XML 39 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.8.0.1

Litigation | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2017
Litigation [Abstract] |
Litigation | Note 15. Litigation The Company is party to a number of lawsuits arising in the normal course of our business. On May 8, 2013, Armada (Singapore) PTE Limited, an ocean shipping company now in bankruptcy ("Armada") filed a case in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against AMCOL and certain of its subsidiaries ( Armada (Singapore) PTE Limited v. AMCOL International Corp., et al., United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois , Case No. 13 CV 3455). We acquired AMCOL and its subsidiaries on May 9, 2014. A co-defendant is Ashapura Minechem Limited, a company located in Mumbai, India (“AML”). During the relevant time period, 2008-2010, AMCOL owned slightly over 20% of the outstanding AML stock through December 2009, after which it owned approximately 19%. In 2008, AML entered into two contracts of affreightment (“COA”) with Armada for over 60 ship loads of bauxite from India to China. After one shipment, AML made no further shipments, which led Armada to file arbitrations in London against AML, one for each COA. AML did not appear in the London arbitrations and default awards of approximately $70 million were entered. The litigation filed by Armada against AMCOL and AML relates to these awards, which AML has not paid. The substance of the allegations by Armada is that AML and AMCOL engaged in illegal conduct to thwart Armada’s efforts to collect the arbitration award. AMCOL won a motion for judgement on the pleadings that resulted in the successful dismissal of all but one count in the complaint, including a dismissal of all counts alleging violations of Illinois’ Fraudulent Transfer laws and federal RICO violations. Armada has filed an appeal of the dismissal and the district court proceedings are stayed pending the appeal. We have accrued an estimate of potential damages for the Armada lawsuit, the amount of which was not material to our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Certain of the Company's subsidiaries are among numerous defendants in a number of cases seeking damages for exposure to silica or to asbestos containing materials. The Company currently has three pending silica cases and 20 pending asbestos cases. To date, 1,493 silica cases and 53 asbestos cases have been dismissed, not including any lawsuits against AMCOL or American Colloid Company dismissed prior to our acquisition of AMCOL. Seven new asbestos cases were filed in 2017, including one that was previously reported on the Company’s 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Four asbestos cases were dismissed during the period. No silica cases were dismissed during the period. Most of these claims do not provide adequate information to assess their merits, the likelihood that the Company will be found liable, or the magnitude of such liability, if any. Additional claims of this nature may be made against the Company or its subsidiaries. At this time management anticipates that the amount of the Company's liability, if any, and the cost of defending such claims, will not have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations. The Company has settled only one silica lawsuit, for a nominal amount, and no asbestos lawsuits to date (not including any that may have been settled by AMCOL prior to completion of the acquisition). We are unable to state an amount or range of amounts claimed in any of the lawsuits because state court pleading practices do not require identifying the amount of the claimed damage. The aggregate cost to the Company for the legal defense of these cases since inception continues to be insignificant. The majority of the costs of defense for these cases, excluding cases against AMCOL or American Colloid, are reimbursed by Pfizer Inc. pursuant to the terms of certain agreements entered into in connection with the Company's initial public offering in 1992. The Company is entitled to indemnification, pursuant to agreement, for sales prior to the initial public offering. Of the 20 pending asbestos cases, 13 of the non-AMCOL cases are subject to indemnification, in whole or in part, because the plaintiffs claim liability based on sales of products that occurred either entirely before the initial public offering, or both before and after the initial public offering. In the six remaining non-AMCOL cases, the plaintiffs have not alleged dates of exposure. The remaining case is an AMCOL case, which makes no allegation with respect to periods of exposure. Our experience has been that the Company is not liable to plaintiffs in any of these lawsuits and the Company does not expect to pay any settlements or jury verdicts in these lawsuits. Environmental Matters On April 9, 2003, the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection issued an administrative consent order relating to our Canaan, Connecticut, plant where both our Refractories segment and Specialty Minerals segment have operations. We agreed to the order, which includes provisions requiring investigation and remediation of contamination associated with historic use of polychlorinated biphenyls ("PCBs") and mercury at a portion of the site. We have completed the required investigations and submitted several reports characterizing the contamination and assessing site-specific risks. We are awaiting regulators’ approval of the risk assessment report, which will form the basis for a proposal by the Company concerning eventual remediation. We believe that the most likely form of overall site remediation will be to leave the existing contamination in place (with some limited soil removal), encapsulate it, and monitor the effectiveness of the encapsulation. We anticipate that a substantial portion of the remediation cost will be borne by the United States based on its involvement at the site from 1942 – 1964, as historic documentation indicates that PCBs and mercury were first used at the facility at a time of U.S. government ownership for production of materials needed by the military. Pursuant to a Consent Decree entered on October 24, 2014, the United States paid the Company $2.3 million in the 4th quarter of 2014 to resolve the Company’s claim for response costs for investigation and initial remediation activities at this facility through October 24, 2014. Contribution by the United States to any future costs of investigation or additional remediation has, by agreement, been left unresolved. Though the cost of the likely remediation remains uncertain pending completion of the phased remediation decision process, we have estimated that the Company’s share of the cost of the encapsulation and limited soil removal described above would approximate $0.4 million, which has been accrued as of December 31, 2017. The Company is evaluating options for upgrading the wastewater treatment facilities at its Adams, Massachusetts plant. This work has been undertaken pursuant to an administrative Consent Order originally issued by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) on June 18, 2002. This order was amended on June 1, 2009 and on June 2, 2010. The amended Order includes the investigation by January 1, 2022 of options for ensuring that the facility's wastewater treatment ponds will not result in unpermitted discharge to groundwater. Additional requirements of the amendment include the submittal by July 1, 2022 of a plan for closure of a historic lime solids disposal area. Preliminary engineering reviews completed in 2005 indicate that the estimated cost of wastewater treatment upgrades to operate this facility beyond 2024 may be between $6 million and $8 million. The Company estimates that the remaining remediation costs would approximate $0.4 million, which has been accrued as of December 31, 2017. The Company and its subsidiaries are not party to any other material pending legal proceedings, other than routine litigation incidental to their businesses.

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 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration