XML 34 R20.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.25.3

Note 11 - Commitments, Contingencies and Obligations | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2025
Disclosure Text Block [Abstract] |
Commitments, Contingencies and Obligations | Note 11. Commitments, Contingencies and Obligations San Mateo Creek Basin, New Mexico In July 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") informed Hecla Limited that it and several other potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”) may be liable for cleanup of the San Mateo Creek Basin (“SMCB”), which is an approximately 321 square mile area in New Mexico that contains numerous legacy uranium mines and mills. At the time, the EPA stated it had incurred approximately $9.6 million in response costs. Also, in May, 2022 and August, 2024, Hecla Limited received a letter from a PRP notifying Hecla Limited that other PRPs may seek cost recovery and contribution from Hecla Limited under CERCLA for certain investigatory work performed by the PRPs at the SMCB site. Hecla Limited cannot with reasonable certainty estimate the amount or range of liability, if any, relating to this matter because of, among other reasons, the lack of information concerning the site, including the relative contributions of contamination by the various PRPs. Carpenter Snow Creek and Barker-Hughesville Sites in Montana In July 2010, the EPA made a formal request to Hecla for information regarding the Carpenter Snow Creek Superfund site located in Cascade County, Montana. The Carpenter Snow Creek site is located in a historical mining district, and in the early 1980s Hecla Limited leased 6 mining claims and performed limited exploration activities at the site. Hecla Limited terminated the mining lease in 1988. In June 2011, the EPA informed Hecla Limited that it believes Hecla Limited, and several other PRPs, may be liable for cleanup of the site or for costs incurred by the EPA in cleaning up the site. The EPA stated in the letter that it has incurred approximately $4.5 million in response costs and estimated that total remediation costs may exceed $100 million. Hecla Limited cannot with reasonable certainty estimate the amount or range of liability, if any, relating to this matter because of, among other reasons, the lack of information concerning the site, including the relative contributions of contamination by various other PRPs. In February 2017, the EPA made a formal request to Hecla for information regarding the Barker-Hughesville Mining District Superfund site located in Judith Basin and Cascade Counties, Montana. Hecla Limited submitted a response in April 2017. The Barker-Hughesville site is located in a historic mining district, and between approximately June and December 1983, Hecla Limited was party to an agreement with another mining company under which limited exploration activities occurred at or near the site. In August 2018, the EPA informed Hecla Limited that it and several other PRPs may be liable for cleanup of the site or for costs incurred by the EPA in cleaning up the site. The EPA did not include an amount of its alleged response costs to date. Hecla Limited cannot with reasonable certainty estimate the amount or range of liability, if any, relating to this matter because of, among other reasons, the lack of information concerning past or anticipated future costs at the site and the relative contributions of contamination by various other PRPs. Potential Regulatory Action in Quebec As previously disclosed in our 2024 Form 10-K, in May, 2023, the wall of an impoundment dam storing mixed waste material (i.e. clay, till, and rock, but not tailings or other deleterious materials) stripped during open pit mining at Casa Berardi experienced a slip resulting in the waste material being mobilized downstream. The incident is under investigation by the Quebec Ministry of Environment, Fight Against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks (“MELCCFP”), and possibly other Provincial or Federal regulators. As a result of such investigation(s), it is possible that our Hecla Quebec subsidiary and its directors and officers could face an enforcement action. An enforcement action could lead to monetary penalties, which could range from tens of thousands of dollars (Canadian) to millions of dollars (Canadian). Based on a review of precedent by Quebec legal counsel, we do not believe any penalties would be material to Hecla, but it is possible that they could be material. In addition, our future permitting efforts at Casa Berardi could be negatively impacted if the relevant regulator(s) are influenced by any alleged or actual (i) permit violations or (ii) other compliance failures. See the Risk Factor in our 2024 Form 10-K “Our operations are subject to complex, evolving and increasingly stringent environmental laws and regulations. Compliance with environmental regulations, and litigation based on such regulations, involves significant costs and can threaten existing operations or constrain expansion opportunities.” Debt See Note 7 for information on the commitments related to our debt arrangements as of September 30, 2025. Other Commitments Our contractual obligations as of September 30, 2025 included open purchase orders and commitments of $10.7 million, $5.6 million, $7.1 million, $8.0 million and $5.0 million for various capital and non-capital items at Greens Creek, Lucky Friday, Keno Hill, Casa Berardi and Other, respectively. We also have total commitments of $17.2 million relating to scheduled payments on finance leases, including interest, primarily for equipment at our operations, and total commitments of $11.9 million relating to payments on operating leases (see Note 7 for more information). As part of our ongoing business and operations, we are required to provide surety bonds, bank letters of credit, and restricted deposits for various purposes, including financial support for environmental reclamation obligations and workers compensation programs. As of September 30, 2025, we had surety bonds totaling $218.8 million and letters of credit totaling $6.7 million in place as financial support for future reclamation and closure costs, self-insurance, and employee benefit plans. The obligations associated with these instruments are generally related to performance requirements that we address through ongoing operations. As the requirements are met, the beneficiary of the associated instruments cancels or returns the instrument to the issuing entity. Certain of these instruments are associated with operating sites with long-lived assets and will remain outstanding until closure of the sites. We believe we are in compliance with all applicable bonding requirements and will be able to satisfy future bonding requirements as they arise. Other Contingencies We also have certain other contingencies resulting from litigation, claims, EPA investigations, and other commitments and are subject to a variety of environmental and safety laws and regulations incident to the ordinary course of business, including two active lawsuits in federal courts in Idaho and Alaska, respectively, involving labor and employment matters. We currently have no basis to conclude that any or all of such contingencies will materially affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, in the future, there may be changes to these contingencies, or additional contingencies may occur, any of which might result in an accrual or a change in current accruals recorded by us, and there can be no assurance that their ultimate disposition will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 405 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/405-30/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147478522/954-440-50-1 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 6: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

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