XML 26 R17.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.23.1

LAWSUITS, CLAIMS, COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Mar. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Lawsuits, Claims, Commitments and Contingencies |
NOTE 8 - LAWSUITS, CLAIMS, COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
LEGAL MATTERS Occidental or certain of its subsidiaries are involved, in the normal course of business, in lawsuits, claims and other legal proceedings that seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, breach of contract, property damage or other losses, punitive damages, civil penalties, or injunctive or declaratory relief. Occidental or certain of its subsidiaries are also involved in proceedings under CERCLA and similar federal, regional, state, provincial, tribal, local and international environmental laws. These environmental proceedings seek funding or performance of remediation and, in some cases, compensation for alleged property damage, natural resource damages, punitive damages, civil penalties, injunctive relief and government oversight costs. Usually Occidental or such subsidiaries are among many companies in these environmental proceedings and have to date been successful in sharing remediation costs with other financially sound companies. Further, some lawsuits, claims and legal proceedings involve acquired or disposed assets with respect to which a third party or Occidental or its subsidiary retains liability or indemnifies the other party for conditions that existed prior to the transaction. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, Occidental or its subsidiaries accrue reserves for outstanding lawsuits, claims and proceedings when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the liability can be reasonably estimated. Reserves for matters, other than for the arbitration award (disclosed below), tax matters and disputes or environmental remediation, that satisfy these criteria as of March 31, 2023 and 2022 were not material to Occidental’s Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheets. If unfavorable outcomes of these matters were to occur, future results of operations or cash flows for any particular quarterly or annual period could be materially adversely affected. Occidental’s estimates are based on information known about legal matters and its experience in contesting, litigating and settling similar matters. Occidental reassesses the probability and estimability of contingent losses as new information becomes available. ANDES ARBITRATION In 2016, Occidental received payments from the Republic of Ecuador of approximately $1.0 billion pursuant to a November 2015 arbitration award for Ecuador’s 2006 expropriation of Occidental’s Participation Contract for Block 15. The awarded amount represented a recovery of Occidental's 60% of the value of Block 15. In 2017, Andes commenced an arbitration, against OEPC, claiming it is entitled to a 40% share of the judgment amount obtained by Occidental. Occidental contended that Andes is not entitled to any of the amounts paid under the 2015 arbitration award because Occidental’s recovery was limited to Occidental’s own 60% economic interest in the block. In March 2021, the arbitration tribunal issued an award in favor of Andes and against OEPC in the amount of $391 million plus interest. In June 2021, OEPC filed a motion to vacate the award due to concerns regarding the validity of the award. In December 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York confirmed the arbitration award, plus prejudgment interest, in the aggregate amount of $558 million. OEPC has appealed the judgment. Oral argument with respect to OEPC’s appeal occurred in February 2023, and a ruling is expected later this year. Andes has filed state court claims in New York and Delaware against OEPC, OPC and OXY USA to attempt to recover on its judgment against OEPC during the pendency of the appeal. The New York state court action against OPC was dismissed with prejudice in March 2023, and Andes filed its notice of appeal in April 2023. Andes also continues to attempt to recover on its judgment in New York federal court and in Delaware state court. All Occidental entities are vigorously defending against these actions. In addition, OEPC commenced an arbitration against Andes to recover significant additional claims not addressed by the prior arbitration tribunal relating to Andes' 40% share of costs, liabilities, losses and expenses due under the farmout agreement and joint operating agreement to which Andes and OEPC are parties. A hearing on these claims occurred in December 2022. A ruling from the arbitration tribunal is expected in the first half of 2023. ALDEN LEEDS AND OTHER LITIGATION In December 2022, the EPA and the DOJ filed a proposed Consent Decree with the District Court in the Alden Leeds litigation seeking court approval of a proposed settlement in which the EPA seeks to release 85 potentially responsible parties from all remediation costs in OU2 and OU4 of the DASS for approximately $150 million. OxyChem believes the proposed settlement relies, improperly, on an allocation report prepared by an EPA contractor in which the contractor purported to assign a disproportionate share of the responsibility for remediation costs in OU2 and OU4 to OxyChem. In the proposed settlement, the EPA also seeks to bar OxyChem from pursuing contribution claims against the 85 settling parties for remediation costs in OU2 and OU4, including those asserted in OxyChem’s 2018 Contribution Action. The 2018 Contribution Action is currently stayed. The proposed settlement does not address the liability of any party with respect to OU3 or natural resource damages. OxyChem intends to contest the proposed settlement vigorously. As discussed above in Note 7 – Environmental Liabilities and Expenditures, in March 2023, the EPA issued the OU4 UAO, which directs OxyChem to design the remedy for OU4. Subject to its defenses, OxyChem is complying with this order. Based upon the OU4 UAO, OxyChem also filed its 2023 Cost Recovery Action against multiple parties to recover costs incurred or that will be incurred to comply with the OU4 UAO. The proposed EPA settlement was subject to a public comment period that closed in March 2023. OxyChem believes the proposed settlement exceeds the EPA’s statutory authority and is based on a flawed allocation process. OxyChem also believes that process was unreasonably limited in scope and unreliably based on voluntary reporting by the settling parties, instead of sworn evidence, publicly available sampling results and historical documents reflecting the operating history and disposal practices of the 85 parties that the EPA proposes to release as part of this settlement. OxyChem expects to show that the EPA’s proposed settlement does not fairly and reasonably reflect the settling parties’ contribution of hazardous substances to the DASS and, among other things, incorrectly attributes to OxyChem substances that were contributed by one or more of the 85 settling parties. OxyChem's request to intervene in the Alden Leeds litigation has been granted. This intervention will allow OxyChem to protect its rights under federal law to challenge the proposed settlement, as well as the allocation report and process upon which the settlement is based. In the 2018 Contribution Action and 2023 Cost Recovery Action, OxyChem also intends to defend and prosecute vigorously its right to seek contribution and cost recovery from all potentially responsible parties to pay remediation costs in the DASS and to seek a judicial allocation of responsibility under CERCLA. As the Alden Leeds litigation is in its early stages, OxyChem is unable to estimate the timing of the District Court’s decision, its outcome, or the outcome of any appeals from the District Court’s decision. MAXUS LIQUIDATING TRUST As described in Note 7 – Environmental Liabilities and Expenditures, Maxus was contractually obligated to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless OxyChem against environmental liabilities arising from the former operations of DSCC. In June 2016, Maxus filed for bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the Bankruptcy Court). In June 2017, the Bankruptcy Court approved a Plan of Liquidation to liquidate Maxus and create the Trust for the benefit of Maxus’ creditors, including OxyChem, to pursue claims against Maxus’ current and former parents, YPF and Repsol, certain of their respective subsidiaries and affiliates, and others to satisfy claims by OxyChem and other creditors for past and future remediation and other costs. In July 2017, the court-approved Plan of Liquidation became final, and the Trust became effective. Pursuant to the Plan, the Trust is governed by an independent trustee and is not controlled by OxyChem. The Plan authorizes the Trust to distribute any assets it recovers from such litigation claims to the Trust’s beneficiaries, which include OxyChem and other creditors, in accordance with the Plan and governing Trust Agreement. In June 2018, the Trust filed its complaint against YPF and Repsol in the Bankruptcy Court asserting claims based upon, among other things, fraudulent transfer and alter ego. During 2019, the Bankruptcy Court denied Repsol's and YPF's motions to dismiss the complaint as well as their motions to move the case to a different court. These rulings were upheld on appeal. The Trust, YPF and Repsol each filed motions for summary judgment, and the Bankruptcy Court denied all but one motion in the second quarter of 2022. The Bankruptcy Court’s summary judgment decision indicated that, at trial, the Trust must establish a causal link between its claimed damages and the alter ego conduct of YPF and Repsol. In April 2023, the Trust, YPF and Repsol reached an agreement to resolve the claims pending in the Bankruptcy Court. Related agreements were executed among the United States Government, YPF and Repsol as well as among OxyChem, YPF and Repsol. YPF and Repsol are required to pay the Trust $575 million, which the Trust will distribute according to the Plan. The agreements are subject to court and other approvals. If the settlement is approved, then OxyChem expects to recover proceeds of approximately $350 million during the second half of this year. OxyChem currently has a valuation allowance established against a substantial portion of its claims against Maxus. If the settlement is ultimately approved, OxyChem expects it will recognize a gain in excess of $200 million on the remeasurement of the valuation allowance. TAX MATTERS AND DISPUTES During the course of its operations, Occidental is subject to audit by tax authorities for varying periods in various federal, state, local and international tax jurisdictions. Tax years through 2020 for U.S. federal income tax purposes have been audited by the IRS pursuant to its Compliance Assurance Program and subsequent taxable years are currently under review. Tax years through 2014 have been audited for state income tax purposes. Significant audit matters in international jurisdictions have been resolved through 2010. During the course of tax audits, disputes have arisen and other disputes may arise as to facts and matters of law. For Anadarko, its taxable years through 2014 and tax year 2016 for U.S. federal tax purposes have been audited by the IRS. Tax years through 2010 have been audited for state income tax purposes. There is one outstanding significant tax matter in an international jurisdiction related to a discontinued operation. As stated above, during the course of tax audits, disputes have arisen and other disputes may arise as to facts and matters of law. Other than the dispute discussed below, Occidental believes that the resolution of these outstanding tax disputes would not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position or results of operations. Anadarko received an $881 million tentative refund in 2016 related to its $5.2 billion Tronox Adversary Proceeding settlement payment in 2015. In September 2018, Anadarko received a statutory notice of deficiency from the IRS disallowing the net operating loss carryback and rejecting Anadarko’s refund claim. As a result, Anadarko filed a petition with the U.S. Tax Court to dispute the disallowances in November 2018. In December 2022, the parties filed competing motions for partial summary judgment. The Tax Court denied the motions and trial began on May 1, 2023. In accordance with ASC 740’s guidance on the accounting for uncertain tax positions, Occidental has recorded no tax benefit on the tentative cash tax refund of $881 million. As a result, should Occidental not ultimately prevail on the issue, there would be no additional tax expense recorded relative to this position for financial statement purposes other than future interest. However, in that event, Occidental would be required to repay approximately $1.4 billion in federal taxes, $28 million in state taxes and accrued interest of $453 million. A liability for this amount plus interest is included in deferred credits and other liabilities - other. INDEMNITIES TO THIRD PARTIES Occidental, its subsidiaries, or both, have indemnified various parties against specified liabilities those parties might incur in the future in connection with purchases and other transactions that they have entered into with Occidental or its subsidiaries. These indemnities usually are contingent upon the other party incurring liabilities that reach specified thresholds. As of March 31, 2023, Occidental is not aware of circumstances that it believes would reasonably be expected to lead to indemnity claims that would result in payments materially in excess of reserves.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration