Commitments and Contingencies | 12. Commitments and Contingencies Commitments and contingencies as of September 30, 2016 not disclosed elsewhere, are as follows. Leases — Headwaters has noncancellable operating leases for certain facilities and equipment. These leases, most of which are in the construction materials segment, currently are set to expire in various years through 2033, but many have renewal options under which the lease term can be extended. Rental expense was approximately $33.4 million, $34.4 million and $36.2 million in 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. As of September 30, 2016, minimum rental payments due under these leases are as follows: Year ending September 30, (in thousands) 2017 $ 2018 2019 2020 2021 Thereafter $ Purchase Commitments — Certain CCP contracts with suppliers require Headwaters to make minimum purchases of CCP materials. Actual purchases under contracts with minimum requirements were approximately $20.3 million, $32.7 million and $44.8 million in 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. As of September 30, 2016, minimum future purchase requirements are as follows: Year ending September 30, (in thousands) 2017 $ 2018 2019 2020 2021 Thereafter $ Compensation Arrangements — Employment Agreements. Headwaters has entered into employment agreements with its Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and five other employees. The agreements have original terms of approximately three to five years and the CEO and CFO agreements are renewable for one‑year terms. The CEO’s agreement calls for supplemental retirement contributions equal to 72.5% of his salary during a portion of the term of the agreement and 42.5% thereafter. The aggregate commitment for salaries and other obligations for all future periods as of September 30, 2016, assuming no renewals, is approximately $5.4 million. The agreements also provide for certain termination benefits. If the officers’ and employees’ employment would have terminated on September 30, 2016 (but not by reason of a change in control, which is described hereafter), the aggregate termination benefits as of that date would have been approximately $12.0 million, of which approximately $4.1 million has been expensed and accrued. Executive Change in Control Agreements. The Compensation Committee (Committee) has approved “Executive Change in Control Agreements” with certain officers and employees. Upon a change in control, as defined, the agreements provide for immediate vesting and exercisability of all outstanding stock‑based awards. In addition, if termination of employment occurs within a specified period of a change in control, the agreements provide for i) severance pay equal to a stipulated multiple of the sum of the person’s current annual salary plus a bonus component based on either past bonuses paid or the target bonus for the fiscal year in which the change in control occurs; and ii) continuance of health and other benefits and perquisites for a stipulated period following the change in control. Further, if any long‑term cash awards are not continued, payment shall be made based on the pro‑rated level of performance achieved as of the end of the most recently completed fiscal quarter. If terminations associated with a change in control would have occurred on September 30, 2016, the cash severance payments due to the officers and employees (including amounts due under long‑term cash awards and the estimated costs of continuing benefits and perquisites) and the excess of the market value of unvested stock‑based awards on that date above related exercise prices would have aggregated approximately $24.5 million (of which approximately $9.9 million has been expensed and accrued). Cash Performance Unit Awards. In 2014, the Committee approved grants of performance unit awards to certain officers and employees, to be settled in cash, based on the achievement of cash flow generated during 2014. For purposes of these awards, cash flow is generally defined as operating income plus depreciation, amortization and asset impairments, reduced by capital expenditures. The number of awards granted was determined using a target compensation amount for each participant and was adjusted, subject to prescribed limitations, based on the actual cash flow generated during the 2014 performance year, using a threshold/target/maximum adjustment structure. The awards provided for 50% vesting as of September 30, 2015 and 50% vesting as of September 30, 2016, provided the participant was still employed by Headwaters on those vest dates. The terms of the awards also provided for i) adjustment for changes in Headwaters’ average stock price for the 60 days prior to and including September 30, 2014 as compared to Headwaters’ average stock price for the 60 days prior to and including September 30, 2013, and ii) potential further adjustment based on cash flows generated in the two years subsequent to the year of grant, or base performance year. Approximately $5.1 million of expense was recorded for the 2014 awards in 2014. In 2015 and 2016, the Committee approved grants of performance unit awards to certain officers and employees for cash flow generated during those fiscal years, with terms similar to the 2014 awards described above. Approximately $8.6 million and $3.5 million of expense was recognized for these awards during 2015 and 2016, which amounts are subject to adjustment, depending on cash flows generated in future years. As of September 30, 2016, approximately $13.7 million was accrued for all performance unit awards outstanding but unpaid as of that date. Cash‑Settled SAR Grants. In 2012, the Committee approved grants to certain officers and employees of approximately 1.0 million cash‑settled SARs, none of which remain outstanding as of September 30, 2016, the termination date of these awards. These SARs, which were considered liability awards, vested in annual installments through September 30, 2014 and were settled in cash upon exercise by the employee. In 2011, the Committee approved grants to certain employees of approximately 0.4 million cash‑settled SARs, none of which remained outstanding as of September 30, 2015, the termination date of these awards. Compensation expense/(income) for all cash-settled SARs was approximately $4.6 million for 2014, $3.1 million for 2015 and $(0.1) million for 2016. Employee Benefit Plans — In addition to standard health and life insurance programs, Headwaters has six employee benefit plans that were operative during the years presented: the 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan (401(k) Plan), the 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP), the Incentive Bonus Plan (IBP), the Deferred Compensation Plan (DCP), the 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan (2010 ICP) and an Executive Retirement Program (ERP). Substantially all employees of Headwaters are eligible to participate in the 401(k) Plan and the ESPP after meeting length of service requirements. Only designated employees are eligible to participate in the IBP, DCP, 2010 ICP and ERP. The total expense for all of Headwaters’ benefit plans combined, including all general and discretionary bonuses and cash‑settled SARs, but excluding stock‑settled SARs and ESPP expenses (which are included in stock‑based compensation) and standard health and life insurance programs, was approximately $26.7 million, $34.8 million and $23.8 million in 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. 