XML 42 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.3.1.900
FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2015
Fair Value Disclosures [Abstract]  
FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
NOTE 6 - FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The following represents the assets and liabilities of the Company measured at fair value at December 31, 2015 and 2014:
 
(In Millions)
 
December 31, 2015
Description
Quoted Prices in Active
Markets for Identical Assets/Liabilities
(Level 1)
 
Significant Other Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
 
Total
Assets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cash equivalents
$
30.0

 
$

 
$

 
$
30.0

Derivative assets

 

 
7.8

 
7.8

Total
$
30.0

 
$

 
$
7.8

 
$
37.8

Liabilities:

 

 

 

Derivative liabilities
$

 
$
0.6

 
$
3.4

 
$
4.0

Total
$

 
$
0.6

 
$
3.4

 
$
4.0

 
(In Millions)
 
December 31, 2014
Description
Quoted Prices in Active
Markets for Identical
Assets/Liabilities (Level 1)
 
Significant Other Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
 
Total
Assets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Derivative assets
$

 
$

 
$
63.2

 
$
63.2

Available-for-sale marketable securities
4.3

 

 

 
4.3

Total
$
4.3

 
$

 
$
63.2

 
$
67.5

Liabilities:

 

 

 

Derivative liabilities
$

 
$

 
$
9.5

 
$
9.5

Foreign exchange contracts

 
31.5

 

 
31.5

Total
$

 
$
31.5

 
$
9.5

 
$
41.0

Financial assets classified in Level 1 at December 31, 2015 include money market funds. Financial assets classified in Level 1 at December 31, 2014 include available-for-sale marketable securities. The valuation of these instruments is based upon unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets in active markets.
The valuation of financial assets and liabilities classified in Level 2 is determined using a market approach based upon quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, or other inputs that are observable. Level 2 securities primarily include derivative financial instruments valued using financial models that use as their basis readily observable market parameters. At December 31, 2015, such derivative financial instruments included our commodity hedge contracts. The fair value of the commodity hedge contracts is based on forward market prices and represents the estimated amount we would receive or pay to terminate these agreements at the reporting date, taking into account creditworthiness, nonperformance risk and liquidity risks associated with current market conditions. At December 31, 2014, such derivative financial instruments included our foreign currency exchange contracts. The fair value of the foreign currency exchange contracts was based on forward market prices and represented the estimated amount we would receive or pay to terminate these agreements at the reporting date, taking into account creditworthiness, nonperformance risk and liquidity risks associated with current market conditions.
The derivative assets classified within Level 3 at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 primarily relate to a freestanding derivative instrument related to certain supply agreements with one of our U.S. Iron Ore customers. The agreements include provisions for supplemental revenue or refunds based on the customer’s annual steel pricing at the time the product is consumed in the customer’s blast furnaces. We account for this provision as a derivative instrument at the time of sale and adjust this provision to fair value as an adjustment to Product revenues each reporting period until the product is consumed and the amounts are settled. The fair value of the instrument is determined using a market approach based on an estimate of the annual realized price of hot-rolled steel at the steelmaker’s facilities, and takes into consideration current market conditions and nonperformance risk.
The Level 3 derivative assets and liabilities at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 also consisted of derivatives related to certain provisional pricing arrangements with our U.S. Iron Ore and Asia Pacific Iron Ore customers. These provisional pricing arrangements specify provisional price calculations, where the pricing mechanisms generally are based on market pricing, with the final revenue rate to be based on market inputs at a specified point in time in the future, per the terms of the supply agreements. The difference between the estimated final revenue at the date of sale and the estimated final revenue rate is characterized as a derivative and is required to be accounted for separately once the revenue has been recognized. The derivative instrument is adjusted to fair value through Product revenues each reporting period based upon current market data and forward-looking estimates provided by management until the final revenue rate is determined.
The following table illustrates information about quantitative inputs and assumptions for the derivative assets and derivative liabilities categorized in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy:
Qualitative/Quantitative Information About Level 3 Fair Value Measurements
($ in millions)
 
Fair Value at
 
Balance Sheet Location
 
Valuation Technique
 
Unobservable Input
 
Range or Point Estimate
(Weighted Average)
 
12/31/2015
Provisional Pricing Arrangements
 
$
2.0

 
Other current assets
 
Market Approach
 
Management's
Estimate of 62% Fe
 
$43
 
$
3.4

 
Other current liabilities
 
 
 
Customer Supply Agreement
 
$
5.8

 
Other current assets
 
Market Approach
 
Hot-Rolled Steel Estimate
 
$415 - $450 ($430)

The significant unobservable input used in the fair value measurement of the reporting entity’s provisional pricing arrangements is management’s estimate of 62 percent Fe fines spot price based upon current market data, including historical seasonality and forward-looking estimates determined by management. Significant increases or decreases in this input would result in a significantly higher or lower fair value measurement, respectively.
The significant unobservable input used in the fair value measurement of the reporting entity’s customer supply agreements is the future hot-rolled steel price that is estimated based on current market data, analysts' projections, projections provided by the customer and forward-looking estimates determined by management. Significant increases or decreases in this input would result in a significantly higher or lower fair value measurement, respectively.
We recognize any transfers between levels as of the beginning of the reporting period, including both transfers into and out of levels. There were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. The following tables represent a reconciliation of the changes in fair value of financial instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.
 
(In Millions)
 
Derivative Assets (Level 3)
 
Derivative Liabilities
(Level 3)
 
Year Ended
December 31,
 
Year Ended
December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2015
 
2014
Beginning balance - January 1
$
63.2

 
$
57.7

 
$
(9.5
)
 
$
(1.0
)
Total gains (losses)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Included in earnings
35.1

 
187.8

 
(61.0
)
 
(9.5
)
Settlements
(90.5
)
 
(182.3
)
 
67.1

 
1.0

Transfers into Level 3

 

 

 

Transfers out of Level 3

 

 

 

Ending balance - December 31
$
7.8

 
$
63.2

 
$
(3.4
)
 
$
(9.5
)
Total gains (losses) for the period included in earnings attributable to the change in unrealized gains (losses) on assets still held at the reporting date
$
29.1

 
$
187.8

 
$
(3.4
)
 
$
(9.5
)

Gains and losses included in earnings are reported in Product revenues in the Statements of Consolidated Operations for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.
The carrying amount for certain financial instruments (e.g. Accounts receivable, net, Accounts payable and Accrued expenses) approximate fair value and, therefore, have been excluded from the table below. A summary of the carrying amount and fair value of other financial instruments at December 31, 2015 and 2014 were as follows:
 
 
 
(In Millions)
 
 
 
December 31, 2015
 
December 31, 2014
 
Classification
 
Carrying
Value
 
Fair Value
 
Carrying
Value
 
Fair
Value
Long-term debt:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Senior Notes—$700 million
Level 1
 
$
410.6

 
$
69.4

 
$
686.0

 
$
367.3

Senior Notes—$1.3 billion
Level 1
 
787.9

 
137.4

 
1,270.5

 
704.0

Senior Notes—$400 million
Level 1
 
288.9

 
52.8

 
391.9

 
228.1

Senior Notes—$500 million
Level 1
 
309.1

 
87.1

 
475.3

 
312.0

Senior First Lien Notes—$540 million
Level 1
 
497.4

 
414.5

 

 

Senior Second Lien Notes—$544.2 million
Level 1
 
403.2

 
134.7

 

 

ABL Facility
Level 2
 

 

 

 

Fair Value Adjustment to Interest Rate Hedge
Level 2
 
2.3

 
2.3

 
2.8

 
2.8

Total long-term debt
 
 
$
2,699.4

 
$
898.2

 
$
2,826.5

 
$
1,614.2


The fair value of long-term debt was determined using quoted market prices or discounted cash flows based upon current borrowing rates. The revolving loan and equipment loan facilities are variable rate interest and approximate fair value. See NOTE 5 - DEBT AND CREDIT FACILITIES for further information.
Items Measured at Fair Value on a Non-Recurring Basis
The following tables present information about the impairment charges on both financial and nonfinancial assets and liabilities that were measured on a fair value basis at March 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014. There were no financial and non-financial assets and liabilities that were measured on a non-recurring fair value basis at December 31, 2015. The tables also indicate the fair value hierarchy of the valuation techniques used to determine such fair value.
 
