COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
12 Months Ended |
|---|---|
Dec. 31, 2017 | |
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |
| COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
NOTE 20 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Contingencies
Litigation
We are currently the subject of, or party to, various claims and legal proceedings incidental to our operations. If management believes that a loss arising from these matters is probable and can reasonably be estimated, we record the amount of the loss or the minimum estimated liability when the loss is estimated using a range, and no point within the range is more probable than another. As additional information becomes available, any potential liability related to these matters is assessed and the estimates are revised, if necessary. Based on currently available information, management believes that the ultimate outcome of these matters, individually and in the aggregate, will not have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, these claims and legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings could occur. An unfavorable ruling could include monetary damages, additional funding requirements or an injunction. If an unfavorable ruling were to occur, there exists the possibility of a material impact on the financial position and results of operations for the period in which the ruling occurs or future periods. However, we do not believe that any pending claims or legal proceedings will result in a material liability in relation to our consolidated financial statements.
Currently, we have recorded a liability in the Statements of Consolidated Financial Position related to the following legal matters:
Michigan Electricity Matters. On February 19, 2015, in connection with various proceedings before FERC with respect to certain cost allocations for continued operation of the Presque Isle Power Plant in Marquette, Michigan, FERC issued an order directing MISO to submit a revised methodology for allocating SSR costs that identified the load serving entities that require the operation of SSR units at the power plant for reliability purposes. On September 17, 2015, FERC issued an order conditionally approving MISO’s revised allocation methodology. On September 22, 2016, FERC denied requests for rehearing of the February 19 order, rejecting arguments that FERC did not have the authority to order refunds in a cost allocation case and to impose retroactive surcharges to effectuate such refunds. FERC, however, suspended any refunds and surcharges pending its review of a July 25, 2016 ALJ initial decision on the appropriate amount of SSR compensation. On November 8, 2016, Tilden and Empire, along with various Michigan-aligned parties, filed petitions for review of FERC’s order regarding allocation and non-cost SSR issues with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. On January 27, 2017, Tilden, Empire and other appellants filed a motion to terminate further abeyance of briefing so that cost allocation issues could be heard at the Court of Appeals, which motion was granted on April 4, 2017. Should retroactive surcharges be permitted, our current estimate of the potential liability to the Empire and Tilden mines is $12.3 million, based on FERC's October 19, 2017 Order reviewing the July 25, 2016 ALJ initial decision. We will continue to vigorously challenge the retroactive imposition of any SSR costs before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, $12.3 million and $13.6 million, respectively, is included in our Statements of Consolidated Financial Position as part of Accrued expenses.
CCAA Proceedings
Effective January 27, 2015, following the commencement of CCAA proceedings for the Bloom Lake Group, we deconsolidated the Bloom Lake Group and certain other wholly-owned subsidiaries comprising substantially all of our Canadian operations. Additionally, on May 20, 2015, the Wabush Group commenced CCAA proceedings which resulted in the deconsolidation of the remaining Wabush Group entities that were not previously deconsolidated. As a result of this action, the CCAA protection granted to the Bloom Lake Group was extended to include the Wabush Group to facilitate the reorganization of each of their businesses and operations.
Prior to the deconsolidations, certain of our wholly-owned subsidiaries made loans to the Canadian Entities for the purpose of funding their operations and had accounts receivable generated in the ordinary course of business. The loans, corresponding interest and the accounts receivable were considered intercompany transactions and eliminated in our consolidated financial statements. Since the deconsolidations, the loans, associated interest and accounts receivable are considered related party transactions and have been recognized in our consolidated financial statements at their estimated fair value of $51.6 million and $48.6 million classified as Loans to and accounts receivables from the Canadian Entities in the Statements of Consolidated Financial Position at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.
As of December 31, 2017, CCAA proceedings are ongoing and the majority of the assets of each of the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group have been liquidated. The Monitor appointed by the court in the CCAA proceedings for the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group has conducted a claims process pursuant to which creditors have filed claims against the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group. The Monitor is reviewing all claims filed as part of this claims process. Currently, there is uncertainty as to the amount of the distribution that will be made to the creditors of the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group, including, if any, to us, and whether we could be held liable for claims that may be asserted by or on behalf of the Bloom Lake Group or the Wabush Group or by their respective representatives against non-debtor affiliates of the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group.
The net proceeds of sale of the assets of the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group are currently being held by the Monitor. Certain of these funds will be utilized to fund the accrued and ongoing costs of the CCAA proceedings and the remaining funds will be available for distribution to the creditors of the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group.
During 2017, we became aware that it was probable the Monitor will assert a preference claim against the Company and/or certain of its affiliates. Given that it is probable the claim will be asserted by the Monitor, we have recorded an estimated liability of $55.6 million, which includes the value of our related-party claims against the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group, classified as Contingent claims in the Statements of Consolidated Financial Position as of December 31, 2017 and included within Loss from Discontinued Operations, net of tax in the Statements of Consolidated Operations for the year ended December 31, 2017. Should the Monitor proceed to assert the claim, we believe the Monitor will demand an amount in excess of the value of our related-party claims against the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group. Thus, it is possible that a change in the estimated liability may occur in the future. We deny liability for any amount and will vigorously defend such claim.
We previously recorded liabilities of $37.2 million related to guarantees for certain environmental obligations of the Canadian Entities, classified as Other liabilities in the Statements of Consolidated Financial Position as of December 31, 2016. During 2017, the Wabush Scully Mine was sold as part of the ongoing CCAA proceedings for the Wabush Group. As part of this transaction, we were required to fund the buyer's financial assurance shortfall of $7.7 million in order to complete the conveyance of the environmental remediation obligations to the buyer, which released us from our guarantees and resulted in a net gain of $31.4 million included in Loss from Discontinued Operations, net of tax in the Statements of Consolidated Operations.
Environmental Matters
We had environmental liabilities of $2.9 million and $2.8 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively, including obligations for known environmental remediation exposures at active and closed mining operations and other sites. These amounts have been recognized based on the estimated cost of investigation and remediation at each site, and include site studies, design and implementation of remediation plans, legal and consulting fees, and post-remediation monitoring and related activities. Future expenditures are not discounted unless the amount and timing of the cash disbursements are readily known. Potential insurance recoveries have not been reflected. Additional environmental obligations could be incurred, the extent of which cannot be assessed. The amount of our ultimate liability with respect to these matters may be affected by several uncertainties, primarily the ultimate cost of required remediation and the extent to which other responsible parties contribute. Refer to NOTE 11 - ENVIRONMENTAL AND MINE CLOSURE OBLIGATIONS for further information.
Tax Matters
The calculation of our tax liabilities involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax regulations. We recognize liabilities for anticipated tax audit issues based on our estimate of whether, and the extent to which, additional taxes will be due. If we ultimately determine that payment of these amounts is unnecessary, we reverse the liability and recognize a tax benefit during the period in which we determine that the liability is no longer necessary. We also recognize tax benefits to the extent that it is more likely than not that our positions will be sustained when challenged by the taxing authorities. To the extent we prevail in matters for which liabilities have been established, or are required to pay amounts in excess of our liabilities, our effective tax rate in a given period could be materially affected. An unfavorable tax settlement would require use of our cash and result in an increase in our effective tax rate in the year of resolution. A favorable tax settlement would be recognized as a reduction in our effective tax rate in the year of resolution. Refer to NOTE 9 - INCOME TAXES for further information.
|