| Goodwill
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
March 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||
As | As | |||||||||||
Reported | Corrections | Restated | ||||||||||
Goodwill
|
$ | 3,082,467 | $ | 2,455 | $ | 3,084,922 | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
Total assets
|
$ | 8,835,564 | $ | 2,455 | $ | 8,838,019 | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Deferred income taxes
|
$ | 954,577 | $ | (28,561 | ) | $ | 926,016 | |||||
|
||||||||||||
Total liabilities
|
$ | 5,382,234 | $ | (28,561 | ) | $ | 5,353,673 | |||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Retained earnings
|
$ | 1,775,587 | $ | 31,016 | $ | 1,806,603 | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
Shareholders’ equity
|
$ | 3,453,330 | $ | 31,016 | $ | 3,484,346 | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
|
$ | 8,835,564 | $ | 2,455 | $ | 8,838,019 | ||||||
|
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31 | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Discontinued operations
|
||||||||
Earnings (loss) from results
|
$ | 81 | $ | (1,599 | ) | |||
Gain on disposal
|
8,794 | 723 | ||||||
Income tax (provision) benefit
|
(3,148 | ) | 351 | |||||
|
||||||||
Earnings (loss) on discontinued operations,
net of tax
|
$ | 5,727 | $ | (525 | ) | |||
|
|
|
|
Fair Value 1 | ||||||||||||||||
March 31 | December 31 | March 31 | ||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet Location | 2010 | 2009 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
Liability derivatives
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest rate derivatives
|
Other accrued liabilities | $ | 8,956 | $ | 11,193 | $ | 0 | |||||||||
Interest rate derivatives
|
Other noncurrent liabilities | 0 | 0 | 15,400 | ||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Total derivatives liability
|
$ | 8,956 | $ | 11,193 | $ | 15,400 | ||||||||||
|
1 | See Note 7 for further discussion of the fair value determination. |
Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||
Location on | March 31 | |||||||||||
Statement | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||
Interest rate derivatives
|
||||||||||||
Loss recognized in OCI
(effective portion)
|
Note 8 | $ | (808 | ) | $ | (799 | ) | |||||
|
||||||||||||
Loss reclassified from
Accumulated OCI (effective portion)
|
Interest expense | (4,898 | ) | (3,370 | ) |
|
|
Level 1: | Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities; | ||
|
||||
|
Level 2: | Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data; | ||
|
||||
|
Level 3: | Inputs that are unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement. |
Level 1 | ||||||||||||
March 31 | December 31 | March 31 | ||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2009 | ||||||||||
Fair value recurring
|
||||||||||||
Rabbi Trust
|
||||||||||||
Mutual funds
|
$ | 11,947 | $ | 10,490 | $ | 12,019 | ||||||
Equities
|
7,740 | 8,472 | 5,222 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Net asset
|
$ | 19,687 | $ | 18,962 | $ | 17,241 | ||||||
|
Level 2 | ||||||||||||
March 31 | December 31 | March 31 | ||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2009 | ||||||||||
Fair value recurring
|
||||||||||||
Medium-term investments
|
$ | 4,109 | $ | 4,111 | $ | 11,530 | ||||||
Interest rate derivative
|
(8,956 | ) | (11,193 | ) | (15,400 | ) | ||||||
Rabbi Trust
|
||||||||||||
Common/collective trust funds
|
2,769 | 4,084 | 409 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Net liability
|
$ | (2,078 | ) | $ | (2,998 | ) | $ | (3,461 | ) | |||
|
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31 | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Net loss
|
$ | (38,747 | ) | $ | (32,780 | ) | ||
Other comprehensive income (loss)
|
||||||||
Fair value adjustments to cash flow
hedges, net of tax
|
(478 | ) | (476 | ) | ||||
Reclassification adjustment for cash flow
hedges amounts included in net loss,
net of tax
|
2,887 | 1,983 | ||||||
Amortization of pension and postretirement plan acturarial loss and prior service
cost, net of tax
|
899 | 274 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Total comprehensive loss
|
$ | (35,439 | ) | $ | (30,999 | ) | ||
|
March 31 | December 31 | March 31 | ||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2009 | ||||||||||
Cash flow hedges
|
$ | (46,956 | ) | $ | (49,365 | ) | $ | (55,012 | ) | |||
Pension and postretirement plans
|
(144,093 | ) | (144,993 | ) | (128,489 | ) | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
$ | (191,049 | ) | $ | (194,358 | ) | $ | (183,501 | ) | |||
|
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31 | ||||||||
PENSION BENEFITS | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Components of net periodic benefit cost
|
||||||||
Service cost
|
$ | 4,808 | $ | 4,661 | ||||
Interest cost
