Commitments and contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and contingencies	Commitments and contingencies Environmental Contingencies Based upon all available information, we believe our current environmental liabilities do not have, and are not likely to have, a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. Because of the issues and uncertainties described below and the inability to predict the requirements of future environmental laws, there can be no assurance that future capital expenditures and costs for environmental compliance at currently or formerly owned or operated properties will not result in liabilities which may have a material adverse effect. It is our policy to accrue for costs associated with environmental assessments and remedial efforts when it becomes probable that a liability has been incurred and the costs can be reasonably estimated. The aggregate environmental-related accrued liabilities were $1,396 and $906 at June 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. All accrued amounts have been recorded without giving effect to any possible future recoveries. With respect to costs for ongoing environmental compliance, including maintenance and monitoring, such costs are expensed as incurred. Century Aluminum of West Virginia ("CAWV") continues to perform remedial measures at our Ravenswood West Virginia facility pursuant to an order issued by the EPA in 1994 (the “3008(h) Order”). CAWV also conducted a RCRA facility investigation (“RFI”) under the 3008(h) Order evaluating other areas at Ravenswood that may have contamination requiring remediation. The RFI has been approved by appropriate agencies. CAWV has completed interim remediation measures at two sites identified in the RFI, and we believe no further remediation will be required. A Corrective Measures Study, which formally documents the conclusion of these activities, has been submitted by the EPA and a final order has been completed and signed by the EPA in April 2013. Under the order, CAWV's responsibilities going forward include monitoring specific wells as well as restricting access to certain parts of the site. Prior to our purchase of Hawesville, the EPA issued a final Record of Decision (“ROD”) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”). By agreement, Southwire Company (“Southwire”), the former owner and operator is to perform all obligations under the ROD. CAKY has agreed to operate and maintain the ground water treatment system required under the ROD on behalf of Southwire, and Southwire will reimburse CAKY for any expense that exceeds $400 annually. In July 2006, we were named as a defendant, together with certain affiliates of Alcan Inc., in a lawsuit brought by Alcoa Inc. seeking to determine responsibility for certain environmental indemnity obligations related to the sale of a cast aluminum plate manufacturing facility located in Vernon, California, which we purchased from Alcoa Inc. in December 1998, and sold to Alcan Rolled Products-Ravenswood LLC in July 1999. The complaint also seeks costs and attorney fees. The matter is in a preliminary stage, and we cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this action or estimate a range of possible losses related to this matter at this time. We do not expect that the ultimate costs to resolve this action will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, regardless of the final outcome. Matters relating to the St. Croix Alumina Refining Facility We are a party to an EPA Administrative Order on Consent (the “Order”) pursuant to which other past and present owners of an alumina refining facility at St. Croix, Virgin Islands (the “St. Croix Alumina Refinery”) have agreed to carry out a Hydrocarbon Recovery Plan to remove and manage hydrocarbons floating on groundwater underlying the facility. Pursuant to the Hydrocarbon Recovery Plan, recovered hydrocarbons and groundwater are delivered to the adjacent petroleum refinery where they are received and managed. In connection with the sale of the facility by Lockheed Martin Corporation (“Lockheed”) to one of our affiliates, Virgin Islands Alumina Corporation (“Vialco”), in 1989, Lockheed, Vialco and Century entered into the Lockheed-Vialco Asset Purchase Agreement. The indemnity provisions contained in the Lockheed-Vialco Asset Purchase Agreement allocate responsibility for certain environmental matters. Lockheed has tendered indemnity and defense of the above matter to Vialco. We have likewise tendered indemnity to Lockheed. Through June 30, 2013, we have expended approximately $985 on the Hydrocarbon Recovery Plan. At this time, we are not able to estimate the amount of any future potential payments under this indemnification to comply with the Order, but we do not anticipate that any such amounts will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, regardless of the final outcome. In May 2005, we and Vialco were among several defendants listed in a lawsuit filed by the Commissioner of the Department of Planning and Natural Resources (“DPNR”), in his capacity as Trustee for Natural Resources of the United States Virgin Islands. The complaint alleges damages to natural resources caused by alleged releases from the St. Croix Alumina Refinery and the adjacent petroleum refinery. The primary cause of action is pursuant to the natural resource damage provisions of CERCLA, but various ancillary Territorial law causes of action were included as well. We and Lockheed have each tendered indemnity and defense of the case to the other pursuant to the terms of the Lockheed-Vialco Asset Purchase Agreement. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, costs and attorney fees. In November 2011, the court granted a motion by Century, dismissing Century from the case. Vialco, however, remains a defendant in this case and has asserted factual and affirmative defenses. The parties are currently engaged in the discovery process. As of June 30, 2013, no trial date has been set for the remaining claims. In December 2006, Vialco and the two succeeding owners of the St. Croix Alumina Refinery were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed by the Commissioner of the DPNR. The complaint alleges the defendants failed to take certain actions specified in a Coastal Zone management permit issued to Vialco in October 1994, and alleges violations of territorial water pollution control laws during the various defendants’ periods of ownership. The complaint seeks statutory and other unspecified monetary penalties for the alleged violations. The parties are currently engaged in the discovery process. In May 2009, St. Croix Renaissance Group, L.L.L.P. (“SCRG”) filed a third-party complaint for contribution and other relief against several third-party defendants, including Vialco, relating to a lawsuit filed against SCRG seeking recovery of response costs relating to the aforementioned DPNR CERCLA matter. In February 2011, the court granted a motion by Century, dismissing Century from the case. Vialco, however, remains a defendant in this case. In March 2011, the court granted the remaining defendants’, including Vialco’s, motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case. The plaintiff filed a notice of appeal with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in May 2011. On June 5, 2013, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's ruling to hold that plaintiff's expenditures of funds may be found as recoverable response costs incurred by the government entitling plaintiffs to recover future response costs, but did not rule. Vialco remains the only Century entity in the litigation. At this time, it is not practicable to predict the ultimate outcome of or to estimate a range of possible losses relating to any of the foregoing. In December 2010, Century was among several defendants listed in a lawsuit filed by approximately 2,300 plaintiffs who either worked, resided or owned property in the area downwind from the St. Croix Alumina Refinery. In March 2011, Century was also named a defendant in a nearly identical suit brought by approximately 200 plaintiffs previously named in the aforementioned suit. The plaintiffs in both suits allege damages caused by the presence of red mud and other particulates coming from the alumina facility and are seeking unspecified monetary damages, costs and attorney fees as well as certain injunctive relief. We have tendered indemnity and defense to St. Croix Alumina LLC and Alcoa Alumina & Chemical LLC under the terms of an acquisition agreement relating to the facility and have filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims, but the court has not yet ruled on the motion. Pursuant to the terms of the asset purchase agreement between Vialco and the purchaser of the St. Croix Alumina Refinery in 1995, the purchaser assumed responsibility for all costs and other liabilities associated with the bauxite waste disposal facilities, including pre-closure and post-closure liabilities. At this time, it is not practicable to predict the ultimate outcome of or to estimate a range of possible losses relating to any of the foregoing actions. Legal Contingencies In addition to the foregoing matters, we have pending against us or may be subject to various lawsuits, claims and proceedings related primarily to employment, commercial, environmental, shareholder, safety and health matters. In evaluating whether to accrue for losses associated with legal contingencies, it is our policy to take into consideration factors such as the facts and circumstances asserted, our historical experience with contingencies of a similar nature, the likelihood of our prevailing and the severity of any potential loss. For some matters, no accrual is established because we have assessed our risk of loss to be remote. Where the risk of loss is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, we record an accrual, either on an individual basis or with respect to a group of matters involving similar claims, based on the factors set forth above. We also determine estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses in excess of related accrued liabilities, if any, when we have assessed that a loss is reasonably possible. Based on current knowledge, management has ascertained estimates for losses that are reasonably possible and management does not believe that any reasonably possible outcomes in excess of our accruals, if any, either individually or in aggregate, would be material to our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. We reevaluate and update our assessments and accruals as matters progress over time. We have been named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by our former Chief Executive Officer, Logan Kruger, alleging breach of contract. The lawsuit alleges that Century anticipatorily breached the employment and severance protection agreements between Century and Mr. Kruger and that Century is obligated to make various severance payments in excess of $20,000 to Mr. Kruger under such agreements. In addition, the complaint seeks unspecified damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees. The trial court has transferred the matter to an arbitration panel for resolution. We believe these claims are without merit and intend to defend ourselves against them. The arbitration hearing is scheduled for the third quarter of 2013. In March 2011, the purported stockholder class actions pending against us consolidated as In re: Century Aluminum Company Securities Litigation were dismissed with prejudice by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs in the class actions allege that we improperly accounted for cash flows associated with the termination of certain forward financial sales contracts which accounting allegedly resulted in artificial inflation of our stock price and investor losses. Plaintiffs are seeking rescission of our February 2009 common stock offering, unspecified compensatory damages, including interest thereon, costs and expenses and attorneys’ fees. In March 2011, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the order and judgment entered by the trial court. In January 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (the "Ninth Circuit") affirmed the trial court's decision. Plaintiffs filed a motion