XML 73 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2014
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES [Abstract]  
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 

Note 8: Commitments and Contingencies

 

STANDBY LETTERS OF CREDIT

 

We provide, in the normal course of business, certain third party beneficiaries standby letters of credit to support our obligations to pay or perform according to the requirements of an underlying agreement. Such letters of credit typically have an initial term of one year, typically renew automatically, and can only be modified or cancelled with the approval of the beneficiary. All of our standby letters of credit are issued by banks that participate in our $500,000,000 line of credit, and reduce the borrowing capacity thereunder. Our standby letters of credit as of September 30, 2014 are summarized by purpose in the table below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

in thousands

 

 

Standby Letters of Credit

 

 

Risk management insurance

$       32,839 

 

Industrial revenue bond

14,230 

 

Reclamation/restoration requirements

6,199 

 

Total

$       53,268 

 

 

LITIGATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

 

We are a defendant in various lawsuits in the ordinary course of business. It is not possible to determine with precision the outcome, or the amount of liability, if any, under these lawsuits, especially where the cases involve possible jury trials with as yet undetermined jury panels.

 

In addition to these lawsuits in which we are involved in the ordinary course of business, certain other material legal proceedings are more specifically described below.

 

lower passaic river matter

 

§

Lower Passaic River Study Area (Superfund Site) — The Lower Passaic River Study Area is part of the Diamond Shamrock Superfund Site in New Jersey. Vulcan and approximately 70 other companies are parties to a May 2007 Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to perform a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) of the lower 17 miles of the Passaic River (River). On April 11, 2014, the EPA issued a proposed Focused Feasibility Study (FFS) that calls for a bank-to-bank dredging remedy for the lower 8 miles of the River. The EPA estimates that the cost of implementing this proposal is approximately $950 million to $1.73 billion. The period for public comment on the proposed FFS is closed.  It is anticipated that the EPA will issue its final record of decision sometime in 2015.

 

At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate our ultimate liability related to this matter because the RI/FS and FFS are not final. Furthermore, the AOC does not obligate us to fund or perform the remedial action contemplated by either the RI/FS or the FFS. Vulcan formerly owned a chemicals operation near River Mile 0.1, which was sold in 1974. The Company has found no evidence that its former chemicals operation contributed any of the primary contaminants of concern to the River. Therefore, neither the ultimate remedial approach and associated costs (or range of costs), nor the parties who will participate in funding the remediation and their respective allocations, have been determined.

 

Based on the facts available at this time, we believe our liability related to any remedial actions will be immaterial.

 

OTHER LITIGATION

 

§

TEXAS BRINE MATTER — During the operation of its former Chemicals Division, Vulcan was the lessee under a salt lease from 1976 – 2005 in an underground salt dome formation in Assumption Parish, Louisiana. The Texas Brine Company operated this salt mine for the account of Vulcan. Vulcan sold its Chemicals Division in 2005 and assigned the lease to the purchaser, and Vulcan has had no association with the leased premises or Texas Brine Company since that time. In August 2012, a sinkhole developed near the salt dome and numerous lawsuits were filed in state court in Assumption Parish, Louisiana. Other lawsuits, including class action litigation, were also filed in August 2012 in federal court in the Eastern District of Louisiana in New Orleans. Certain of the plaintiffs and Texas Brine settled the Federal Court class action for approximately $48.1 million. This settlement has been approved by the court, and the settlement process is now subject to the terms of the court’s order and settlement agreement. Vulcan is named as a released party in the settlement agreement along with the other released parties, including Texas Brine, and its insurers. Texas Brine and its insurers did not, however, release Vulcan from any alleged claims, including claims for contribution and indemnity.

 

There are numerous defendants to the litigation in state and federal court. Vulcan was first brought into the litigation as a third-party defendant in August 2013 by the Texas Brine Company. Vulcan has since been added as a direct and third-party defendant by other parties, including a direct claim by the State of Louisiana. The damages alleged in the litigation range from individual plaintiffs’ claims for property damage, to the State of Louisiana’s claim for response costs, to claims for alleged physical damages to oil pipelines, to various alleged business interruption claims, and to claims for indemnity and contribution from Texas Brine. It is alleged that the sinkhole was caused, in whole or in part, by Vulcan’s negligent actions or failure to act. It is also alleged that Vulcan breached the salt lease, as well as an operating agreement with Texas Brine. Vulcan denies any liability in this matter and will vigorously defend the litigation. We cannot reasonably estimate any liability related to this matter.

 

It is not possible to predict with certainty the ultimate outcome of these and other legal proceedings in which we are involved, and a number of factors, including developments in ongoing discovery or adverse rulings, or the verdict of a particular jury, could cause actual losses to differ materially from accrued costs. No liability was recorded for claims and litigation for which a loss was determined to be only reasonably possible or for which a loss could not be reasonably estimated. Legal costs incurred in defense of lawsuits are expensed as incurred. In addition, losses on certain claims and litigation described above may be subject to limitations on a per occurrence basis by excess insurance, as described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K.