|
10,405 | 10,485 | ||||||
Expected return on plan assets
|
(12,535 | ) | (11,670 | ) | ||||
Amortization of prior service cost
|
115 | 115 | ||||||
Amortization of actuarial loss
|
1,336 | 400 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Net periodic pension benefit cost
|
$ | 4,129 | $ | 3,991 | ||||
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31 | ||||||||
OTHER POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Components of net periodic benefit cost
|
||||||||
Service cost
|
$ | 1,066 | $ | 978 | ||||
Interest cost
|
1,663 | 1,761 | ||||||
Amortization of prior service credit
|
(182 | ) | (206 | ) | ||||
Amortization of actuarial loss
|
222 | 149 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Net periodic postretirement benefit cost
|
$ | 2,769 | $ | 2,682 | ||||
|
|
March 31 | December 31 | March 31 | ||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2009 | ||||||||||
Short-term borrowings
|
||||||||||||
Bank borrowings
|
$ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 565,000 | ||||||
Commercial paper
|
300,000 | 236,512 | 100,000 | |||||||||
Other notes payable
|
0 | 0 | 2,000 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Total short-term borrowings
|
$ | 300,000 | $ | 236,512 | $ | 667,000 | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Bank borrowings
|
||||||||||||
Maturity
|
n/a | n/a | 1 to 20 days | |||||||||
Weighted-average interest rate
|
n/a | n/a | 0.73 | % | ||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Commercial paper
|
||||||||||||
Maturity
|
1 day | 42 days | 1 day | |||||||||
Weighted-average interest rate
|
0.34 | % | 0.39 | % | 0.82 | % | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
Other notes payable
|
||||||||||||
Maturity
|
n/a | n/a | 2 months | |||||||||
Weighted-average interest rate
|
n/a | n/a | n/a |
March 31 | December 31 | March 31 | ||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2009 | ||||||||||
Long-term debt
|
||||||||||||
10.125% 2015 notes issued 20091
|
$ | 149,552 | $ | 149,538 | $ | 149,498 | ||||||
10.375% 2018 notes issued 20092
|
248,299 | 248,270 | 248,186 | |||||||||
3-year floating loan issued 2008
|
100,000 | 175,000 | 270,000 | |||||||||
6.30% 5-year notes issued 20083
|
249,656 | 249,632 | 249,564 | |||||||||
7.00% 10-year notes issued 20084
|
399,633 | 399,625 | 399,602 | |||||||||
3-year floating notes issued 2007
|
325,000 | 325,000 | 325,000 | |||||||||
5.60% 5-year notes issued 20075
|
299,692 | 299,666 | 299,590 | |||||||||
6.40% 10-year notes issued 20076
|
349,840 | 349,837 | 349,825 | |||||||||
7.15% 30-year notes issued 20077
|
249,319 | 249,317 | 249,313 | |||||||||
6.00% 10-year notes issued 1999
|
0 | 0 | 250,000 | |||||||||
Private placement notes
|
15,212 | 15,243 | 15,342 | |||||||||
Medium-term notes
|
21,000 | 21,000 | 21,000 | |||||||||
Industrial revenue bonds
|
17,550 | 17,550 | 17,550 | |||||||||
Other notes
|
1,738 | 1,823 | 3,430 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Total debt excluding short-term borrowings
|
$ | 2,426,491 | $ | 2,501,501 | $ | 2,847,900 | ||||||
Less current maturities of long-term debt
|
325,344 | 385,381 | 311,689 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Total long-term debt
|
$ | 2,101,147 | $ | 2,116,120 | $ | 2,536,211 | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Estimated fair value of total long-term debt
|
$ | 2,333,436 | $ | 2,300,522 | $ | 2,262,929 | ||||||
|
1 | Includes decreases for unamortized discounts, as follows: March 31, 2010 - $448 thousand, December 31, 2009 — $462 thousand and March 31, 2009 — $502 thousand. The effective interest rate for these 2015 notes is 10.305%. | |
2 | Includes decreases for unamortized discounts, as follows: March 31, 2010 — $1,701 thousand, December 31, 2009 — $1,730 thousand and March 31, 2009 — $1,814 thousand. The effective interest rate for these 2018 notes is 10.584%. | |
3 | Includes decreases for unamortized discounts, as follows: March 31, 2010 — $344 thousand, December 31, 2009 — $368 thousand and March 31, 2009 — $436 thousand. The effective interest rate for these 5-year notes is 7.47%. | |
4 | Includes decreases for unamortized discounts, as follows: March 31, 2010 — $367 thousand, December 31, 2009 — $375 thousand and March 31, 2009 — $398 thousand. The effective interest rate for these 10-year notes is 7.86%. | |
5 | Includes decreases for unamortized discounts, as follows: March 31, 2010 — $308 thousand, December 31, 2009 — $334 thousand and March 31, 2009 — $410 thousand. The effective interest rate for these 5-year notes is 6.58%. | |
6 | Includes decreases for unamortized discounts, as follows: March 31, 2010 — $160 thousand, December 31, 2009 — $163 thousand and March 31, 2009 — $175 thousand. The effective interest rate for these 10-year notes is 7.39%. | |
7 | Includes decreases for unamortized discounts, as follows: March 31, 2010 — $681 thousand, December 31, 2009 — $683 thousand and March 31, 2009 — $687 thousand. The effective interest rate for these 30-year notes is 8.04%. |
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31 | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
ARO operating costs
|
||||||||
Accretion
|
$ | 2,189 | $ | 2,272 | ||||
Depreciation
|
3,183 | 3,603 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Total
|
$ | 5,372 | $ | 5,875 | ||||
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31 | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Asset retirement obligations
|
||||||||
Balance at beginning of period
|
$ | 167,757 | $ | 173,435 | ||||
Liabilities incurred
|
0 | 334 | ||||||
Liabilities settled
|
(2,377 | ) | (2,599 | ) | ||||
Accretion expense
|
2,189 | 2,272 | ||||||
Revisions up (down)
|
(3,638 | ) | 332 | |||||
|
||||||||
Balance at end of period
|
$ | 163,931 | $ | 173,774 | ||||
|
|
March 31 2010 |
||||
Standby letters of credit
|
||||
Risk management requirement for insurance claims
|
$ | 38,278 | ||
Payment surety required by utilities
|
133 | |||
Contractual reclamation/restoration requirements
|
11,931 | |||
Financial requirement for industrial revenue bond
|
14,230 | |||
|
||||
Total
|
$ | 64,572 | ||
|
|
March 31 2010 |
December 31 2009 |
|||||||
Current assets
|
$ | 3,670 | $ | 3,799 | ||||
Property, plant & equipment, net
|
11,016 | 11,117 | ||||||
Intangible assets
|
93 | 96 | ||||||
Other assets
|
60 | 60 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Total assets held for sale
|
$ | 14,839 | $ | 15,072 | ||||
|
||||||||
Current liabilities
|
$ | 425 | $ | 369 | ||||
|
||||||||
Total liabilities of assets held for sale
|
$ | 425 | $ | 369 | ||||
|
|
Aggregates | Concrete | Asphalt mix | Cement | Total | ||||||||||||||||
Gross carrying amount
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total as of December 31, 2009
|
$ | 3,002,346 | $ | 0 | $ | 91,633 | $ | 252,664 | $ | 3,346,643 | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Purchase price allocation adjustment
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total as of March 31, 2010
|
$ | 3,002,346 | $ | 0 | $ | 91,633 | $ | 252,664 | $ | 3,346,643 | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Accumulated impairment losses
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total as of December 31, 2009
|
$ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | (252,664 | ) | $ | (252,664 | ) | ||||||||
Goodwill impairment loss
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total as of March 31, 2010
|
$ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | (252,664 | ) | $ | (252,664 | ) | ||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Goodwill, net of accumulated
impariment losses
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total as of December 31, 2009
|
$ | 3,002,346 | $ | 0 | $ | 91,633 | $ | 0 | $ | 3,093,979 | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total as of March 31, 2010
|
$ | 3,002,346 | $ | 0 | $ | 91,633 | $ | 0 | $ | 3,093,979 | ||||||||||
|
|
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
Segment Financial Disclosure | March 31 | |||||||
Amounts in millions | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
TOTAL REVENUES
|
||||||||
Aggregates
|
||||||||
Segment revenues
|
$ | 341.3 | $ | 401.8 | ||||
Intersegment sales
|
(32.0 | ) | (37.1 | ) | ||||
|
||||||||
Net sales
|
309.3 | 364.7 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Concrete
|
||||||||
Segment revenues
|
82.9 | 114.8 | ||||||
Intersegment sales
|
0.0 | (0.1 | ) | |||||
|
||||||||
Net sales
|
82.9 | 114.7 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Asphalt mix
|
||||||||
Segment revenues
|
63.6 | 78.4 | ||||||
Intersegment sales
|
(0.6 | ) | 0.0 | |||||
|
||||||||
Net sales
|
63.0 | 78.4 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Cement
|
||||||||
Segment revenues
|
17.9 | 19.7 | ||||||
Intersegment sales
|
(8.6 | ) | (9.6 | ) | ||||
|
||||||||
Net sales
|
9.3 | 10.1 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Total
|
||||||||
Net sales
|
464.5 | 567.9 | ||||||
Delivery revenues
|
28.8 | 32.4 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Total revenues
|
$ | 493.3 | $ | 600.3 | ||||
|
||||||||
GROSS PROFIT
|
||||||||
Aggregates
|
$ | 15.4 | $ | 63.6 | ||||
Concrete
|
(16.1 | ) | (0.9 | ) | ||||
Asphalt mix
|
1.1 | 16.2 | ||||||
Cement
|
0.5 | (1.3 | ) | |||||
|
||||||||
Total gross profit
|
$ | 0.9 | $ | 77.6 | ||||
|
||||||||
Depreciation, Depletion,
Accretion and Amortization
|
||||||||
Aggregates
|
$ | 73.1 | $ | 78.8 | ||||
Concrete
|
13.0 | 12.9 | ||||||
Asphalt mix
|
2.2 | 2.0 | ||||||
Cement
|
4.4 | 4.6 | ||||||
Corporate and other unallocated
|
1.5 | 1.0 | ||||||
|
||||||||
Total depreciation, depletion,
