XML 99 R23.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
REGULATION AND CONTINGENCIES
12 Months Ended
Apr. 29, 2012
REGULATION AND CONTINGENCIES [Abstract]  
REGULATION AND CONTINGENCIES
REGULATION AND CONTINGENCIES 
Like other participants in the industry, we are subject to various laws and regulations administered by federal, state and other government entities, including the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and corresponding state agencies, as well as the United States Department of Agriculture, the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyard Administration, the United States Food and Drug Administration, the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Commodities and Futures Trading Commission and similar agencies in foreign countries. 
We from time to time receive notices and inquiries from regulatory authorities and others asserting that we are not in compliance with such laws and regulations. In some instances, litigation ensues. In addition, individuals may initiate litigation against us. 
Missouri Litigation
Premium Standard Farms, Inc. (PSF), the Company and certain of our other subsidiaries and affiliates are parties to litigation in Missouri involving a number of claims alleging that hog farms owned or under contract with the defendants interfered with the plaintiffs' use and enjoyment of their properties. Additional supplemental information regarding these claims is found in “Item 3. Legal Proceedings—Missouri Litigation.”
During fiscal 2012 and continuing in the first quarter of fiscal 2013, we engaged in global settlement negotiations with counsel representing nearly all of the plaintiffs in the nuisance litigation and numerous carriers of commercial general liability and pollution liability policies. The parties to the litigation have made substantial progress toward consummation of a global settlement that would resolve the vast majority of the nuisance litigation. However, there are significant contingencies that must be fulfilled before the settlement is consummated, and we cannot make any assurance that those contingencies will be satisfied. In addition, we have agreements with the insurance carriers under which we receive payments that we contribute to pay a portion of the settlement, most of which are contingent on the consummation of the global settlement.
In the event that the global settlement is not consummated, we believe we have good defenses to all of the actions described above and intend to defend vigorously these suits. Although we recognize the uncertainties of litigation, based on our historical experience and our understanding of the facts and circumstances underlying these claims, in the event the global settlement is not consummated, we believe that these claims will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
Our policy for establishing accruals and disclosures for contingent liabilities is contained in Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. We established an accrual with respect to the Missouri nuisance suits on the opening balance sheet for our acquisition of PSF in fiscal 2008 and we have periodically adjusted that accrual as developments have occurred. The accrual, as adjusted from time to time, represents our best estimate of the probable loss for these suits. Due to the recent developments discussed above including the substantial progress toward the consummation of a global settlement and the settlements with certain insurance carriers, we recognized $22.2 million in net charges to selling, general and administrative expenses in the Hog Production segment associated with the Missouri litigation in fiscal 2012. In November 2010 (fiscal 2011), we reached a settlement with one of our insurance carriers regarding the reimbursement of certain past and future defense costs associated with our Missouri litigation. Related to this matter, we recognized a net benefit of $19.1 million in selling, general and administrative expenses in the Hog Production segment in fiscal 2011.
Expenses and other liabilities associated with the Missouri litigation will not affect our profits or losses unless our accrual proves to be insufficient or excessive. The global settlement, if consummated on the terms contemplated, would not be materially different than the accrual. However, payments made under the global settlement, if consummated, will negatively impact our cash flows and liquidity position. In addition, in the event the global settlement is not consummated, legal expenses incurred in our and our subsidiaries' defense of these claims and any payments made to plaintiffs through unfavorable verdicts or otherwise will also negatively impact our cash flows and our liquidity position. In any event, we do not expect such payments to have a material adverse impact on our overall financial position or liquidity.
If the global settlement is not consummated, given the uncertainty of the outcome of the Missouri nuisance suits, it is possible that the total costs incurred related to these and similar potential claims could exceed our current estimates. As of April 29, 2012, if the global settlement is not consummated, we cannot reasonably estimate the maximum potential exposure or the range of possible loss in excess of amounts accrued for these contingencies. We will continue to review the amount of any necessary accruals or other related expenses and record charges in the period in which the determination is made that an adjustment is required.
Fire Insurance Settlement
In July 2009 (fiscal 2010), a fire occurred at the primary manufacturing facility of our subsidiary, Patrick Cudahy, Inc. (Patrick Cudahy), in Cudahy, Wisconsin. The fire damaged a portion of the facility’s production space and required the temporary cessation of operations, but did not consume the entire facility. Shortly after the fire, we resumed production activities in undamaged portions of the plant, including the distribution center, and took steps to address the supply needs for Patrick Cudahy products by shifting production to other Company and third-party facilities.
We maintain comprehensive general liability and property insurance, including business interruption insurance. In December 2010 (fiscal 2011), we reached an agreement with our insurance carriers to settle the claim for a total of $208.0 million, of which $70.0 million had been advanced to us in fiscal 2010. We allocated these proceeds to first recover the book value of the property lost, out-of-pocket expenses incurred and business interruption losses that resulted from the fire. The remaining proceeds were recognized as an involuntary conversion gain of $120.6 million in the Corporate segment in the third quarter of fiscal 2011. The involuntary conversion gain was classified in a separate line item on the consolidated statement of income.
Based on an evaluation of business interruption losses incurred, we recognized $15.8 million and $31.8 million in fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2010, respectively, of the insurance proceeds in cost of sales in our Pork segment to offset business interruption losses incurred.
Of the $208.0 million in insurance proceeds received to settle the claim, $120.6 million and $9.9 million has been classified in net cash flows from investing activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows for fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2010, respectively, which represents the portion of proceeds related to destruction of the facility. The remainder of the proceeds was recorded in net cash flows from operating activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows and was attributed to business interruption recoveries and reimbursable costs covered under our insurance policy.