Guarantees and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Guarantees and Contingencies	8. Guarantees and Contingencies We are subject to loss contingencies with respect to various claims, lawsuits and other proceedings. A liability is recognized in our consolidated financial statements when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. If the risk of loss is probable, but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated or the risk of loss is only reasonably possible, a liability is not accrued; however, we disclose the nature of those contingencies. We cannot predict with certainty if, how or when existing claims, lawsuits and proceedings will be resolved or what the eventual relief, if any, may be, particularly for proceedings that are in their early stages of development or where plaintiffs seek indeterminate damages. Numerous issues may need to be resolved, including through lengthy discovery, conciliation and/or arbitration proceedings, or litigation before a loss or range of loss can be reasonably estimated. Subject to the foregoing, in management’s opinion, based upon currently known facts and circumstances, the outcome of such lawsuits, claims and proceedings, including the matters described below, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. However, we could incur judgments, enter into settlements or revise our opinion regarding the outcome of certain matters, and such developments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the amounts are accrued and our cash flows in the period in which the amounts are paid. In September 2003, we received a directive from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to remediate contamination in the sediments of the Lower Passaic River. The NJDEP is also seeking natural resource damages. The directive, insofar as it affects us, relates to alleged releases from a petroleum bulk storage terminal in Newark, New Jersey we previously owned. We and over 70 companies entered into an Administrative Order on Consent with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to study the same contamination; this work remains ongoing. We and other parties settled a cost recovery claim by the State of New Jersey and also agreed with EPA to fund remediation of a portion of the site. In April 2014, the EPA issued a Focused Feasibility Study (“FFS”) proposing to conduct bank-to-bank dredging of the lower eight miles of the Passaic River at an estimated cost of $1.7 billion. On March 4, 2016, the EPA issued a Record of Decision (“ROD”) in respect of the lower eight miles of the Lower Passaic River, selecting a remedy that includes bank-to-bank dredging at an estimated cost of $1.38 billion. The ROD does not address the upper nine miles of the Lower Passaic River, which may require additional remedial action. In addition, the federal trustees for natural resources have begun a separate assessment of damages to natural resources in the Passaic River. Given that the EPA has not selected a remedy for the entirety of the Lower Passaic River, total remedial costs cannot be reliably estimated at this time. Based on currently known facts and circumstances, we do not believe that this matter will result in a significant liability to us because there are numerous other parties who we expect will share in the cost of remediation and damages and our former terminal did not store or use contaminants which are of the greatest concern in the river sediments and could not have contributed contamination along most of the river’s length. From time to time, we are involved in other judicial and administrative proceedings, including proceedings relating to other environmental matters. We cannot predict with certainty if, how or when such proceedings will be resolved or what the eventual relief, if any, may be, particularly for proceedings that are in their early stages of development or where plaintiffs seek indeterminate damages. Numerous issues may need to be resolved, including through potentially lengthy discovery and determination of important factual matters before a loss or range of loss can be reasonably estimated for any proceeding. Subject to the foregoing, in management’s opinion, based upon currently known facts and circumstances, the outcome of such proceedings is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

8. Guarantees and Contingencies

We are subject to loss contingencies with respect to various claims, lawsuits and other proceedings. A liability is recognized in our consolidated financial statements when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. If the risk of loss is probable, but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated or the risk of loss is only reasonably possible, a liability is not accrued; however, we disclose the nature of those contingencies. We cannot predict with certainty if, how or when existing claims, lawsuits and proceedings will be resolved or what the eventual relief, if any, may be, particularly for proceedings that are in their early stages of development or where plaintiffs seek indeterminate damages. Numerous issues may need to be resolved, including through lengthy discovery, conciliation and/or arbitration proceedings, or litigation before a loss or range of loss can be reasonably estimated. Subject to the foregoing, in management’s opinion, based upon currently known facts and circumstances, the outcome of such lawsuits, claims and proceedings, including the matters described below, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. However, we could incur judgments, enter into settlements or revise our opinion regarding the outcome of certain matters, and such developments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the amounts are accrued and our cash flows in the period in which the amounts are paid.

In September 2003, we received a directive from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to remediate contamination in the sediments of the Lower Passaic River. The NJDEP is also seeking natural resource damages. The directive, insofar as it affects us, relates to alleged releases from a petroleum bulk storage terminal in Newark, New Jersey we previously owned. We and over 70 companies entered into an Administrative Order on Consent with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to study the same contamination; this work remains ongoing. We and other parties settled a cost recovery claim by the State of New Jersey and also agreed with EPA to fund remediation of a portion of the site. In April 2014, the EPA issued a Focused Feasibility Study (“FFS”) proposing to conduct bank-to-bank dredging of the lower eight miles of the Passaic River at an estimated cost of $1.7 billion. On March 4, 2016, the EPA issued a Record of Decision (“ROD”) in respect of the lower eight miles of the Lower Passaic River, selecting a remedy that includes bank-to-bank dredging at an estimated cost of $1.38 billion. The ROD does not address the upper nine miles of the Lower Passaic River, which may require additional remedial action. In addition, the federal trustees for natural resources have begun a separate assessment of damages to natural resources in the Passaic River. Given that the EPA has not selected a remedy for the entirety of the Lower Passaic River, total remedial costs cannot be reliably estimated at this time. Based on currently known facts and circumstances, we do not believe that this matter will result in a significant liability to us because there are numerous other parties who we expect will share in the cost of remediation and damages and our former terminal did not store or use contaminants which are of the greatest concern in the river sediments and could not have contributed contamination along most of the river’s length.

From time to time, we are involved in other judicial and administrative proceedings, including proceedings relating to other environmental matters. We cannot predict with certainty if, how or when such proceedings will be resolved or what the eventual relief, if any, may be, particularly for proceedings that are in their early stages of development or where plaintiffs seek indeterminate damages. Numerous issues may need to be resolved, including through potentially lengthy discovery and determination of important factual matters before a loss or range of loss can be reasonably estimated for any proceeding. Subject to the foregoing, in management’s opinion, based upon currently known facts and circumstances, the outcome of such proceedings is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.