UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.     Yes  [X]    No  [    ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).     Yes  [X]    No  [    ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes  [    ]    No  [X]

See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Inventories consisted of the following:

 

Loans and Long-Term Receivables

Other

Our investment in PP&E, with the associated accumulated depreciation and amortization (Accum. D&A), was:

In conjunction with, and effective as of, the Separation, we entered into the Indemnification and Release Agreement with ConocoPhillips. This agreement governs the treatment between ConocoPhillips and us of aspects relating to indemnification, insurance, litigation responsibility and management, and litigation document sharing and cooperation arising in connection with the Separation. Generally, the agreement provides for cross-indemnities principally designed to place financial responsibility for the obligations and liabilities of our business with us and financial responsibility for the obligations and liabilities of ConocoPhillips’ business with ConocoPhillips. The agreement also establishes procedures for handling claims subject to indemnification and related matters.

A number of lawsuits involving a variety of claims that arose in the ordinary course of business have been filed against us or are subject to indemnifications provided by us. We also may be required to remove or mitigate the effects on the environment of the placement, storage, disposal or release of certain chemical, mineral and petroleum substances at various active and inactive sites. We regularly assess the need for accounting recognition or disclosure of these contingencies. In the case of all known contingencies (other than those related to income taxes), we accrue a liability when the loss is probable and the amount is reasonably estimable. If a range of amounts can be reasonably estimated and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, then the minimum of the range is accrued. We do not reduce these liabilities for potential insurance or third-party recoveries. If applicable, we record receivables for probable insurance or other third-party recoveries. In the case of income-tax-related contingencies, we use a cumulative probability-weighted loss accrual in cases where sustaining a tax position is less than certain.

Based on currently available information, we believe it is remote that future costs related to known contingent liability exposures will exceed current accruals by an amount that would have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial statements. As we learn new facts concerning contingencies, we reassess our position both with respect to accrued liabilities and other potential exposures. Estimates particularly sensitive to future changes include contingent liabilities recorded for environmental remediation, tax and legal matters. Estimated future environmental remediation costs are subject to change due to such factors as the uncertain magnitude of cleanup costs, the unknown time and extent of such remedial actions that may be required, and the determination of our liability in proportion to that of other responsible parties. Estimated future costs related to tax and legal matters are subject to change as events evolve and as additional information becomes available during the administrative and litigation processes.

We are subject to international, federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. When we prepare our consolidated financial statements, we record accruals for environmental liabilities based on management’s best estimates, using all information available at the time. We measure estimates and base liabilities on currently available facts, existing technology, and presently enacted laws and regulations, taking into account stakeholder and business considerations. When measuring environmental liabilities, we also consider our prior experience in remediation of contaminated sites, other companies’ cleanup experience, and data released by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or other organizations. We consider unasserted claims in our determination of environmental liabilities, and we accrue them in the period they are both probable and reasonably estimable.

Although liability of those potentially responsible for environmental remediation costs is generally joint and several for federal sites and frequently so for state sites, we are usually only one of many companies alleged to have liability at a particular site. Due to the joint and several liabilities, we could be responsible for all cleanup costs related to any site at which we have been designated as a potentially responsible party. We have been successful to date in sharing cleanup costs with other financially sound companies. Many of the sites at which we are potentially responsible are still under investigation by the EPA or the state agencies concerned. Prior to actual cleanup, those potentially responsible normally assess the site conditions, apportion responsibility and determine the appropriate remediation. In some instances, we may have no liability or may attain a settlement of liability. Where it appears that other potentially responsible parties may be financially unable to bear their proportional share, we consider this inability in estimating our potential liability, and we adjust our accruals accordingly. As a result of various acquisitions in the past, we assumed certain environmental obligations. Some of these environmental obligations are mitigated by indemnifications made by others for our benefit and some of the indemnifications are subject to dollar and time limits.

Our legal organization applies its knowledge, experience and professional judgment to the specific characteristics of our cases, employing a litigation management process to manage and monitor the legal proceedings against us. Our process facilitates the early evaluation and quantification of potential exposures in individual cases. This process also enables us to track those cases that have been scheduled for trial and/or mediation. Based on professional judgment and experience in using these litigation management tools and available information about current developments in all our cases, our legal organization regularly assesses the adequacy of current accruals and determines if adjustment of existing accruals, or establishment of new accruals, is required.

We have contingent liabilities resulting from throughput agreements with pipeline and processing companies not associated with financing arrangements. Under these agreements, we may be required to provide any such company with additional funds through advances and penalties for fees related to throughput capacity not utilized.

We use financial and commodity-based derivative contracts to manage exposures to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates and commodity prices or to capture market opportunities. Since we are not currently using cash-flow hedge accounting, all gains and losses, realized or unrealized, from commodity derivative contracts have been recognized in the consolidated statement of income. Gains and losses from derivative contracts held for trading not directly related to our physical business, whether realized or unrealized, have been reported net in “Other income”income (loss)” on our consolidated statement of income. Cash flows from all our derivative activity for the periods presented appear in the operating section of the consolidated statement of cash flows.

Purchase and sales contracts with fixed minimum notional volumes for commodities that are readily convertible to cash (e.g., crude oil and gasoline) are recorded on the balance sheet as derivatives unless the contracts are eligible for, and we elect, the normal purchases and normal sales exception (i.e., contracts to purchase or sell quantities we expect to use or sell over a reasonable period in the normal course of business). We generally apply this normal purchases and normal sales exception to eligible crude oil, refined product, natural gas and power commodity purchase and sales contracts; however, we may elect not to apply this exception (e.g., when another derivative instrument will be used to mitigate the risk of the purchase or sales

contract but hedge accounting will not be applied, in which case both the purchase or sales contract and the derivative contract mitigating the resulting risk will be recorded on the balance sheet at fair value).

 

Hedge accounting has not been used for any items in the table.

The gains (losses) from commodity derivatives incurred, and the line items where they appear on our consolidated statement of income, were:

 

Hedge accounting has not been used for any item in the table.

 

Financial instruments potentially exposed to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of over-the-counter (OTC) derivative contracts and trade receivables.

The credit risk from our OTC derivative contracts, such as forwards and swaps, derives from the counterparty to the transaction. Individual counterparty exposure is managed within predetermined credit limits and includes the use of cash-call margins when appropriate, thereby reducing the risk of significant nonperformance. We also use futures, swaps and option contracts that have a negligible credit risk because these trades are cleared with an exchange clearinghouse and subject to mandatory margin requirements until settled; however, we are exposed to the credit risk of those exchange brokers for receivables arising from daily margin cash calls, as well as for cash deposited to meet initial margin requirements.

Certain of our derivative instruments contain provisions that require us to post collateral if the derivative exposure exceeds a threshold amount. We have contracts with fixed threshold amounts and other contracts with variable threshold amounts that are contingent on our credit rating. The variable threshold amounts typically decline for lower credit ratings, while both the variable and fixed threshold amounts typically revert to zero if our credit ratings fall below investment grade. Cash is the primary collateral in all contracts; however, many contracts also permit us to post letters of credit as collateral.

We used the following methods and assumptions to estimate the fair value of financial instruments:

Financial assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on a recurring basis consist primarily of investments to support nonqualified deferred compensation plans and derivative instruments. The deferred compensation investments are measured at fair value using unadjusted prices available from national securities exchanges; therefore, these assets are categorized as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. We value our exchange-traded commodity derivatives using closing prices provided by the exchange as of the balance sheet date, and these are also classified as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. WhereWhen exchange-cleared contracts lack sufficient liquidity or are valued using either adjusted exchange-provided prices are adjusted,or non-exchange quotes, are used, or when the instrument lacks sufficient liquidity, we generally classify those exchange-cleared contracts as Level 2. OTC financial swaps and physical commodity forward purchase and sales contracts are generally valued using quotations provided by brokers and price index developers such as Platts and Oil Price Information Service. TheseWe corroborate these quotes are corroborated with market data and are classifiedclassify the resulting fair values as Level 2. In certain less liquid markets or for longer-term contracts, forward prices are not as readily available. In these circumstances, OTC swaps and physical commodity purchase and sales contracts are valued using internally developed methodologies that consider historical relationships among various commodities that result in management’s best estimate of fair value. TheseWe classify these contracts are classified as Level 3. Financial OTC and physical commodity options are valued using industry-standard models that consider various assumptions, including quoted forward prices for commodities, time value, volatility factors, and contractual prices for the underlying instruments, as well as other relevant economic measures. The degree to which these inputs are observable in the forward markets determines whether the options are classified as Level 2 or 3. We use a mid-market pricing convention (the mid-point between bid and ask prices). When appropriate, valuations are adjusted to reflect credit considerations, generally based on available market evidence.

We have master netting arrangements for all of our exchange-cleared derivative instruments, the majority of our OTC derivative instruments, and certain physical commodity forward contracts (primarily pipeline crude oil deliveries). The following tables show these contracts on a net basis in the column “Effect of Counterparty Netting.” We have no contracts that are subject to master netting arrangements that are reflected gross on the balance sheet.