CONTINGENCIES, ENVIRONMENTAL AND LEGAL MATTERS

Asset Retirement Obligations

The Company has recognized asset retirement obligations, or AROs, for properties where it can make a reasonable estimate of the future expenditures necessary to satisfy the related obligations. The Company considers identified legally-enforceable obligations, estimated settlement dates and appropriate discount and inflation rates in calculating the fair value of its AROs.

The AROs are included in "Other long-term liabilities" in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2015 and 2014. Changes in the Company’s AROs are as follows:



(amounts in millions)	Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2015			Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2014			Period from inception (April 23, 2013) through December 31, 2013		Period from January 1, 2013 to October 31, 2013
	(Successor)			(Successor)			(Successor)		(Predecessor)
AROs, beginning of period	$	18.5		$	4.8		$	—	$	2.3
Acquisitions	0.4			13.2			4.8		—
Additional obligations incurred	—			0.5			—		—
Accretion expense	1.0			0.7			—		0.1
Remeasurements	(0.2		)	—			—		—
Payments/ settlements	(0.4		)	(0.2		)	—		(0.1		)
Foreign currency adjustments	(1.8		)	(0.5		)	—		(0.1		)
AROs, end of period	$	17.5		$	18.5		$	4.8	$	2.2

Environmental Liabilities

The Company formulates and distributes specialty chemical products and is therefore subject to extensive domestic and foreign environmental protection laws and regulations, including those governing the management, discharge and disposal of hazardous material and pollutants into the soil, air and water, as well as laws and regulations governing workers' health and safety. As a result, the Company is exposed to risks of liability or claims with respect to environmental clean-up of contaminated facilities or other matters, including those in connection with the disposal or releases of, or exposure to, hazardous materials. The Company has incurred, and will continue to incur, costs and capital expenditures in complying with these laws and regulations. Additional costs could be incurred, including cleanup costs, fines, sanctions, and third-party claims, as a result of violations of or liabilities under environmental laws.

Among other environmental laws, the Company is subject to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (commonly known as Superfund), under which the Company may be designated as a “potentially responsible party” ("PRP") with respect to cleanup costs associated with sites on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Priority List. The Company conducts studies, individually or jointly with other PRPs, to determine the feasibility of various remedial techniques. It is the Company's policy to record appropriate liabilities for environmental matters when remedial efforts or damage claim payments are probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated. Such liabilities are based on the Company's best estimate of the undiscounted future costs required to complete the remedial work. The recorded liabilities are adjusted periodically as remediation efforts are determined.

Remediation activities vary substantially in duration and cost from site to site. These activities, and their associated costs, depend on the mix of unique site characteristics, evolving remediation technologies, diverse regulatory agencies and enforcement policies, as well as the presence or absence of potentially responsible parties.

In particular, Alent, which the Company acquired in December 2015, had reserved approximately £16.2 million ($23.9 million based on the GBP/USD exchange rate of 1.4736 on December 31, 2015) for potential liability in connection with environmental remediation, clean-up costs, and monitoring of sites that were either closed or disposed of in prior years. These sites are in various stages of environmental management: at some sites, the work is in the early stages of assessment and investigation, while at others, the clean-up remedies have been implemented and the remaining work consists of monitoring the integrity of those remedies. These sites also include federal or state Superfund sites. Because the laws pertaining to Superfund sites generally impose retroactive, strict, joint and several liability, a governmental plaintiff could seek to recover all remediation costs at any such site from any of the PRPs for such site, including us, despite the involvement of other PRPs. The Company is one of several identified PRPs, in the aforementioned Superfund sites. The Company believes that the liability associated with these sites ha been apportioned based on the type and amount of waste disposed by each PRP at such disposal site and the number of financially solvent PRPs. In many cases, the nature of future environmental expenditures cannot be quantified with accuracy.

The Company does not currently anticipate any material losses in excess of the reserve amount recorded. However, it is possible that new information about these sites, such as results of investigations, could make it necessary for the the Company to reassess its potential exposure related to these environmental matters. As the settlement of many of the obligations for which provision is made is subject to legal or other regulatory process, the timing of the associated cash outflows is subject to some uncertainty, but the majority of the amounts provided are expected to be utilized over the next five to ten years.

As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company's environmental reserves totaled $25.7 million and $4.5 million, respectively. The Company’s management does not believe it is possible to develop an estimate of the range of reasonably possible environmental loss in excess of our recorded liabilities. As of the date hereof, the Company’s management believes that any possible losses related to environmental remediation in addition to the amounts recorded as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 would not be material to the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Legal Proceedings

From time to time, the Company is involved in various legal proceedings in the normal course of its business. The Company believes that the resolution of these claims, to the extent not covered by insurance, will not individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company has reserved approximately $6.5 million and $4.4 million, respectively, for its outstanding legal proceedings. The following is a description of certain litigation matters.

Product liability and/or personal injury claims for, or relating to, products the Company sells under its Agricultural Solutions segment are complex in nature and have outcomes that are difficult to predict. Since these products are used in the food chain on a global basis, any such product liability or personal injury claim could lead to litigation in multiple jurisdictions. During 2014, Agricola Colonet, SA de CV claimed that certain Arysta products purchased from a retail distributor in Mexico were contaminated, requiring treated crops to be destroyed. Agricola Colonet, SA de CV is seeking compensation of approximately MXN 182 million ($10.6 million, based on the MXN/USD exchange rate of 0.0581 on December 31, 2015). The Company believes that it has adequate defenses and intends to vigorously defend against this claim, and therefore has not established a reserve related to this claim. Under its risk management policies, the Company maintains certain insurance policies under which such claims may be covered.