accretion and amortization
|
$ | 94.2 | $ | 99.3 | ||||
|
|
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31 | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Cash payments (refunds)
|
||||||||
Interest (exclusive of amount capitalized)
|
$ | 7,035 | $ | 13,334 | ||||
Income taxes
|
(2,657 | ) | (330 | ) | ||||
|
||||||||
Noncash investing and financing activities
|
||||||||
Accrued liabilities for purchases of property, plant
& equipment
|
10,273 | 19,082 | ||||||
Debt issued for purchases of property, plant & equipment
|
0 | 1,982 | ||||||
Stock issued for pension contribution (Note 9)
|
53,864 | 0 | ||||||
Other noncash transactions
|
0 | 25 |
|
• | Addair — This is a purported class action case for medical monitoring and personal injury damages styled Addair et al. v. Processing Company, LLC, et al., pending in the Circuit Court of Wyoming County, West Virginia. The plaintiffs allege various personal injuries from exposure to perc used in coal sink labs. Discovery is now complete. The class certification hearing is scheduled for August 2010. | ||
• | California Water Service Company — On June 6, 2008, we were served in the action styled California Water Service Company v. Dow, et al, now pending in the San Mateo County Superior Court, California. According to the complaint, California Water Service Company “owns and/or operates public drinking water systems, and supplies drinking water to hundreds of thousands of residents and businesses throughout California.” The complaint alleges that water systems in a number of communities have been contaminated with perc. The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages and punitive damages. Discovery is ongoing. | ||
• | City of Sunnyvale California — On January 6, 2009, we were served in an action styled City of Sunnyvale v. Legacy Vulcan Corporation, f/k/a Vulcan Materials Company, filed in the San Mateo County Superior Court, California. The plaintiffs are seeking cost recovery and other damages for alleged environmental contamination from perc and its breakdown products at the Sunnyvale Town Center Redevelopment Project. Discovery is ongoing. |
• | R.R. Street Indemnity — Street, a former distributor of perc manufactured by Vulcan, alleges that Vulcan owes Street, and its insurer (National Union), a defense and indemnity in several of these litigation matters, as well as some prior litigation which Vulcan has now settled. National Union alleges that Vulcan is obligated to contribute to National Union’s share of defense fees, costs and any indemnity payments made on Street’s behalf. Street and Vulcan are having ongoing discussions about the nature and extent of indemnity obligations, if any, and to date there has been no resolution of these issues. | ||
• | Santarsiero — This is a case styled Robert Santarsiero v. R.V. Davies, et al., pending in Supreme Court, New York County, New York. The plaintiff alleges personal injury (kidney cancer) from exposure to perc. Vulcan was brought in as a third-party defendant by original defendant R.V. Davies. Discovery is ongoing. | ||
• | Team Enterprises — On June 5, 2008, we were named as a defendant in the matter of Team Enterprises, Inc. v. Century Centers, Ltd., et al., filed in Modesto, Stanislaus County, California but removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (Fresno Division). This is an action filed by Team Enterprises as the former operator of a dry cleaners located in Modesto, California. The plaintiff is seeking damages from the defendants associated with the remediation of perc from the site of the dry cleaners. |
• | United States Virgin Islands — There are currently two cases pending here. |
• | Government of the United States; Department of Planning and Natural Resources; and Commissioner Robert Mathes, in his capacity as Trustee for the Natural Resources of the Territory of The United States Virgin Islands v. Vulcan Materials Company, et al. Plaintiff brought this action based on parens patriae doctrine for injury to quasi-sovereign interest on the island of St. Thomas (injuries to groundwater resources held in public trust). It is alleged that the island’s sole source of drinking water (the Tutu aquifer) is contaminated with perc. The primary source of perc contamination allegedly emanated from the former Laga facility (a textile manufacturing site). The perc defendants are alleged to have failed to adequately warn perc users of the dangers posed by the use and disposal of perc. It is also alleged that perc from O’Henry Dry Cleaners has contributed to the perc contamination in the Tutu aquifer. There has been no activity in the case since it was filed. | ||