for rehearing or hearing en banc, which the Ninth Circuit denied in April 2013. In February 2010, our subsidiary, CAWV, was named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by Ingram Barge Company ("Ingram") in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The lawsuit alleges that CAWV breached two barging contracts with Ingram by failing to consume a specified amount of barging services as a result of the curtailment of operations at Ravenswood. In May 2013, the parties entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which CAWV agreed to pay Ingram $1,575 and made certain commitments to Ingram with respect to future contracts. In April 2013, our subsidiary Nordural Grundartangi, received a ruling in an arbitration case involving two of its power suppliers, HS Orka and Orkuveita Reykjavikur. Under the arbitration award, Nordural Grundartangi is restricted from reducing power under its existing power contracts with HS Orka and Orkuveita Reykjavikur in order to take power under a separate power contract with Orkuveita Reykjavikur originally intended to be used at Helguvik. Nordural Grundartangi remains entitled to take power under the Orkuveita Reykjavikur Helguvik contract to the extent that its power needs exceed the amount of power provided under its existing power contracts. As part of the award, the tribunal awarded HS Orka damages and Nordural Grundartangi paid $1,470 to HS Orka in full satisfaction of such award. The tribunal ordered each party to pay its own legal fees and costs. Orkuveita Reykjavikur has subsequently brought a claim for damages against Nordural Grundartangi based on the arbitration ruling. Nordural Grundartangi believes these claims are without merit and intends to defend itself against them. Ravenswood Retiree Medical Benefits changes In November 2009, CAWV filed a class action complaint for declaratory judgment against the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union (“USWA”), the USWA’s local union, and four CAWV retirees, individually and as class representatives, seeking a declaration of CAWV’s rights to modify/terminate retiree medical benefits. Later in November 2009, the USWA and representatives of a retiree class filed a separate suit against CAWV, Century Aluminum Company, Century Aluminum Master Welfare Benefit Plan, and various John Does with respect to the foregoing. These actions, entitled Dewhurst, et al. v. Century Aluminum Co., et al., and Century Aluminum of West Virginia, Inc. v. United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial & Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO/CLC, et al., have been consolidated and venue has been set in the District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. In January 2010, the USWA filed a motion for preliminary injunction to prevent us from implementing the foregoing changes while these lawsuits are pending, which was dismissed by the trial court. In August 2011, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the District Court’s dismissal of the USWA’s motion for preliminary injunction. The case is currently in the discovery stage. Ravenswood Pension Plans In June 2011, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (the “PBGC”) informed us that it believed a “cessation of operations” under ERISA had occurred at our Ravenswood facility as a result of the curtailment of operations at the facility. Although we disagree that a “cessation of operations” occurred, CAWV entered into a settlement agreement with the PBGC in April 2013 to resolve the matter. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, CAWV will make additional contributions (above any minimum required contributions) to its defined benefit pension plans totaling approximately $17,400 over the term of the agreement, which runs through 2016. In April 2013, CAWV made the first scheduled contribution pursuant to this agreement of $5,900. Power Commitments Hawesville In August 2012, CAKY issued a 12-month notice to terminate its long-term power supply agreement (the “Hawesville Power Agreement”) with Kenergy, a member cooperative of Big Rivers Electric Corporation (“Big Rivers”). The Hawesville Power Agreement is take-or-pay for Hawesville’s energy requirements at full production. During the 12-month notice period, Century is required to pay a demand charge for power, but is not obligated to continue operating the plant. The Hawesville Power Agreement currently provides sufficient power at cost-based rates for Hawesville’s full production capacity requirements, but, pursuant to the termination notice, the Hawesville Power Agreement will terminate on August 20, 2013. If a new power arrangement is not reached prior to August 20, 2013, the Hawesville plant will have to be curtailed. On April 29, 2013, CAKY announced that it had reached a tentative agreement with Kenergy and Big Rivers on the framework for providing market priced power to the Hawesville smelter. Under the arrangement, the power companies would purchase power on the open market and pass it through to Hawesville at the market price plus additional costs incurred by them. Definitive agreements for the framework have been agreed to by the parties but must still be approved by various third parties, including the Kentucky Public Service Commission (“KPSC”). The definitive agreements have been submitted for approval to the KPSC, which is expected to issue a decision prior to the August 20, 2013 termination of the existing Hawesville Power Agreement. Sebree In January 2013, Sebree issued a 12-month notice to terminate its long-term power supply agreement (the “Sebree Power Agreement”) with Kenergy, a member cooperative of Big Rivers. The Sebree Power Agreement is take-or-pay for Sebree’s energy requirements at full production. During the 12-month notice period, Century is required to pay a demand charge for power, but is not obligated to continue operating the plant. The Sebree Power Agreement currently provides sufficient power at cost-based rates for Sebree’s full production capacity requirements, but, pursuant to the termination notice, the Sebree Power Agreement will terminate on January 31, 2014. If a new power arrangement is not reached prior to January 31, 2014, the Sebree plant will have to be curtailed. We intend to seek a market-based power contract for Sebree similar to the tentative agreement we have reached for Hawesville, but no assurance can be given that we will be able to obtain one. Mt. Holly Mt. Holly has a power purchase agreement (the “Santee Cooper Agreement”) with the South Carolina Public Service Authority (“Santee Cooper”) with a term through December 2015, unless extended. The Santee Cooper Agreement provides adequate power for Mt. Holly’s full production capacity requirements at prices fixed based on published rate schedules (which are subject to change), with adjustments for fuel prices and other items. The Santee Cooper Agreement restricts Mt. Holly’s ability to reduce its power consumption (or the associated payment obligations) below contracted levels and to terminate the agreement, unless, in each case, the LME falls below certain negotiated levels. In 2012, Mt. Holly and Santee Cooper amended the terms of Santee Cooper agreement in order to allow Mt. Holly to receive all or a portion of Mt. Holly's supplemental power requirements from an off-system natural gas-fired power generation facility (the “off-system facility”). The energy charge for supplemental power from the off-system facility is based on the cost of natural gas rather than Santee Cooper's system average fuel costs, which are primarily coal-based. The amendments to the power agreement may provide a benefit to Mt. Holly provided that natural gas costs remain below Santee Cooper's system average fuel costs. The amended power agreement provides that Mt. Holly may continue to receive its supplemental power requirements from the off-system facility through December 31, 2015. Ravenswood CAWV has a power purchase agreement (the “ApCo Agreement”) with the Appalachian Power Company (“ApCo”). CAWV currently purchases a limited amount of power under the ApCo Agreement as necessary to maintain its Ravenswood smelter, which is presently curtailed. Power is supplied under the ApCo Agreement at prices set forth in published tariffs (which are subject to change), with certain adjustments. Grundartangi Nordural Grundartangi ehf has power purchase agreements with HS Orka hf (“HS”), Landsvirkjun and Orkuveita Reykjavikur (“OR”) to provide power to its Grundartangi smelter. These power purchase agreements, which will expire on various dates from 2019 through 2036, provide power at LME-based variable rates. Each power purchase agreement contains take-or-pay obligations with respect to a significant percentage of the total committed and available power under such agreement. In the fourth quarter of 2011, an additional 47.5 MW of power became available under a power purchase agreement with OR. This power can be used at either Grundartangi or Helguvik and a portion is currently being utilized at Grundartangi. In June 2012, Nordural Grundartangi entered into a new supplemental power contract with Landsvirkjun. The supplemental power contract, which will expire in October 2029 (or upon the occurrence of certain earlier events), will provide Nordural Grundartangi with supplemental power, as Nordural Grundartangi may request from time to time, at LME-based variable rates. Nordural Grundartangi has agreed to make certain prepayments to Landsvirkjun in connection with the contract, which will reduce the price paid for power at the time of consumption. Helguvik Nordural Helguvik has power purchase agreements with HS and OR to provide power to the Helguvik project. These power purchase agreements provide power at LME-based variable rates and contain take-or-pay obligations with respect to a significant percentage of the total committed and available power under such agreements. The first stage of power under the OR power purchase agreement (approximately 47.5 MW) became available in the fourth quarter of 2011 and a portion of that power is currently being utilized at Grundartangi. No other power is currently available under either power purchase agreement. HS (with respect to all phases) and OR (with respect to all phases other than the first phase) have alleged that certain conditions to the delivery of power under the power purchase agreements have not been satisfied. Nordural Helguvik is in discussion with both HS and OR with respect to such conditions. Other Commitments and Contingencies Labor Commitments Approximately 75% of our U.S. based work force is represented by the USWA. CAKY’s Hawesville plant employees represented by the USWA are under a collective bargaining agreement which expires on March 31, 2015. The Sebree plant employees represented by the USWA are under a collective bargaining agreement that expires on September 30, 2014. In April 2010, Nordural Grundartangi ehf entered into a new labor agreement with the five labor unions representing approximately 84% of Grundartangi’s work force. The labor agreement expires on December 31, 2014. The labor agreement for CAWV’s Ravenswood plant employees represented by the USWA expired on August 31, 2010. Other Commitments The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the related Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act were enacted in March 2010. The Health Care Acts extend health care coverage to many uninsured individuals and expands coverage to those already insured. The Health Care Acts contain provisions which could impact our retiree medical benefits in future periods. However, the extent of that impact, if any, cannot be determined until regulations are promulgated under the Health Care Acts and additional interpretations of the Health Care Acts become available. We are continuing to assess the potential impacts that this legislation may have on our future results of operations, cash flows and financial position related to our health care benefits and other postretirement benefit obligations. Among other things, the Health Care Acts eliminated the tax deductibility of the Medicare Part D subsidy for companies that provide qualifying prescription drug coverage to retirees effective for years beginning after December 31, 2012.

Commitments and contingencies

Environmental Contingencies

Based upon all available information, we believe our current environmental liabilities do not have, and are not likely to have, a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. Because of the issues and uncertainties described below and the inability to predict the requirements of future environmental laws, there can be no assurance that future capital expenditures and costs for environmental compliance at currently or formerly owned or operated properties will not result in liabilities which may have a material adverse effect.

It is our policy to accrue for costs associated with environmental assessments and remedial efforts when it becomes probable that a liability has been incurred and the costs can be reasonably estimated. The aggregate environmental-related accrued liabilities were $1,396 and $906 at June 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. All accrued amounts have been recorded without giving effect to any possible future recoveries. With respect to costs for ongoing environmental compliance, including maintenance and monitoring, such costs are expensed as incurred.

Century Aluminum of West Virginia ("CAWV") continues to perform remedial measures at our Ravenswood West Virginia facility pursuant to an order issued by the EPA in 1994 (the “3008(h) Order”). CAWV also conducted a RCRA facility investigation (“RFI”) under the 3008(h) Order evaluating other areas at Ravenswood that may have contamination requiring remediation. The RFI has been approved by appropriate agencies. CAWV has completed interim remediation measures at two sites identified in the RFI, and we believe no further remediation will be required. A Corrective Measures Study, which formally documents the conclusion of these activities, has been submitted by the EPA and a final order has been completed and signed by the EPA in April 2013. Under the order, CAWV's responsibilities going forward include monitoring specific wells as well as restricting access to certain parts of the site.

Prior to our purchase of Hawesville, the EPA issued a final Record of Decision (“ROD”) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”). By agreement, Southwire Company (“Southwire”), the former owner and operator is to perform all obligations under the ROD. CAKY has agreed to operate and maintain the ground water treatment system required under the ROD on behalf of Southwire, and Southwire will reimburse CAKY for any expense that exceeds $400 annually.

In July 2006, we were named as a defendant, together with certain affiliates of Alcan Inc., in a lawsuit brought by Alcoa Inc. seeking to determine responsibility for certain environmental indemnity obligations related to the sale of a cast aluminum plate manufacturing facility located in Vernon, California, which we purchased from Alcoa Inc. in December 1998, and sold to Alcan Rolled Products-Ravenswood LLC in July 1999. The complaint also seeks costs and attorney fees. The matter is in a preliminary stage, and we cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this action or estimate a range of possible losses related to this matter at this time. We do not expect that the ultimate costs to resolve this action will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, regardless of the final outcome.

Matters relating to the St. Croix Alumina Refining Facility

We are a party to an EPA Administrative Order on Consent (the “Order”) pursuant to which other past and present owners of an alumina refining facility at St. Croix, Virgin Islands (the “St. Croix Alumina Refinery”) have agreed to carry out a Hydrocarbon Recovery Plan to remove and manage hydrocarbons floating on groundwater underlying the facility. Pursuant to the Hydrocarbon Recovery Plan, recovered hydrocarbons and groundwater are delivered to the adjacent petroleum refinery where they are received and managed. In connection with the sale of the facility by Lockheed Martin Corporation (“Lockheed”) to one of our affiliates, Virgin Islands Alumina Corporation (“Vialco”), in 1989, Lockheed, Vialco and Century entered into the Lockheed-Vialco Asset Purchase Agreement. The indemnity provisions contained in the Lockheed-Vialco Asset Purchase Agreement allocate responsibility for certain environmental matters. Lockheed has tendered indemnity and defense of the above matter to Vialco. We have likewise tendered indemnity to Lockheed. Through June 30, 2013, we have expended approximately $985 on the Hydrocarbon Recovery Plan. At this time, we are not able to estimate the amount of any future potential payments under this indemnification to comply with the Order, but we do not anticipate that any such amounts will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, regardless of the final outcome.

In May 2005, we and Vialco were among several defendants listed in a lawsuit filed by the Commissioner of the Department of Planning and Natural Resources (“DPNR”), in his capacity as Trustee for Natural Resources of the United States Virgin Islands. The complaint alleges damages to natural resources caused by alleged releases from the St. Croix Alumina Refinery and the adjacent petroleum refinery. The primary cause of action is pursuant to the natural resource damage provisions of CERCLA, but various ancillary Territorial law causes of action were included as well. We and Lockheed have each tendered indemnity and defense of the case to the other pursuant to the terms of the Lockheed-Vialco Asset Purchase Agreement. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, costs and attorney fees. In November 2011, the court granted a motion by Century, dismissing Century from the case. Vialco, however, remains a defendant in this case and has asserted factual and affirmative defenses. The parties are currently engaged in the discovery process. As of June 30, 2013, no trial date has been set for the remaining claims.

