XML 38 R23.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.3.1.900
Other Commitments And Contingencies
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2015
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]  
Other Commitments and Contingencies
Other Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation and regulatory matters related to the Company’s restatement of its 2013 annual financial statements
In re KBR, Inc. Securities Litigation. Lead plaintiffs, Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System and IBWE Local 58/NECA Funds, seek class action status on behalf of our shareholders, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company, our former chief executive officer, our current and former chief financial officers, and our former chief accounting officer, arising out of the restatement of our 2013 annual financial statements, and seek undisclosed damages. The case is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Master File No. 14-cv-01287. We filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint for failure to plead particularized facts supporting a strong inference of scienter on the part of the individual defendants and the motion was denied on September 3, 2015. We intend to continue to vigorously defend against these claims. Discovery in the case has begun and is expected to continue in 2016. At this early stage, we are not yet able to determine the likelihood of loss, if any, arising from this matter.

Butorin v. Blount et al, is a shareholder derivative complaint, filed on May 27, 2014 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas on behalf of the Company naming certain current and former members of the Company's board of directors as defendants and the Company as a nominal defendant. The complaint alleges that the named directors breached their fiduciary duties by permitting the Company's internal controls to be inadequate. On March 31, 2015, the District Court transferred the case to the U.S. District Court of Delaware. The court has approved a stay of the action pending resolution of securities litigation and that stay has not been lifted. At this early stage, we are not yet able to determine the likelihood of loss, if any, arising from this matter.
Stella Dupree and Donald Taylor v. KBR, Inc., was filed by shareholders of the Company on May 12, 2015 in Delaware Chancery Court seeking the right to inspect and make copies of certain books and records of the Company under §220 of Delaware General Corporation Law relating primarily to the restatement of our 2013 annual financial statements. The Company provided a limited set of documents to the remaining plaintiff and is awaiting the plaintiff's voluntary dismissal of the case.
We have also received requests for information and a subpoena for documents from the Securities Exchange Commission ("SEC") regarding the restatement of our 2013 annual financial statements. We have been and intend to continue cooperating with the SEC.

PEMEX and PEP Arbitration

In 1997, Commisa, a subsidiary of KBR, Inc., entered into a contract with PEP, a subsidiary of PEMEX, the Mexican national oil company, to build offshore platforms and treatment and reinjection facilities in the Bay of Campeche, offshore Mexico. The project, known as EPC 1, encountered significant schedule delays and increased costs due to problems with design work, late delivery and defects in equipment, increases in scope and other changes.

PEP took possession of the facilities in March 2004 prior to the completion of our scope of work and without paying us for our work. We filed for arbitration with the International Chamber of Commerce ("ICC") in 2004 claiming recovery of damages of approximately $323 million. PEP subsequently filed counterclaims totaling $157 million. In December 2009, the ICC arbitration panel ruled in our favor, and we were awarded a total of approximately $351 million including legal and administrative recovery fees as well as interest. PEP was awarded approximately $6 million on counterclaims, plus interest on a portion of that sum. In connection with this award, we recognized a gain of $117 million net of tax in 2009.

U.S. Proceedings. Collection efforts have involved multiple actions. On August 27, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered an order stating it would confirm the award even though it had been annulled in Mexico (see Mexico proceedings discussion below). The judgment included reimbursement for sums Commisa was forced to pay from our performance bonds that PEP had previously called (see Performance Bonds discussion below). PEP filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on October 16, 2013 and posted $465 million cash as security for the judgment pending appeal. Oral argument on the appeal was held on November 20, 2014. The U.S. government was invited to file a brief and did so, and the parties have filed responses to the U.S. government's brief. We continue to await the Court's ruling on the matter. There has been no indication as to when a decision will be reached and we are not aware of any factors preventing a decision from being reached. PEMEX and PEP could seek rehearing at the court of appeals and a review by the U.S. Supreme Court. At this time, we are unable to predict the timing of any ruling or resolution concerning this matter.

Mexico Proceedings. PEP's initial multiple attempts to nullify the award in Mexico were rejected by the Mexican courts. However, in September 2011, the Collegiate Court ruled that PEP, by administratively rescinding the contract in 2004, deprived the arbitration panel of jurisdiction and the award was null and void.

Other Proceedings. Commisa also initiated collection proceedings in Luxembourg and sought to collect under the North American Free Trade Agreement, the latter of which has been denied pending collection efforts in the U.S. and in Luxembourg.

