FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2011

FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS [Abstract]

FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

Fair value is defined as the price at which an asset could be exchanged in a current transaction between knowledgeable, willing parties or the amount that would be paid to transfer a liability to a new obligor, not the amount that would be paid to settle the liability with the creditor.  Where available, fair value is based on observable market prices or parameters or derived from such prices or parameters.  Where observable prices or inputs are not available, valuation models are applied.  These valuation techniques involve some level of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on the price transparency for the instruments or market and the instruments’ complexity.

Assets and liabilities recorded at fair value in the condensed balance sheets are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their fair value.  Hierarchical levels, defined by ASC 820 “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” (ASC 820) and directly related to the amount of subjectivity associated with the inputs to fair valuation of these assets and liabilities, are as follows:

Level 1 — Inputs were unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities at the measurement date.

Level 2 — Inputs (other than quoted prices included in Level 1) were either directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability through correlation with market data at the measurement date and for the duration of the instrument’s anticipated life.

Level 3 — Inputs reflected management’s best estimate of what market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date.  Consideration was given to the risk inherent in the valuation technique and the risk inherent in the inputs to the model.

Determining which hierarchical level an asset or liability falls within requires significant judgment.  We evaluate our hierarchy disclosures each quarter.  The following table summarizes the financial instruments measured at fair value in the condensed balance sheets:

	Fair Value Measurements
Balance at June 30, 2011	Level 1			Level 2			Level 3			Total
Assets	($ in millions)
Interest rate swaps		$	—		$	8.4		$	—	$	8.4
Commodity forward contracts			3.3			5.3			—		8.6
Liabilities
Interest rate swaps		$	—		$	8.5		$	—	$	8.5
Commodity forward contracts			—			0.1			—		0.1
Earn out			—			—			43.2		43.2
Balance at December 31, 2010
Assets
Interest rate swaps		$	—		$	9.1		$	—	$	9.1
Commodity forward contracts			7.0			9.9			—		16.9
Liabilities
Interest rate swaps		$	—		$	9.3		$	—	$	9.3
Commodity forward contracts			—			0.2			—		0.2
Balance at June 30, 2010
Assets
Interest rate swaps		$	—		$	11.4		$	—	$	11.4
Commodity forward contracts			—			0.2			—		0.2
Liabilities
Interest rate swaps		$	—		$	12.0		$	—	$	12.0
Commodity forward contracts			1.4			0.3			—		1.7
Foreign currency contracts			0.3			—			—		0.3

For the six months ended June 30, 2011, there were no transfers into or out of Level 1 and Level 2.

23

The following table summarizes the activity for our financial instruments measured at fair value using level 3 inputs:

	June 30,
	2011			2010
	($ in millions)
Balance at beginning of year	$	—		$	—
Purchases, sales and settlements		(42.3	)		—
Unrealized loss included in other (expense) income		(0.9	)		—
Balance at end of period	$	(43.2	)	$	—

Interest Rate Swaps

The fair value of the interest rate swaps was included in other current assets, other assets, current installments of long-term debt, accrued liabilities, long-term debt, and other liabilities as of June 30, 2011, December 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010.  These financial instruments were valued using the “income approach” valuation technique.  This method used valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present amount.  The measurement was based on the value indicated by current market expectations about those future amounts.  We use interest rate swaps as a means of managing interest expense and floating interest rate exposure to optimal levels.

Commodity Forward Contracts

The fair value of the commodity forward contracts was classified in other current assets and accrued liabilities as of June 30, 2011, December 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010, with unrealized gains and losses included in accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of applicable taxes.  These financial instruments were valued primarily based on prices and other relevant information observable in market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities including both forward and spot prices for commodities.  We use commodity forward contracts for certain raw materials and energy costs such as copper, zinc, lead, electricity and natural gas to provide a measure of stability in managing our exposure to price fluctuations.

Foreign Currency Contracts

The fair value of the foreign currency contracts was classified in accrued liabilities as of December 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010, with gains and losses included in selling and administration expense, as these financial instruments do not meet the criteria to qualify for hedge accounting.  We did not have any foreign currency contracts as of June 30, 2011.  These financial instruments were valued primarily based on prices and other relevant information observable in market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities including both forward and spot prices for foreign currencies.  We enter into forward sales and purchase contracts to manage currency risk resulting from purchase and sale commitments denominated in foreign currencies (principally Canadian dollar and Euro).

Financial Instruments

The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable and accounts payable approximated fair values due to the short-term maturities of these instruments.  The fair value of our long-term debt was determined based on current market rates for debt of the same risk and maturities.  As of June 30, 2011, December 31, 2010, and June 30, 2010, the estimated fair value of debt was $613.1 million, $530.3 million and $414.9 million, respectively, which compares to debt recorded on the condensed balance sheets of $582.8 million, $496.0 million and $402.3 million, respectively.

24

Earn Out

The fair value of the earn out associated with the SunBelt acquisition was estimated using a probability-weighted discounted cash flow model.  This fair value measurement is based on significant inputs not observed in the market.  Key assumptions in determining the fair value of the earn out include the discount rate and cash flow projections for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2012, and 2013.

Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements

In addition to assets and liabilities that are recorded at fair value on a recurring basis, we record assets and liabilities at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as required by ASC 820.  There were no assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as of June 30, 2011 and 2010.  At February 28, 2011, $180.6 million of assets were measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis.  We recognized a gain of $181.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 on our previously held investment in SunBelt, which had been accounted for under the equity method of accounting prior to the acquisition.  We remeasured our equity interest in SunBelt based on our purchase of PolyOne’s 50% interest in SunBelt.  We used level 1 inputs for the cash payments and level 3 inputs for the estimated earn out.