• | L’Henry, Inc., d/b/a O’Henry Cleaners and Cyril V. Francois, LLC v. Vulcan and Dow. Plaintiffs are the owners of a dry cleaning business on St. Thomas. The dry cleaner began operation in 1981. It is alleged that perc from the dry cleaner contributed to the contamination of the Tutu Wells aquifer, and that Vulcan as a perc manufacturer failed to properly warn the dry cleaner of the proper disposal method for perc, resulting in unspecified damages to the dry cleaner. A trial date of December 1, 2010, has been set for this matter. |
• | Florida Antitrust Litigation — Our subsidiary, Florida Rock Industries, Inc., has been named as a defendant in a number of class action lawsuits filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The lawsuits were filed by several ready-mixed concrete producers and construction companies against a number of concrete and cement producers and importers in Florida. There are now two consolidated complaints: (1) on behalf of direct independent ready-mixed concrete producers, and (2) on behalf of indirect users of ready-mixed concrete. The defendants include Cemex Corp., Holcim (US) Inc., Lafarge North America, Inc., Lehigh Cement Company, Oldcastle Materials, Suwannee American Cement LLC, Titan America LLC, and Votorantim Cimentos North America, Inc. The complaints allege various violations under the federal antitrust laws, including price fixing and market allocations. We have no reason to believe that Florida Rock is liable for any of the matters alleged in the complaint, and we intend to defend the case vigorously. |
• | Florida Lake Belt Litigation — Sierra Club, National Resources Defense Council and National Parks Conservation Association v. Lt. General Carl A. Stock, et al. On January 30, 2009, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida issued an order invalidating certain of the Lake Belt mining permits, including a permit for our Miami quarry, which immediately stopped all mining excavation in the majority of the Lake Belt region. We appealed this order to the Eleventh Circuit, and on January 21, 2010, the Eleventh Circuit upheld the ruling of the District Court. On May 1, 2009, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) issued a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. The Record of Decision was issued on January 29, 2010, and the Corps has issued new mining permits. We received our new permit on March 3, 2010. We believe that with the issuance of this permit, the litigation over the old permits is moot. Therefore, we resumed mining on or about April 12, 2010. | ||
• | IDOT/Joliet Road — In September 2001, we were named a defendant in a suit brought by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Chancery Division, Illinois, alleging damage to a 0.9-mile section of Joliet Road that bisects our McCook quarry in McCook, Illinois, a Chicago suburb. The plaintiffs are claiming damages in excess of $40 million, plus punitive damages. The matter has been set for trial on May 10, 2010. We believe that the claims and damages alleged by the State are covered by liability insurance policies purchased by Vulcan. We have received a letter from our primary insurer stating that there is coverage of this lawsuit under its policy; however, the letter indicates that the insurer is currently taking the position that various damages sought by the State are not covered. At this time, we believe a loss related to this litigation is reasonably possible; however, we cannot reasonably estimate the loss or range of loss that may result from a settlement or an adverse judgment at trial. |
• | Lower Passaic River Clean-Up — We have been sued as a third-party defendant in New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, et al. v. Occidental Chemical Corporation, et al., a case brought by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection in the New Jersey Superior Court. The third-party complaint was filed on February 4, 2009. This suit by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection seeks recovery of past and future clean-up costs as well as unspecified economic damages, punitive damages, penalties and a variety of other forms of relief arising from alleged discharges into the Passaic River of dioxin and other unspecified hazardous substances. Our former Chemicals Division operated a plant adjacent to the Passaic River and has been sued as a third-party defendant in this New Jersey action, along with approximately 300 other parties. Additionally, Vulcan and approximately 70 other companies are parties to a May 2007 Administrative Order of Consent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to perform a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study of the contamination in the lower 17 miles of the Passaic River. This study is ongoing. No remedial remedy for this Superfund site has yet been determined. At this time, we cannot determine the likelihood or reasonably estimate a range of loss pertaining to this matter. |