XML 28 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.4.0.3

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Environmental Matters The Company’s refineries are subject to extensive and frequently changing federal, state and local laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, those relating to the discharge of materials into the environment or that otherwise relate to the protection of the environment, waste management and the characteristics and the compositions of fuels. Compliance with existing and anticipated laws and regulations can increase the overall cost of operating the refineries, including remediation, operating costs and capital costs to construct, maintain and upgrade equipment and facilities. In connection with the Paulsboro refinery acquisition, the Company assumed certain environmental remediation obligations. The environmental liability of $12,021 recorded as of March 31, 2016 ($10,367 as of December 31, 2015) represents the present value of expected future costs discounted at a rate of 8.0%. The current portion of the environmental liability is recorded in Accrued expenses and the non-current portion is recorded in Other long-term liabilities. As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, this liability is self-guaranteed by the Company. In connection with the acquisition of the Delaware City assets, Valero Energy Corporation (“Valero”) remains responsible for certain pre-acquisition environmental obligations up to $20,000 and the predecessor to Valero in ownership of the refinery retains other historical obligations. In connection with the acquisition of the Delaware City assets and the Paulsboro refinery, the Company and Valero purchased ten year, $75,000 environmental insurance policies to insure against unknown environmental liabilities at each site. In connection with the Toledo refinery acquisition, Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) (“Sunoco”) remains responsible for environmental remediation for conditions that existed on the closing date for twenty years from March 1, 2011, subject to certain limitations. In connection with the acquisition of the Chalmette refinery, the Company obtained $3,936 in financial assurance (in the form of a surety bond) to cover estimated potential site remediation costs associated with an agreed to Administrative Order of Consent with the EPA. The estimated cost assumes remedial activities will continue for a minimum of 30 years. Further, in connection with the acquisition of the Chalmette refinery, the Company purchased a ten year, $100,000 environmental insurance policy to insure against unknown environmental liabilities at the refinery. In 2010, New York State adopted a Low-Sulfur Heating Oil mandate that, beginning July 1, 2012, requires all heating oil sold in New York State to contain no more than 15 parts per million (“PPM”) sulfur. Since July 1, 2012, other states in the Northeast market began requiring heating oil sold in their state to contain no more than 15 PPM sulfur. Currently, six Northeastern states require heating oil with 15 PPM or less sulfur. By July 1, 2016, two more states are expected to adopt this requirement and by July 1, 2018 most of the remaining Northeastern states (except for Pennsylvania and New Hampshire) will require heating oil with 15 PPM or less sulfur. All of the heating oil the Company currently produces meets these specifications. The mandate and other requirements do not currently have a material impact on the Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The EPA issued the final Tier 3 Gasoline standards on March 3, 2014 under the Clean Air Act. This final rule establishes more stringent vehicle emission standards and further reduces the sulfur content of gasoline starting in January of 2017. The new standard is set at 10 PPM sulfur in gasoline on an annual average basis starting January 1, 2017, with a credit trading program to provide compliance flexibility. The EPA responded to industry comments on the proposed rule and maintained the per gallon sulfur cap on gasoline at the existing 80 PPM cap. The standards set by the new rule are not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The EPA was required to release the final annual standards for the Reformulated Fuels Standard (“RFS”) for 2014 no later than Nov 29, 2013 and for 2015 no later than Nov 29, 2014. The EPA did not meet these requirements but did release proposed standards for 2014. The EPA did not finalize this proposal in 2014. The EPA published the final 2014-2016 Renewable standards late in 2015. The EPA essentially set the standards for 2014 and 2015 at the estimated actual renewable fuel used in each year given they were for the most part regulating activities that had already occurred. In setting the 2016 standards the EPA recognized the E10 blend wall and used the general waiver authority to set the 2016 renewable fuel requirement lower than the original requirements stated in the Energy Independence Security Act (EISA). These new standards are being challenged by both renewable fuel producers and obligated parties in legal actions. The courts are attempting to consolidate some of these challenges. It appears unlikely the courts will be able resolve these issues before EPA releases the final 2017 standards late in 2016 assuming they stay on schedule. The Company is currently evaluating the final standards and they may have a material impact on the Company's cost of compliance with RFS 2. The EPA published a Final Rule to the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) Section 316(b) in August 2014 regarding cooling water intake structures, which includes requirements for petroleum refineries. The purpose of this rule is to prevent fish from being trapped against cooling water intake screens (impingement) and to prevent fish from being drawn through cooling water systems (entrainment). Facilities will be required to implement Best Technology Available (BTA) as soon as possible, but state agencies have the discretion to establish implementation time lines. The Company continues to evaluate the impact of this regulation, and at this time does not anticipate it having a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In addition, on December 1, 2015 the EPA finalized revisions to an existing air regulation concerning Maximum Achievable Control Technologies (“MACT”) for Petroleum Refineries. The regulation requires additional continuous monitoring systems for eligible process safety valves relieving to atmosphere, minimum flare gas heat (Btu) content, and delayed coke drum vent controls to be installed by January 30, 2019. In addition, a program for ambient fence line monitoring for benzene will need to be implemented by January 30, 2018. The Company is currently evaluating the final standards to evaluate the impact of this regulation, and at this time does not anticipate it will have a material