In December 2006, Vialco and the two succeeding owners of the St. Croix Alumina Refinery were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed by the Commissioner of the DPNR. The complaint alleges the defendants failed to take certain actions specified in a Coastal Zone management permit issued to Vialco in October 1994, and alleges violations of territorial water pollution control laws during the various defendants’ periods of ownership. The complaint seeks statutory and other unspecified monetary penalties for the alleged violations. The parties are currently engaged in the discovery process.

In May 2009, St. Croix Renaissance Group, L.L.L.P. (“SCRG”) filed a third-party complaint for contribution and other relief against several third-party defendants, including Vialco, relating to a lawsuit filed against SCRG seeking recovery of response costs relating to the aforementioned DPNR CERCLA matter. In February 2011, the court granted a motion by Century, dismissing Century from the case. Vialco, however, remains a defendant in this case. In March 2011, the court granted the remaining defendants’, including Vialco’s, motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case. The plaintiff filed a notice of appeal with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in May 2011. On June 5, 2013, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's ruling to hold that plaintiff's expenditures of funds may be found as recoverable response costs incurred by the government entitling plaintiffs to recover future response costs, but did not rule. Vialco remains the only Century entity in the litigation. At this time, it is not practicable to predict the ultimate outcome of or to estimate a range of possible losses relating to any of the foregoing.

In December 2010, Century was among several defendants listed in a lawsuit filed by approximately 2,300 plaintiffs who either worked, resided or owned property in the area downwind from the St. Croix Alumina Refinery. In March 2011, Century was also named a defendant in a nearly identical suit brought by approximately 200 plaintiffs previously named in the aforementioned suit. The plaintiffs in both suits allege damages caused by the presence of red mud and other particulates coming from the alumina facility and are seeking unspecified monetary damages, costs and attorney fees as well as certain injunctive relief. We have tendered indemnity and defense to St. Croix Alumina LLC and Alcoa Alumina & Chemical LLC under the terms of an acquisition agreement relating to the facility and have filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims, but the court has not yet ruled on the motion.

Pursuant to the terms of the asset purchase agreement between Vialco and the purchaser of the St. Croix Alumina Refinery in 1995, the purchaser assumed responsibility for all costs and other liabilities associated with the bauxite waste disposal facilities, including pre-closure and post-closure liabilities. At this time, it is not practicable to predict the ultimate outcome of or to estimate a range of possible losses relating to any of the foregoing actions.

Legal Contingencies

In addition to the foregoing matters, we have pending against us or may be subject to various lawsuits, claims and proceedings related primarily to employment, commercial, environmental, shareholder, safety and health matters.

In evaluating whether to accrue for losses associated with legal contingencies, it is our policy to take into consideration factors such as the facts and circumstances asserted, our historical experience with contingencies of a similar nature, the likelihood of our prevailing and the severity of any potential loss. For some matters, no accrual is established because we have assessed our risk of loss to be remote. Where the risk of loss is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, we record an accrual, either on an individual basis or with respect to a group of matters involving similar claims, based on the factors set forth above.

We also determine estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses in excess of related accrued liabilities, if any, when we have assessed that a loss is reasonably possible. Based on current knowledge, management has ascertained estimates for losses that are reasonably possible and management does not believe that any reasonably possible outcomes in excess of our accruals, if any, either individually or in aggregate, would be material to our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. We reevaluate and update our assessments and accruals as matters progress over time.

We have been named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by our former Chief Executive Officer, Logan Kruger, alleging breach of contract. The lawsuit alleges that Century anticipatorily breached the employment and severance protection agreements between Century and Mr. Kruger and that Century is obligated to make various severance payments in excess of $20,000 to Mr. Kruger under such agreements. In addition, the complaint seeks unspecified damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees. The trial court has transferred the matter to an arbitration panel for resolution. We believe these claims are without merit and intend to defend ourselves against them. The arbitration hearing is scheduled for the third quarter of 2013.

In March 2011, the purported stockholder class actions pending against us consolidated as In re: Century Aluminum Company Securities Litigation were dismissed with prejudice by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs in the class actions allege that we improperly accounted for cash flows associated with the termination of certain forward financial sales contracts which accounting allegedly resulted in artificial inflation of our stock price and investor losses. Plaintiffs are seeking rescission of our February 2009 common stock offering, unspecified compensatory damages, including interest thereon, costs and expenses and attorneys’ fees. In March 2011, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the order and judgment entered by the trial court. In January 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (the "Ninth Circuit") affirmed the trial court's decision. Plaintiffs filed a motion for rehearing or hearing en banc, which the Ninth Circuit denied in April 2013.

In February 2010, our subsidiary, CAWV, was named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by Ingram Barge Company ("Ingram") in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The lawsuit alleges that CAWV breached two barging contracts with Ingram by failing to consume a specified amount of barging services as a result of the curtailment of operations at Ravenswood. In May 2013, the parties entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which CAWV agreed to pay Ingram $1,575 and made certain commitments to Ingram with respect to future contracts.