Performance Bonds

We had provided approximately $80 million in performance bonds to PEP when the project was awarded. The bonds were written by a Mexican bond company and backed by a U.S. insurance company which is indemnified by KBR. As a result of the ICC arbitration award in December 2009, the panel determined that KBR had performed on the project and recovery on the bonds by PEP was precluded.  Notwithstanding, PEP filed an action in Mexico in June 2010 against the Mexican bond company to collect the bonds. On June 17, 2013, after proceedings in multiple Mexican courts, we were required to pay $108 million to the Mexican bond company. The $108 million consists of the $80 million in outstanding bonds, plus $26 million in related interest and other expenses and $2 million in legal and banking fees. These sums were added to the judgment entered by the Federal Court in New York as discussed above.

Consistent with our treatment of probable claim recoveries, we have recorded $400 million of the ICC arbitration award, net of advances, in "claims and accounts receivable" on the consolidated balance sheets. PEP has posted $465 million in cash collateral in the U.S. under the control of the Federal District Court in New York. In addition we have taken action to attach assets in Luxembourg as additional protection to collect on the ICC arbitration award. Although it is possible we could resolve and collect the amounts due from PEP in the next 12 months, we believe the timing of the collection of the award is uncertain; therefore, consistent with our prior practice, as of December 31, 2015, we continue to classify the amount recorded for financial reporting purposes due from PEP as long term.

Environmental

We are subject to numerous environmental, legal and regulatory requirements related to our operations worldwide. In the U.S., these laws and regulations include, among others: the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act; the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; and the Toxic Substances Control Act. In addition to federal and state laws and regulations, other countries where we do business often have numerous environmental regulatory requirements by which we must abide in the normal course of our operations. These requirements apply to our business segments where we perform construction and industrial maintenance services or operate and maintain facilities.

We continue to monitor conditions at sites owned or previously owned. These locations were primarily utilized for manufacturing or fabrication work and are no longer in operation. The use of these facilities created various environmental issues including deposits of metals, volatile and semi-volatile compounds and hydrocarbons impacting surface and subsurface soils and groundwater. The range of remediation costs could change depending on our ongoing site analysis and the timing and techniques used to implement remediation activities. We do not expect that costs related to environmental matters will have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. Based on the information presently available to us the assessment and remediation costs associated with all environmental matters is immaterial and we do not anticipate incurring additional costs.

We have been named as a potentially responsible party in various clean-up actions taken by federal and state agencies in the U.S. All of these matters have been settled or resolved and as of December 31, 2015 we have not been named in any additional matters.

Existing or pending climate change legislation, regulations, international treaties or accords are not expected to have a short-term material direct effect on our business, the markets that we serve or on our results of operations or financial position. However, climate change legislation could have a direct effect on our customers or suppliers, which could impact our business. For example, our commodity-based markets depend on the level of activity of mineral and oil and gas companies and existing or future laws, regulations, treaties or international agreements related to climate change, including incentives to conserve energy or use alternative energy sources, which could impact our business if such laws, regulations, treaties or international agreements reduce the worldwide demand for minerals, oil and natural gas.  We will continue to monitor developments in this area.

Leases

We are obligated under operating leases, principally for the use of land, offices, equipment, field facilities and warehouses. We recognize minimum rental expenses over the term of the lease. When a lease contains a fixed escalation of the minimum rent or rent holidays, we recognize the related rent expense on a straight-line basis over the lease term and record the difference between the recognized rental expense and the amounts payable under the lease as deferred lease credits. We have certain leases for office space where we receive allowances for leasehold improvements. We capitalize these leasehold improvements as property, plant and equipment and deferred lease credits. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their economic useful lives or the lease term. Total rent expense was $155 million, $158 million and $159 million in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The current portion of deferred rent of $7 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, is recorded in "other current liabilities" on our consolidated balance sheets and the noncurrent deferred rent of $114 million and $128 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, is recorded in "other liabilities" on our consolidated balance sheets.

Future total rental payments on noncancelable operating leases are as follows:
Dollars in millions
Future rental
payments (a)
2016
$
98

2017
$
83

2018
$
72

2019
$
61

2020
$
56

Beyond 2020
$
350


 
(a)
Amounts presented are net of subleases.

Insurance Programs

Our employee-related health care benefits program is self-funded. Our workers’ compensation, automobile and general liability insurance programs include a deductible applicable to each claim.  Claims in excess of our deductible are paid by the insurer. The liabilities are based on claims filed and estimates of claims incurred but not reported. As of December 31, 2015, liabilities for anticipated claim payments and incurred but not reported claims for all insurance programs totaled approximately $52 million, comprised of $14 million included in "accrued salaries, wages and benefits," $12 million included in "other current liabilities" and $26 million included in "other liabilities" all on our consolidated balance sheets. As of December 31, 2014, liabilities for unpaid and incurred but not reported claims for all insurance programs totaled approximately $66 million, comprised of $14 million included in "accrued salaries, wages and benefits," $19 million included in "other current liabilities" and $33 million included in "other liabilities" all on our consolidated balance sheets.