 
(In Millions)
 
 
March 31, 2015
Description
 
Quoted Prices in Active
Markets for Identical Assets/
Liabilities
(Level 1)
 
Significant Other Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
 
Total
 
Total Gains
Liabilities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
$544.2 Million 7.75% 2020 Second Lien Notes
 
$

 
$
397.2

 
$

 
$
397.2

 
$
269.5

 
 
$

 
$
397.2

 
$

 
$
397.2

 
$
269.5

The $544.2 million 7.75 percent Second Lien Notes issued in the exchange offers were recorded as an extinguishment of debt as the change in debt terms was considered substantial. As such, the newly issued Second Lien Senior Notes were recorded at fair value at the issuance date. In order to determine the fair value of the Second Lien Senior Notes on the date of the exchange, we utilized the median bid-ask spread obtained from various investment banks for the exchange date. The bid-ask spread is indicative of the fair value of the notes on the exchange date. The 27.0 percent discount equated to a discount of $147.0 million on the issue value of $544.2 million, or an estimated fair value of $397.2 million.
 
 
(In Millions)
 
 
Year Ended December 31, 2014
Description
 
Quoted Prices in Active
Markets for Identical Assets/
Liabilities
(Level 1)
 
Significant Other Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
 
Total
 
Total Losses
Assets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Goodwill impairment -
Asia Pacific Iron Ore reporting unit
 
$

 
$

 
$

 
$

 
$
73.5

Other long-lived assets -
Property, plant and equipment
    and Mineral rights:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Asia Pacific Iron Ore reporting unit
 

 

 
72.4

 
72.4

 
526.5

Other reporting units
 

 

 

 

 
11.3

Other long-lived assets -
Intangibles and other long-term assets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Asia Pacific Iron Ore reporting unit
 

 

 
7.0

 
7.0

 
24.2

Investment in ventures
impairment - Global Exploration
 

 

 

 

 
9.2

 
 
$

 
$

 
$
79.4

 
$
79.4

 
$
644.7


Financial Assets
During the third quarter of 2014, an impairment charge of $9.2 million to investment in ventures was recorded within our Global Exploration operating segment as a decision was made to abandon the investment during the period.
Non-Financial Assets
During the third and fourth quarter of 2014, we identified factors that indicated the carrying values of the asset groups in the chart above may not be recoverable primarily due to long-term price forecasts as part of management’s long-range planning process. Updated estimates of long-term prices for all products, specifically the Platts 62 percent Fe fines spot price were lower than prior estimates. This especially affects the Asia Pacific Iron Ore business segment because their contracts correlate heavily to world market spot pricing, which were updated based upon current market conditions, macro-economic factors influencing the balance of supply and demand for our products and expectations for future cost and capital expenditure requirements.
Additionally, our CEO, Lourenco Goncalves, was appointed by the Board of Directors in early August 2014 and was subsequently identified as the CODM in accordance with ASC 280, Segment Reporting. Our CODM views Asia Pacific Iron Ore as a non-core asset and has communicated plans to evaluate the business unit for a change in strategy including possible divestiture. These factors, among other considerations utilized in the individual impairment assessments, indicate that the carrying value of the respective asset groups in the chart above and Asia Pacific Iron Ore goodwill may not be recoverable.
During the third quarter of 2014, a goodwill impairment charge of $73.5 million was recorded for our Asia Pacific Iron Ore reporting segment. Based on our review of the fair value hierarchy, the inputs used in these fair value measurements were considered Level 3 inputs.
We also recorded impairment charges to property, plant and equipment, mineral rights, intangible assets and other long-term assets during the second half of 2014 related to our Asia Pacific Iron Ore operating segment, along with impairments charged to reporting units within our Other reportable segments. A detailed break out of the impairment charges is shown in the chart above. The recorded impairment charges reduce the related assets to their estimated fair value as we determined that the future cash flows associated with these operations were not sufficient to support the recoverability of the carrying value of these assets. Fair value was determined based on management's best estimate within a range of fair values, which is considered a Level 3 input, and resulted in an asset impairment charge of $562.0 million. The Level 3 inputs used to determine fair value included models developed and market inputs obtained by management which provided a range of fair value estimates of property, plant and equipment. Management’s models include internally developed long-term future cash flow estimates, capital expenditure and cost estimates, market inputs to determine long-term pricing assumptions, discount rates, and foreign exchange rates.