COSTS, EXPENSES, AND OTHER

The table below sets forth the components of “Other, net” in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the periods indicated.



	Three Months Ended				Six Months Ended
	June 30,				June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In Thousands)
Accretion of asset retirement obligations	$	1,597	$	1,508	$	3,195	$	2,957
Legal proceeding liabilities	—		6,500		22,847		6,500
Other, net	1,858		827		4,333		3,000
	$	3,455	$	8,835	$	30,375	$	12,457

Legal Proceeding Liabilities

On February 29, 2012, two members of a three-member arbitration panel reached a decision adverse to Forest in the proceeding styled, Forest Oil Corporation, et al. v. El Rucio Land & Cattle Company Inc., et al., which occurred in Harris County, Texas. The third member of the arbitration panel has dissented. The proceeding was initiated in January 2005 and involves claims asserted by the landowner-claimant based on the diminution in value of its land and related damages allegedly resulting from operational and reclamation practices employed by Forest in the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s. The arbitration decision awards the claimant $21.9 million in damages and attorneys’ fees and additional injunctive relief regarding future surface-use issues. Forest is seeking to have this arbitration award vacated and believes it has meritorious arguments in support thereof. However, Forest is unable to predict the final outcome in this matter and, during the first quarter of 2012, accrued as a liability, which is classified within “Other current liabilities” in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet, the $21.9 million monetary amount of the decision.

In August 2007, Forest sold all of its Alaska assets to Pacific Energy Resources Ltd. and its related entities. On March 9, 2009, Pacific Energy Resources Ltd. filed for bankruptcy. On March 7, 2011, Pacific Energy Resources Ltd., Pacific Energy Alaska Holdings LLC, and Pacific Energy Alaska Operating LLC filed suit against Forest Oil Corporation and Forest Alaska Holdings LLC in United States Bankruptcy Court in the District of Delaware. In this suit, the plaintiffs claimed that, at the time Forest sold Pacific Energy Resources Ltd. its Alaska assets, those assets were overvalued due to Forest’s alleged nondisclosure, fraud, and negligent misrepresentations and that, as a result, the sales transaction rendered Pacific Energy Resources Ltd. insolvent. The plaintiffs sought to recover over $250.0 million in value from Forest. During the second quarter of 2011, Forest and the plaintiffs in this action reached a settlement whereby the plaintiffs released Forest from all claims and agreed to dismiss the complaint against Forest in exchange for a $6.5 million payment from Forest.