401(k) Plan. Under the terms of the 401(k) Plan, eligible employees may elect to make tax‑deferred contributions of up to 50% of their compensation, subject to statutory limitations. Headwaters has a “safe harbor” 401(k) plan which requires a mandatory minimum employer match of employee contributions and immediate vesting of employer contributions. Headwaters is not required to be profitable to make the matching contributions. ESPP. The ESPP provides eligible employees with an opportunity to purchase Headwaters common stock on favorable terms and to pay for such purchases through payroll deductions. Approximately 4.3 million shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance under the ESPP and approximately 2.3 million shares remain available for future issuance as of September 30, 2016. In accordance with terms of the ESPP, participating employees purchase shares of stock directly from Headwaters, which provides newly‑issued shares to meet its commitment. The ESPP is intended to comply with Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code, but is not subject to the requirements of ERISA. Employees purchase stock through payroll deductions of 1% to 10% of cash compensation, subject to certain limitations, which stock is purchased in a series of quarterly offerings. The cost per share to the employee is 85% of the stock’s fair market value at the end of each quarterly offering period. IBP. The IBP, the specifics of which are approved annually by the Committee, provides for annual cash bonuses to be paid if Headwaters accomplishes certain financial goals and if participating employees meet individual goals. DCP. The DCP is a nonqualified plan that allows eligible employees to make tax‑deferred contributions of up to 50% of their base compensation and 100% of their incentive compensation. Headwaters may match employee contributions up to a designated maximum rate, which matching contributions have historically vested after three years of plan eligibility. Headwaters also matches (similar to the “safe harbor” 401(k) match discussed above) certain employee contributions, again with immediate vesting of employer contributions. Headwaters is not required to be profitable to make the matching contributions. 2010 ICP. Following stockholder approval of the 2010 ICP, Headwaters has issued long-term cash and equity awards under that plan. Significant obligations under the 2010 ICP include i) the cash performance unit awards described above; ii) the cash‑settled SAR grants described above; and iii) grants of certain stock‑based awards described in Note 10. ERP. In 2013, Headwaters initiated the ERP to provide retirement benefits to designated officers and employees. There is no formal plan document governing this program, which operates and is funded at the sole discretion of the Committee. Although it is the current intent of the Committee to consider funding the ERP annually, there is no obligation to make contributions in any amount for any period, irrespective of whether Headwaters is profitable. Headwaters’ contributions to participants in the ERP vest 20% per year once a participant reaches the age of 61 and become fully vested at age 65. Self Insurance — Headwaters has adopted self‑insured medical insurance plans that cover substantially all employees. There is stop‑loss coverage for amounts in excess of approximately $0.2 million per individual per year. Headwaters also self insures for workers’ compensation claims in most states, limited by stop‑loss coverage which begins for amounts in excess of $0.35 million per occurrence and approximately $5.0 million in the aggregate annually. Headwaters has contracted with third‑party administrators to assist in the payment and administration of claims. Insurance claims are recognized as expense when incurred and include an estimate of costs for claims incurred but not reported at the balance sheet date. As of September 30, 2016, approximately $5.9 million was accrued for medical and workers’ compensation claims incurred on or before September 30, 2016 that have not been paid or reported. Property, Plant and Equipment — As of September 30, 2016, Headwaters was committed to spend approximately $3.6 million on capital projects that were in various stages of completion. Legal Matters — Headwaters has ongoing litigation and asserted claims which have been incurred during 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 $5.1 million, $2.2 million and $(1.4) million of expense (credit) for legal matters in 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. Except for 2014, when $2.8 million of expense was recorded for potential losses, costs for outside legal counsel comprised a majority of Headwaters’ litigation‑related costs in the years presented. Headwaters currently believes the range of potential loss for all unresolved legal matters, excluding costs for outside counsel, is from $0 up to the amounts sought by claimants and has recorded a liability as of September 30, 2016 of $0. 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. It 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. 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 (VEPCO). 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 VEPCO and related companies, 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 surface water exposing plaintiffs to dangerous chemicals and causing personal injury and 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. In March 2016, the court responded to VFL’s motion, ruling that (i) the statute of limitations barred nuisance and negligence claims of all plaintiffs who are not minors and who are not making personal injury claims, and (ii) emotional distress damages are not cognizable. Plaintiffs moved to amend their complaints, but the motion was denied in August 2016. All but seven Plaintiffs have asserted in discovery that they were not seeking personal injury damages except emotional distress. 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. CPM. In August 2015, CPM Virginia, LLC (CPM), the Battlefield Golf Course developer, filed a complaint in the State of Virginia Richmond Circuit Court against VEPCO, VFL, and Headwaters related to construction of the golf course described in the Fentress Families Trust case. The complaint alleges breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, estoppel, nuisance, breach of warranties, negligence, and interference with prospective business advantage. CPM’s complaint seeks $840 million in compensatory damages plus attorney fees and costs. VFL has moved to dismiss based on a failure to timely serve the suit on VFL. In September 2015, CPM filed a separate complaint in the State of Virginia Chesapeake Circuit Court against VFL and Headwaters also related to construction of the golf course described in the Fentress Families Trust case, alleging breach of contract and seeking declaratory judgment and compensatory damages in the amount of $0.5 million plus attorney fees and costs. CPM alleges that HRI should indemnify CPM for past and future expenses incurred in defending against the Fentress complaints. Because resolution of the CPM litigation is uncertain, legal counsel and management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of VFL or Headwaters’ liability, or the insurers’ obligation to indemnify VFL and Headwaters against loss, if any. Clary. In August 2014, 77 plaintiffs filed suit in the State of West Virginia Circuit Court of Mason County against four defendants, including American Electric Power Co., Inc., Ohio Power Company and an individual. Plaintiffs claim injury resulting from exposure to coal combustion waste from the Gavin Power Plant in Cheshire, Ohio while working as employees of contractors in the Gavin landfill. Plaintiffs claim wrongful death, failure to warn and protect, negligence per se, negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, heightened duty, strict liability, battery, fraud, fraudulent concealment, misrepresentation and related causes of action, seeking unspecified damages for medical monitoring and other costs, loss of consortium, lost wages, personal injuries, and punitive damages. In September 2015, the Ohio Power Company filed a third-party complaint against Headwaters and two other entities who were contractors to Ohio Power Company. Ohio Power Company claims that the third-party defendant contractors operated the Gavin landfill and that plaintiffs are former employees or family members of the third-party defendants. Ohio Power Company denies the plaintiffs’ allegations, but states that Headwaters and the other third-party defendants are required to indemnify Ohio Power and provide contribution to the extent that Ohio Power is found liable to plaintiffs, including interest, attorney fees, and costs. In April 2016, the case was reassigned to the State of West Virginia Mass Litigation Panel. Discovery is underway. The court’s scheduling order has set trial to begin in September 2017. Because resolution of the litigation is uncertain, legal counsel and management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of Headwaters’ liability, or whether insurers have an obligation to indemnify Headwaters against loss, if any. John River Cartage . In January 2012 John River Cartage, Inc. filed suit in the State of Louisiana 18 th Judicial District, Parish Pointe Coupee against Louisiana Generation, LLC, (LaGen), NRG Energy, Inc., and Headwaters Resources, Inc. (HRI). At the time of action, HRI provided CCP management services to LaGen in connection with LaGen’s power generating plant located in New Roads, Louisiana. Plaintiff had been a subcontractor to a previous contractor to LaGen. Plaintiff’s original complaint alleged that LaGen and HRI conspired to convert certain materials at the power plant and violation of Louisiana unfair trade practices law. In September 2015, the court allowed plaintiff to amend its complaint to allege that HRI and LaGen violated Louisiana antitrust law. Discovery is underway. Plaintiff seeks lost profits from sales of the allegedly converted materials, damages to cover debts arising from Plaintiff’s business failure, disgorgement of financial benefits, loss of Plaintiff’s business valuation, and treble damages and attorney fees, as well as unspecified equitable relief. HRI answered the complaint denying the allegations. Trial is set for April 2017. 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. Building Products Matters. There are litigation and pending and threatened claims made against certain subsidiaries within Headwaters’ building products segment, with respect to several products 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 or wall product. 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. Building products 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 attorney 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 within 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 and Clary cases summarized above are examples 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. Discontinued Coal Cleaning Operations. The following litigation relates to the discontinued coal cleaning business: RLF Chinook Properties. In September 2015, RLF Chinook Properties, LLC filed suit in the State of Indiana Circuit Court of Clay against Covol Fuels No. 2, LLC, Headwaters Energy Services Corp., other Covol companies (collectively, “Covol”), as well as BRC Chinook, LLC and other BRC affiliates (collectively, “BRC”). Covol entered into a coal recovery agreement with plaintiff in 2007 with respect to coal at the RLF Chinook site. Covol assigned the coal recovery agreement to BRC in 2013. Plaintiff alleges that BRC has failed to fulfill certain obligations under the coal recovery agreement, including failure to submit reclamation plans to State of Indiana for approval and to restore and reclaim the site per the approved plan. Plaintiff alleges that Covol is liable for the claimed breaches under the coal recovery agreement, and seeks unspecified damages, together with attorney fees and costs. Covol has answered the complaint denying the allegations. Because resolution of the litigation is uncertain, legal counsel and management cannot express an opinion as to the ultimate amount, if any, of Covol’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. |