In April 2013, our subsidiary Nordural Grundartangi, received a ruling in an arbitration case involving two of its power suppliers, HS Orka and Orkuveita Reykjavikur. Under the arbitration award, Nordural Grundartangi is restricted from reducing power under its existing power contracts with HS Orka and Orkuveita Reykjavikur in order to take power under a separate power contract with Orkuveita Reykjavikur originally intended to be used at Helguvik. Nordural Grundartangi remains entitled to take power under the Orkuveita Reykjavikur Helguvik contract to the extent that its power needs exceed the amount of power provided under its existing power contracts. As part of the award, the tribunal awarded HS Orka damages and Nordural Grundartangi paid $1,470 to HS Orka in full satisfaction of such award. The tribunal ordered each party to pay its own legal fees and costs. Orkuveita Reykjavikur has subsequently brought a claim for damages against Nordural Grundartangi based on the arbitration ruling. Nordural Grundartangi believes these claims are without merit and intends to defend itself against them.

Ravenswood Retiree Medical Benefits changes

In November 2009, CAWV filed a class action complaint for declaratory judgment against the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union (“USWA”), the USWA’s local union, and four CAWV retirees, individually and as class representatives, seeking a declaration of CAWV’s rights to modify/terminate retiree medical benefits. Later in November 2009, the USWA and representatives of a retiree class filed a separate suit against CAWV, Century Aluminum Company, Century Aluminum Master Welfare Benefit Plan, and various John Does with respect to the foregoing. These actions, entitled Dewhurst, et al. v. Century Aluminum Co., et al., and Century Aluminum of West Virginia, Inc. v. United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial & Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO/CLC, et al., have been consolidated and venue has been set in the District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

In January 2010, the USWA filed a motion for preliminary injunction to prevent us from implementing the foregoing changes while these lawsuits are pending, which was dismissed by the trial court. In August 2011, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the District Court’s dismissal of the USWA’s motion for preliminary injunction. The case is currently in the discovery stage.

Ravenswood Pension Plans

In June 2011, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (the “PBGC”) informed us that it believed a “cessation of operations” under ERISA had occurred at our Ravenswood facility as a result of the curtailment of operations at the facility. Although we disagree that a “cessation of operations” occurred, CAWV entered into a settlement agreement with the PBGC in April 2013 to resolve the matter. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, CAWV will make additional contributions (above any minimum required contributions) to its defined benefit pension plans totaling approximately $17,400 over the term of the agreement, which runs through 2016. In April 2013, CAWV made the first scheduled contribution pursuant to this agreement of $5,900.

Power Commitments

Hawesville

In August 2012, CAKY issued a 12-month notice to terminate its long-term power supply agreement (the “Hawesville Power Agreement”) with Kenergy, a member cooperative of Big Rivers Electric Corporation (“Big Rivers”). The Hawesville Power Agreement is take-or-pay for Hawesville’s energy requirements at full production. During the 12-month notice period, Century is required to pay a demand charge for power, but is not obligated to continue operating the plant. The Hawesville Power Agreement currently provides sufficient power at cost-based rates for Hawesville’s full production capacity requirements, but, pursuant to the termination notice, the Hawesville Power Agreement will terminate on August 20, 2013. If a new power arrangement is not reached prior to August 20, 2013, the Hawesville plant will have to be curtailed.

On April 29, 2013, CAKY announced that it had reached a tentative agreement with Kenergy and Big Rivers on the framework for providing market priced power to the Hawesville smelter. Under the arrangement, the power companies would purchase power on the open market and pass it through to Hawesville at the market price plus additional costs incurred by them. Definitive agreements for the framework have been agreed to by the parties but must still be approved by various third parties, including the Kentucky Public Service Commission (“KPSC”). The definitive agreements have been submitted for approval to the KPSC, which is expected to issue a decision prior to the August 20, 2013 termination of the existing Hawesville Power Agreement.

Sebree

In January 2013, Sebree issued a 12-month notice to terminate its long-term power supply agreement (the “Sebree Power Agreement”) with Kenergy, a member cooperative of Big Rivers. The Sebree Power Agreement is take-or-pay for Sebree’s energy requirements at full production. During the 12-month notice period, Century is required to pay a demand charge for power, but is not obligated to continue operating the plant. The Sebree Power Agreement currently provides sufficient power at cost-based rates for Sebree’s full production capacity requirements, but, pursuant to the termination notice, the Sebree Power Agreement will terminate on January 31, 2014. If a new power arrangement is not reached prior to January 31, 2014, the Sebree plant will have to be curtailed.

We intend to seek a market-based power contract for Sebree similar to the tentative agreement we have reached for Hawesville, but no assurance can be given that we will be able to obtain one.

Mt. Holly

Mt. Holly has a power purchase agreement (the “Santee Cooper Agreement”) with the South Carolina Public Service Authority (“Santee Cooper”) with a term through December 2015, unless extended. The Santee Cooper Agreement provides adequate power for Mt. Holly’s full production capacity requirements at prices fixed based on published rate schedules (which are subject to change), with adjustments for fuel prices and other items. The Santee Cooper Agreement restricts Mt. Holly’s ability to reduce its power consumption (or the associated payment obligations) below contracted levels and to terminate the agreement, unless, in each case, the LME falls below certain negotiated levels.

In 2012, Mt. Holly and Santee Cooper amended the terms of Santee Cooper agreement in order to allow Mt. Holly to receive all or a portion of Mt. Holly's supplemental power requirements from an off-system natural gas-fired power generation facility (the “off-system facility”). The energy charge for supplemental power from the off-system facility is based on the cost of natural gas rather than Santee Cooper's system average fuel costs, which are primarily coal-based. The amendments to the power agreement may provide a benefit to Mt. Holly provided that natural gas costs remain below Santee Cooper's system average fuel costs. The amended power agreement provides that Mt. Holly may continue to receive its supplemental power requirements from the off-system facility through December 31, 2015.

Ravenswood

CAWV has a power purchase agreement (the “ApCo Agreement”) with the Appalachian Power Company (“ApCo”). CAWV currently purchases a limited amount of power under the ApCo Agreement as necessary to maintain its Ravenswood smelter, which is presently curtailed. Power is supplied under the ApCo Agreement at prices set forth in published tariffs (which are subject to change), with certain adjustments.

Grundartangi

Nordural Grundartangi ehf has power purchase agreements with HS Orka hf (“HS”), Landsvirkjun and Orkuveita Reykjavikur (“OR”) to provide power to its Grundartangi smelter. These power purchase agreements, which will expire on various dates from 2019 through 2036, provide power at LME-based variable rates. Each power purchase agreement contains take-or-pay obligations with respect to a significant percentage of the total committed and available power under such agreement.

In the fourth quarter of 2011, an additional 47.5 MW of power became available under a power purchase agreement with OR. This power can be used at either Grundartangi or Helguvik and a portion is currently being utilized at Grundartangi.

In June 2012, Nordural Grundartangi entered into a new supplemental power contract with Landsvirkjun. The supplemental power contract, which will expire in October 2029 (or upon the occurrence of certain earlier events), will provide Nordural Grundartangi with supplemental power, as Nordural Grundartangi may request from time to time, at LME-based variable rates. Nordural Grundartangi has agreed to make certain prepayments to Landsvirkjun in connection with the contract, which will reduce the price paid for power at the time of consumption.

Helguvik

Nordural Helguvik has power purchase agreements with HS and OR to provide power to the Helguvik project. These power purchase agreements provide power at LME-based variable rates and contain take-or-pay obligations with respect to a significant percentage of the total committed and available power under such agreements. The first stage of power under the OR power purchase agreement (approximately 47.5 MW) became available in the fourth quarter of 2011 and a portion of that power is currently being utilized at Grundartangi. No other power is currently available under either power purchase agreement. HS (with respect to all phases) and OR (with respect to all phases other than the first phase) have alleged that certain conditions to the delivery of power under the power purchase agreements have not been satisfied. Nordural Helguvik is in discussion with both HS and OR with respect to such conditions.

Other Commitments and Contingencies

Labor Commitments

Approximately 75% of our U.S. based work force is represented by the USWA. CAKY’s Hawesville plant employees represented by the USWA are under a collective bargaining agreement which expires on March 31, 2015. The Sebree plant employees represented by the USWA are under a collective bargaining agreement that expires on September 30, 2014.

In April 2010, Nordural Grundartangi ehf entered into a new labor agreement with the five labor unions representing approximately 84% of Grundartangi’s work force. The labor agreement expires on December 31, 2014.

The labor agreement for CAWV’s Ravenswood plant employees represented by the USWA expired on August 31, 2010.

Other Commitments

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the related Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act were enacted in March 2010. The Health Care Acts extend health care coverage to many uninsured individuals and expands coverage to those already insured. The Health Care Acts contain provisions which could impact our retiree medical benefits in future periods. However, the extent of that impact, if any, cannot be determined until regulations are promulgated under the Health Care Acts and additional interpretations of the Health Care Acts become available. We are continuing to assess the potential impacts that this legislation may have on our future results of operations, cash flows and financial position related to our health care benefits and other postretirement benefit obligations. Among other things, the Health Care Acts eliminated the tax deductibility of the Medicare Part D subsidy for companies that provide qualifying prescription drug coverage to retirees effective for years beginning after December 31, 2012.