In March 2013, a claim was filed against Arysta LifeScience Corporation, one of our subsidiaries, relating to a purchasing optimization agreement entered into in 2011 between Arysta LifeScience Corporation and a consulting firm. The agreement provided for an incentive fee to be paid to the plaintiff based upon savings to Arysta resulting from the plaintiff's work. In addition to fees already received, the plaintiff claims damages, which the Company considers to be non-material. The Company believes this claim is without merit and that the fees already paid under the agreement exceed or equal the fees owed to the plaintiff. An arbitration hearing was conducted in May 2014, and in May 2015 the tribunal published a partial award, ruling on various issues of principle, but declining to calculate an award amount, rather asking the parties to attempt to agree upon a calculation reflecting the decisions of the tribunal set out in the award. The parties have been unable to agree on a calculation of the award, and the Company is awaiting further decisions from the tribunal.

The $600 million of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock issued in connection with the Arysta Acquisition may be converted into a maximum of 22,107,590 shares of Platform common stock. To the extent that the aggregate value of such shares is less than $600 million (based on a 10-day volume weighted average price), then, such shortfall would be payable in cash by Platform. Such shortfall would however be reduced by a portion, or all, of the amount for which the arbitration matter described in the preceding paragraph may be resolved, either by order of the arbitrators or by settlement, pursuant to a formula negotiated by and between us and the Arysta Seller.

In June 2009, a lawsuit was filed by a private individual against Arysta LifeScience do Brasil Industria Química e Agropecuária Ltda, or Arysta Brazil, and 25 other defendants, and in November 2011, a claim was filed against Arysta Brazil and five other defendants by the city of Ulianopolis, in each case in connection with materials sent by Arysta Brazil and others to an incineration site owned and operated by an unaffiliated third party in the state of Pará, Brazil. Arysta Brazil was summoned and has filed its answer in connection with both cases. Proceedings have been suspended indefinitely in order to allow the Pará State Attorney to conduct civil inquiries to determine the extent of contamination and the appropriate remediation, and to identify potentially responsible parties. Damages sought in the private lawsuit include a penalty of BRL 50.0 million ($12.6 million, based on the BRL/USD exchange rate of 0.2525 on December 31, 2015), plus interest and the cost of remediation. The cost of remediation in the case brought by the city of Ulianopolis was previously estimated by the city to be BRL 70.9 million ($17.9 million, based on the BRL/USD exchange rate of 0.2525 on December 31, 2015). In addition, 13 former employees of the incineration facility have brought actions naming 80 defendants, including Arysta Brazil, seeking compensation in an aggregate amount of BRL 173.3 million ($43.8 million, based on the BRL/USD exchange rate of 0.2525 on December 31, 2015) for health problems allegedly contracted as a result of their employment at the incineration site.

From time to time, in the ordinary course of business, the Company contests tax assessments received by its subsidiaries in various jurisdictions. The Company's contested tax assessments have been most prevalent in Brazil, where the tax regime is complex, and the administrative and judicial procedures for resolving disputed tax assessments are expensive and time-consuming. In addition, short of simply paying the entire amount demanded, including penalties, interest, and attorney’s fees, it is not possible to settle disputed tax assessments other than by submission for inclusion in formal tax amnesty programs announced by the Brazilian federal or state governments from time to time at irregular intervals. The terms of such amnesty programs vary, but generally offer the possibility of reduced interest and penalties. Historically, Arysta has submitted selected contested tax matters for inclusion in such amnesty programs in Brazil, when it appeared prudent to management to do so. The Company is currently contesting several tax assessments at various stages of the applicable administrative and judicial processes, with a combined amount at issue, including interest and penalties, of approximately BRL 75.2 million ($19.0 million, based on the BRL/USD exchange rate of 0.2525 on December 31, 2015). Because tax matters in Brazil historically take many years to resolve, it is very difficult to estimate when these matters will be finally resolved. Based on management's judgments, the Company does not expect it will incur a material loss in excess of accrued liabilities.

In February 2015, MacDermid, as plaintiff, settled a litigation with Cookson Group plc, Enthone Inc., Cookson Electronics and David North, as defendants, for $25.0 million. The litigation related to certain corporate activities that occurred between MacDermid and the defendants in 2006 and 2007. On April 3, 2015, the Company received part of the settlement in the amount of $16.0 million, and placed the remainder, net of legal costs, into escrow for future distribution in accordance with the pending litigation provisions of the Business Combination Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of October 10, 2013.

In July 2014, a federal court jury found in favor of MacDermid Printing Solutions LLC in litigation against Cortron, Inc. The court entered a judgment in the amount of approximately $64.7 million. Cortron, Inc. has appealed the verdict. Accordingly, MacDermid Printing Solutions LLC’s ability to collect on the judgment is uncertain. All proceeds from this litigation are subject to the pending litigation provisions of the Business Combination Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of October 10, 2013.

In September 2014, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey rendered a summary judgment in favor of MacDermid in this patent litigation with E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. The Court issued summary judgment rulings in favor of MacDermid finding certain E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company’s patents invalid and not infringed. These rulings summarily find against E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company on all of the patent claims asserted by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company in this lawsuit. The ruling, however, leaves the counterclaims made by MacDermid against E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company in place. E.I. du Pont de Nemours has appealed the verdict; accordingly, the final judgment remains uncertain. All proceeds from this litigation are subject to the pending litigation provisions of the Business Combination Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of October 10, 2013.