Commitments and Contingencies | 12. Commitments and Contingencies Significant new commitments, material changes in commitments and ongoing contingencies as of June 30, 2015, not disclosed elsewhere, are as follows: Compensation Arrangements — Cash Performance Unit Awards. The Compensation Committee has approved various grants of performance unit awards to certain officers and employees, to be settled in cash, based on the achievement of certain stipulated goals, all of which are described in detail in the Form 10-K (including fiscal 2015 grants made in the December 2014 quarter). Since September 30, 2014, there have been no significant changes in Headwaters’ commitments or in the amounts accrued under these awards, except for payment in the December 2014 quarter of amounts contractually due under the terms of certain prior year awards, and the accrual of approximately $2.5 million in the June 2015 quarter under terms of the fiscal 2015 grants. As explained in the Form 10-K, the amounts accrued under the fiscal 2014 awards are subject to adjustment for cash flows generated in fiscal 2015 and 2016. Headwaters currently expects that additional amounts could be earned in the September 2015 quarter under the terms of the fiscal 2015 awards. Cash-Settled SAR Grants. In fiscal 2011, the Committee approved grants to certain employees of approximately 0.4 million cash-settled SARs, less than 0.1 million of which remain outstanding as of June 30, 2015. These SARs, which are considered liability awards, vested in annual installments through September 30, 2013 and are settled in cash upon exercise by the employee. The SARs terminate on September 30, 2015 and must be exercised on or before that date. As of June 30, 2015, approximately $0.4 million has been accrued for outstanding awards because the stock price at June 30, 2015 was above the grant-date stock price of $3.81. Changes in Headwaters’ stock price through the dates employees exercise the SARs will result in adjustments to compensation expense and will be reflected in Headwaters’ statement of operations for the September 2015 quarter. In fiscal 2012, the Committee approved grants to certain officers and employees of approximately 1.0 million cash-settled SARs, approximately 0.2 million of which remain outstanding as of June 30, 2015. These SARs have a grant-date stock price of $1.85 and otherwise have terms similar to those described above, except they could not vest until and unless the 60-day average stock price exceeded approximately 135% of the stock price on the date of grant (or $2.50), which occurred in fiscal 2012. Approximately $2.6 million has been accrued for outstanding awards as of June 30, 2015. Changes in Headwaters’ stock price through September 30, 2016, the date unexercised SARs will expire, will result in adjustment to the expected remaining liability, which adjustment (whether positive or negative) will be reflected in Headwaters’ statement of operations each quarter. Compensation expense for all cash-settled SARs was approximately $5.1 million and $2.9 million for the nine months ended June 30, 2014 and 2015, respectively. Property, Plant and Equipment — As of June 30, 2015, Headwaters was committed to spend approximately $1.5 million on capital projects that were in various stages of completion. Legal Matters — Headwaters has ongoing litigation and asserted claims which have been incurred in the normal course of business, including the specific matters discussed below. Headwaters intends to vigorously defend or resolve these matters by settlement, as appropriate. Management does not currently believe that the outcome of these matters will have a material adverse effect on Headwaters’ operations, cash flow or financial position. Headwaters incurred approximately $4.5 million and $1.7 million of expense for legal matters during the nine months ended June 30, 2014 and 2015, respectively. Except for $2.5 million in 2014, costs for outside legal counsel comprised a majority of Headwaters’ litigation-related costs for the periods presented. Headwaters currently believes the range of potential loss for all unresolved legal matters, excluding costs for outside counsel, is from $2.5 million up to the amounts sought by claimants and has recorded a liability as of June 30, 2015 of $2.5 million. The substantial claims and damages sought by claimants in excess of this amount are not currently deemed to be probable. Headwaters’ outside counsel and management currently believe that unfavorable outcomes of outstanding litigation beyond the amount accrued are neither probable nor remote. Accordingly, management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of Headwaters’ liability, nor is it possible to estimate what litigation-related costs will be in future periods. The specific matters discussed below raise difficult and complex legal and factual issues, and the resolution of these issues is subject to many uncertainties, including the facts and circumstances of each case, the jurisdiction in which each case is brought, and the future decisions of juries, judges, and arbitrators. Therefore, although management believes that the claims asserted against Headwaters in the named cases lack merit, there is a possibility of material losses in excess of the amount accrued if one or more of the cases were to be determined adversely against Headwaters for a substantial amount of the damages asserted. I t is possible that a change in the estimate of probable liability could occur, and the changes could be material. Additionally, as with any litigation, these proceedings require that Headwaters incur substantial costs, including attorneys’ fees, managerial time and other personnel resources, in pursuing resolution. EPA. In April 2012, Headwaters Resources, Inc. (HRI) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The complaint alleges that the EPA failed to review, and where necessary, revise RCRA subtitle D regulations applicable to the disposal of coal ash within the timeframe required by statute. Other parties also initiated litigation against the EPA alleging the same (and other) failures of the EPA to perform its duties regarding coal ash disposal regulations. HRI’s complaint seeks certain declaratory relief with respect to EPA rulemaking at issue in the case. The District Court consolidated HRI’s case with related actions brought by other parties. In October 2013, the District Court granted summary judgment that the EPA failed to fulfill its statutory duty to review coal ash disposal regulations, among other things, ordering the EPA to propose a schedule to complete its review of coal ash disposal regulations, and, as necessary, revise the regulations. In May 2014, the District Court entered a consent decree ordering the EPA to take final action in December 2014 regarding EPA’s proposed revisions of RCRA subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals. In December 2014, the EPA issued a prepublication notice of a final rule to regulate the disposal of coal combustion residuals as solid (non-hazardous) waste under subtitle D of RCRA, with national minimum criteria for CCR landfills and impoundments consisting of location restrictions, design and operating criteria, groundwater monitoring and corrective action, closure requirements, post closure care, recordkeeping and reporting, and other requirements. The final rule will be effective 180 days after publication in the Federal Register, which publication occurred on April 17, 2015. It is expected that the EPA will move to terminate the consent decree in the near future which will end the case. Fentress Families Trust. VFL Technology Corporation (VFL), acquired by HRI in 2004, provides services related to fly ash management to Virginia Electric and Power Company. In February 2012, 383 plaintiffs, most of whom are residents living in the City of Chesapeake, Virginia, filed a complaint in the State of Virginia Chesapeake Circuit Court against 15 defendants, including Virginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO), and certain other persons associated with the Battlefield Golf Course, including owners, developers, contractors, and others, including VFL and Headwaters, alleging causes of action for nuisance and negligence. The complaint alleges that fly ash used to construct the golf course was carried in the air and contaminated water exposing plaintiffs to dangerous chemicals and causing property damage. Plaintiffs’ complaint seeks injunctive relief and damages of approximately $850.0 million for removal and remediation of the fly ash and the water supply, $1.9 billion for vexation, $8.0 million and other unspecified amounts for personal injuries, and $55.0 million as damages to properties, plus prejudgment interest, attorney fees, and costs. In a related case, other plaintiffs have filed a separate lawsuit asserting the same claims against the same defendants claiming additional damages totaling approximately $307.2 million. In August 2013 the court ruled on VEPCO’s demurrer ordering that claims for personal injury or property damage based upon allegations of groundwater contamination were dismissed but that claims of nuisance and negligence based upon allegations of air-borne ash and contaminated surface water would not be dismissed. These cases are based on substantially the same alleged circumstances asserted in complaints filed by the plaintiffs in 2009 and voluntarily dismissed in 2010. Discovery is underway. HRI has filed claims for defense and indemnity with several of its insurers. In 2010, HRI filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Utah against two insurers that denied coverage based on allegations in the 2009 Fentress complaints. The District Court ruled in the insurers’ favor, which ruling was affirmed in October 2014 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Another insurer continues to pay for the defense of the underlying cases under a reservation of rights. The relatively novel fly ash claims of the plaintiffs together with multiple insurance policies and policy periods make insurance coverage issues complex and uncertain. Moreover, plaintiffs’ total claims exceed the potential limits of insurance available to HRI. Because resolution of the litigation is uncertain, legal counsel and management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of HRI’s liability, or the insurers’ obligation to indemnify HRI against loss, if any. Building Products Matters. There are litigation and pending and threatened claims made against certain subsidiaries within Headwaters’ building products segment, with respect to several types of exterior finish systems manufactured and sold by its subsidiaries for application by contractors on residential and commercial buildings. The plaintiffs or claimants in these matters typically allege that the structures have suffered damage from water penetration due to some alleged failure of the roofing product or wall system. The claims most often involve alleged liabilities associated with certain roofing, stucco, and architectural stone products which are produced and sold by certain subsidiaries of Headwaters. The foregoing litigation and claims typically cite damages for alleged personal injuries, property damage, economic loss, unfair business practices and punitive damages. Claims made against Headwaters and its subsidiaries generally have been paid by their insurers, subject to Headwaters’ payment of deductibles or self-insured retentions, although such insurance carriers typically have issued “reservation of rights” letters. There is no guarantee of insurance coverage or continuing coverage. These and future proceedings may result in substantial costs to Headwaters and its subsidiaries, including attorneys’ fees, managerial time and other personnel resources and costs. Adverse resolution of these proceedings could have a materially negative effect on Headwaters’ businesses, financial condition, and results of operation, and its ability to meet its financial obligations. Although Headwaters carries general and product liability insurance, subject to exclusions and self-insured retentions, Headwaters cannot assure that such insurance coverage will remain available, that Headwaters’ insurance carriers will remain viable, will accept claims or that the insured amounts will cover all claims in excess of self-insured retentions. Future rate increases may also make such insurance uneconomical for Headwaters to maintain. Because resolution of the litigation, claims, and insurance coverage is uncertain, legal counsel and management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of Headwaters’ or its subsidiaries’ liability. Construction Materials Matters . In addition, there are litigation and pending and threatened claims made against HRI, Headwaters’ construction materials segment, with respect to coal combustion products. The plaintiffs or claimants in these matters have alleged that inhalation or other exposure to fly ash is unsafe, and that HRI has failed to warn about the alleged dangers of fly ash exposure and the use of adequate protection, resulting in personal injury, contamination of land and water, and diminution in property value. The Fentress Family Trust case summarized above is an example of these types of claims. The application of relatively novel fly ash claims to insurance policies is complex and uncertain and HRI has had limited success in tendering defense of such claims to insurers, which is dependent upon the alleged facts and specific policy terms. Adverse resolution of these claims and insurance coverage disputes could have a materially negative effect on Headwaters’ businesses, financial condition, and results of operation, and its ability to meet its financial obligations. Because resolution of the litigation, claims, and insurance coverage disputes is uncertain, legal counsel and management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of HRI’s liability. Other. Headwaters and its subsidiaries are also involved in other legal proceedings that have arisen in the normal course of business. Because resolution of these proceedings is uncertain, legal counsel and management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of Headwaters’ liability. |