impact on the Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In late 2015, the EPA initiated enforcement proceedings against companies it believes produced invalid RINs. We purchased RINs to satisfy a portion of our obligations under the Renewable Fuels Standard program for calendar year 2012 and had purchased some RINs the EPA considered invalid. We continue to purchase RINs to satisfy our obligations under the RFS program, and on April 11, 2016, PBF Holding Company LLC was notified by the EPA that the EPA’s records indicated that PBF Holding used potentially invalid RINs generated by one of the companies. The EPA directed PBF Holding to resubmit reports to remove the potentially invalid RINs and to replace the invalid RINs with valid RINs with the same D Code. We are in the process of determining whether any of those RINs are invalid. We understand the EPA continues to investigate invalid RINs. While we do not know what actions the EPA will take, or penalties it will impose with respect to these identified RINs or any other RINs we have purchased that the EPA may identify as being invalid, at this time, we do not expect any such action or penalties would have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The Company is also currently subject to certain other existing environmental claims and proceedings. The Company believes that there is only a remote possibility that future costs related to any of these other known contingent liability exposures would have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows. PBF LLC Limited Liability Company Agreement The holders of limited liability company interests in PBF LLC, including PBF Energy, generally have to include for purposes of calculating their U.S. federal, state and local income taxes their share of any taxable income of PBF LLC, regardless of whether such holders receive cash distributions from PBF LLC. PBF Energy ultimately may not receive cash distributions from PBF LLC equal to its share of such taxable income or even equal to the actual tax due with respect to that income. For example, PBF LLC is required to include in taxable income PBF LLC’s allocable share of PBFX’s taxable income and gains (such share to be determined pursuant to the partnership agreement of PBFX), regardless of the amount of cash distributions received by PBF LLC from PBFX, and such taxable income and gains will flow-through to PBF Energy to the extent of its allocable share of the taxable income of PBF LLC. As a result, at certain times, the amount of cash otherwise ultimately available to PBF Energy on account of its indirect interest in PBFX may not be sufficient for PBF Energy to pay the amount of taxes it will owe on account of its indirect interests in PBFX. Taxable income of PBF LLC generally is allocated to the holders of PBF LLC units (including PBF Energy) pro-rata in accordance with their respective share of the net profits and net losses of PBF LLC. In general, PBF LLC is required to make periodic tax distributions to the members of PBF LLC, including PBF Energy, pro-rata in accordance with their respective percentage interests for such period (as determined under the amended and restated limited liability company agreement of PBF LLC), subject to available cash and applicable law and contractual restrictions (including pursuant to our debt instruments) and based on certain assumptions. Generally, these tax distributions are required to be in an amount equal to our estimate of the taxable income of PBF LLC for the year multiplied by an assumed tax rate equal to the highest effective marginal combined U.S. federal, state and local income tax rate prescribed for an individual or corporate resident in New York, New York (taking into account the nondeductibility of certain expenses). If, with respect to any given calendar year, the aggregate periodic tax distributions were less than the actual taxable income of PBF LLC multiplied by the assumed tax rate, PBF LLC is required to make a “true up” tax distribution, no later than March 15 of the following year, equal to such difference, subject to the available cash and borrowings of PBF LLC. PBF LLC obtains funding to pay its tax distributions by causing PBF Holding to distribute cash to PBF LLC and from distributions it receives from PBFX. Tax Receivable Agreement PBF Energy entered into a tax receivable agreement with the PBF LLC Series A and PBF LLC Series B Unit holders (the “Tax Receivable Agreement”) that provides for the payment by PBF Energy to such persons of an amount equal to 85% of the amount of the benefits, if any, that PBF Energy is deemed to realize as a result of (i) increases in tax basis, as described below, and (ii) certain other tax benefits related to entering into the Tax Receivable Agreement, including tax benefits attributable to payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement. For purposes of the Tax Receivable Agreement, the benefits deemed realized by PBF Energy will be computed by comparing the actual income tax liability of PBF Energy (calculated with certain assumptions) to the amount of such taxes that PBF Energy would have been required to pay had there been no increase to the tax basis of the assets of PBF LLC as a result of purchases or exchanges of PBF LLC Series A Units for shares of PBF Energy's Class A common stock and had PBF Energy not entered into the Tax Receivable Agreement. The term of the Tax Receivable Agreement will continue until all such tax benefits have been utilized or expired unless: (i) PBF Energy exercises its right to terminate the Tax Receivable Agreement, (ii) PBF Energy breaches any of its material obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement or (iii) certain changes of control occur, in which case all obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement will generally be accelerated and due as calculated under certain assumptions. The payment obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement are obligations of PBF Energy and not of PBF LLC, PBF Holding or PBFX. In general, PBF Energy expects to obtain funding for these annual payments from PBF LLC, primarily through tax distributions, which PBF LLC makes on a pro-rata basis to its owners. Such owners include PBF Energy, which holds a 95.2% interest in PBF LLC as of March 31, 2016 (95.1% as of December 31, 2015). PBF LLC obtains funding to pay its tax distributions by causing PBF Holding to distribute cash to PBF LLC and from distributions it receives from PBFX. As of March 31, 2016, the Company has recognized a liability for the tax receivable agreement of $661,418 ($661,418 as of December 31, 2015) reflecting the estimate of the undiscounted amounts that the Company expects to pay under the agreement.

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://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=51674963&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration