CONTINGENCIES	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2018
CONTINGENCIES
CONTINGENCIES	NOTE 16 CONTINGENCIES Great Lakes v. Essar Steel Minnesota LLC, et al. — On October 29, 2009, Great Lakes filed suit in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, against Essar Minnesota LLC (Essar Minnesota) and certain Foreign Essar Affiliates (collectively, Essar) for breach of its monthly payment obligation under its transportation services agreement with Great Lakes. Great Lakes sought to recover approximately $33 million for past and future payments due under the agreement. In September 2015, the federal district court judge entered a judgment in the amount of $32.9 million in favor of Great Lakes. Essar successfully appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (Eighth Circuit) based on an allegation of improper jurisdiction and various other rulings by the federal district judge. The Eighth Circuit vacated Great Lakes’ judgment against Essar finding that there was no federal jurisdiction. In May 2017, the federal district court awarded Essar Minnesota approximately $1.2 million for costs, including recovery of the premium for the performance bond Essar was required to post pending appeal. Essar Minnesota filed for bankruptcy in July 2016. Following Essar’s successful appeal and award of $1.2 million of costs, Great Lakes was required to release the $1.2 million into the bankruptcy estates. Great Lakes filed a claim against Essar Minnesota in the bankruptcy court. The bankruptcy court approved Great Lakes’ unsecured claim in the amount of $31.5 million in April 2017. Great Lakes is unable to estimate the timing or the extent to which its claim will be recoverable in the bankruptcy proceedings. The Foreign Essar Affiliates have not filed for bankruptcy and Great Lakes’ case against the Foreign Essar Affiliates in Minnesota state court remains pending. The Foreign Essar Affiliates gave an offer of judgment (Offer of Judgment) in the federal district court proceeding whereby the Foreign Essar Affiliates agreed to satisfy any judgment awarded to Great Lakes. The Foreign Essar Affiliates dispute that the Offer of Judgment is enforceable because the federal court judgment was vacated on appeal. Great Lakes has obtained a consent order from the bankruptcy court permitting it to petition the state court to enforce the Offer of Judgment. If unsuccessful in state court, Great Lakes can return to bankruptcy court for an order permitting it to proceed to trial in state court on its claims under the transportation services agreement against the Foreign Essar Affiliates. At June 30, 2018, Great Lakes is unable to estimate the timing or the extent to which its claim will be recoverable in the bankruptcy proceedings, therefore, it did not recognize any gain contingency on its outstanding claim against Essar. Additionally, at June 30, 2018, the Partnership is not aware of any contingent liabilities that would have a material adverse effect on the Partnership’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

NOTE 16 CONTINGENCIES

Great Lakes v. Essar Steel Minnesota LLC, et al. — On October 29, 2009, Great Lakes filed suit in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, against Essar Minnesota LLC (Essar Minnesota) and certain Foreign Essar Affiliates (collectively, Essar) for breach of its monthly payment obligation under its transportation services agreement with Great Lakes. Great Lakes sought to recover approximately $33 million for past and future payments due under the agreement. In September 2015, the federal district court judge entered a judgment in the amount of $32.9 million in favor of Great Lakes. Essar successfully appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (Eighth Circuit) based on an allegation of improper jurisdiction and various other rulings by the federal district judge. The Eighth Circuit vacated Great Lakes’ judgment against Essar finding that there was no federal jurisdiction. In May 2017, the federal district court awarded Essar Minnesota approximately $1.2 million for costs, including recovery of the premium for the performance bond Essar was required to post pending appeal.

Essar Minnesota filed for bankruptcy in July 2016. Following Essar’s successful appeal and award of $1.2 million of costs, Great Lakes was required to release the $1.2 million into the bankruptcy estates. Great Lakes filed a claim against Essar Minnesota in the bankruptcy court. The bankruptcy court approved Great Lakes’ unsecured claim in the amount of $31.5 million in April 2017. Great Lakes is unable to estimate the timing or the extent to which its claim will be recoverable in the bankruptcy proceedings.

The Foreign Essar Affiliates have not filed for bankruptcy and Great Lakes’ case against the Foreign Essar Affiliates in Minnesota state court remains pending. The Foreign Essar Affiliates gave an offer of judgment (Offer of Judgment) in the federal district court proceeding whereby the Foreign Essar Affiliates agreed to satisfy any judgment awarded to Great Lakes. The Foreign Essar Affiliates dispute that the Offer of Judgment is enforceable because the federal court judgment was vacated on appeal. Great Lakes has obtained a consent order from the bankruptcy court permitting it to petition the state court to enforce the Offer of Judgment. If unsuccessful in state court, Great Lakes can return to bankruptcy court for an order permitting it to proceed to trial in state court on its claims under the transportation services agreement against the Foreign Essar Affiliates.

At June 30, 2018, Great Lakes is unable to estimate the timing or the extent to which its claim will be recoverable in the bankruptcy proceedings, therefore, it did not recognize any gain contingency on its outstanding claim against Essar.

Additionally, at June 30, 2018, the Partnership is not aware of any contingent liabilities that would have a material adverse effect on the Partnership’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.