive Plan for 20102011 was as follows: Mr. Richard A. Hubbell: $1,050,000;$1,200,000; Mr. Ben M. Palmer: $375,000;$450,000; Mr. R. Randall Rollins: $900,000$1,050,000 and Ms. Linda H. Graham: $108,240.$160,000. For 2011,2012, the target awards, performance goal and maximum awards were established at the same levels as 2010.2011.

 

 

Our Stock Incentive Plan allows for a wide variety of stock based awards such as stock options and restricted stock. We last issued stock options in the fiscal year ended 2003 and have no current plans to issue additional stock options. We have never issued any stock appreciation rights. Partially in response to changes relative to the manner in which stock options are accounted for under generally accepted accounting principles, we have modified the structure and composition of the long-term equity based component of our executive compensation. In recent years, we have awarded time-based restricted stock in lieu of granting stock options. The terms and conditions of these awards are described in more detail below.

 

Awards under the Company’s Stock Incentive Plan are purely discretionary, are not based upon any specific formula and may or may not be granted in any given fiscal year. For the past three years, we have granted time-based restricted stock to various employees, including our executive officers, in early January during our regularly scheduled meetings of the Compensation Committee during which the Committee reviews executive compensation. Consistent with this practice, we granted restricted stock awards to our executive officers in January 2012, 2011 2010 and 20092010 as follows: