Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Contingencies - Environmental The Company evaluates the adequacy of its environmental liabilities on a quarterly basis. Adjustments to the liabilities are made when additional information becomes available that affects the estimated costs to study or remediate any environmental issues or expenditures are made for which liabilities were established. Changes in the Company’s environmental liabilities in aggregate for the three months ended November 30, 2017 were as follows (in thousands): Balance as of August 31, 2017 Liabilities Established (Released), Net Payments and Other Balance as of November 30, 2017 Short-Term Long-Term $ 48,398 $ 7,021 $ (761 ) $ 54,658 $ 7,214 $ 47,444 Recycling Operations As of November 30, 2017 and August 31, 2017 , the Company's recycling operations had environmental liabilities of $55 million and $48 million , respectively, for the potential remediation of locations where it has conducted business or has environmental liabilities from historical or recent activities. The liabilities relate to the investigation and potential future remediation of soil contamination, groundwater contamination, storm water runoff issues and other natural resource damages. Except for Portland Harbor and certain liabilities discussed under Other Legacy Environmental Loss Contingencies immediately below, such liabilities were not individually material at any site. Portland Harbor In December 2000, the Company was notified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) that it is one of the potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”) that own or operate or formerly owned or operated sites which are part of or adjacent to the Portland Harbor Superfund site (the “Site”). The precise nature and extent of any cleanup of the Site, the parties to be involved, the timing of any specific remedial action and the allocation of the costs for any cleanup among responsible parties have not yet been determined. The process of site investigation, remedy selection, identification of additional PRPs and allocation of costs has been underway for a number of years, but significant uncertainties remain. It is unclear to what extent the Company will be liable for environmental costs or natural resource damage claims or third party contribution or damage claims with respect to the Site. While the Company participated in certain preliminary Site study efforts, it was not party to the consent order entered into by the EPA with certain other PRPs, referred to as the “Lower Willamette Group” (“LWG”), for a remedial investigation/feasibility study (“RI/FS”). During fiscal 2007, the Company and certain other parties agreed to an interim settlement with the LWG under which the Company made a cash contribution to the LWG RI/FS. The LWG has indicated that it had incurred over $115 million in investigation-related costs over an approximately 10 year period working on the RI/FS. Following submittal of draft RI and FS documents which the EPA largely rejected, the EPA took over the RI/FS process. The Company has joined with approximately 100 other PRPs, including the LWG members, in a voluntary process to establish an allocation of costs at the Site, including the costs incurred by the LWG in the RI/FS process. The LWG members have also commenced federal court litigation, which has been stayed, seeking to bring additional parties into the allocation process. In January 2008, the Portland Harbor Natural Resource Trustee Council (“Trustee Council”) invited the Company and other PRPs to participate in funding and implementing the Natural Resource Injury Assessment for the Site. Following meetings among the Trustee Council and the PRPs, funding and participation agreements were negotiated under which the participating PRPs, including the Company, agreed to fund the first phase of the three-phase natural resource damage assessment. Phase 1, which included the development of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Plan ("AP") and implementation of several early studies, was substantially completed in 2010. The Company recently joined with other participating PRPs in agreeing to fund Phase 2 of the natural resource damage assessment, which includes the implementation of the AP to develop information sufficient to facilitate early settlements between the Trustee Council and Phase 2 participants and the identification of restoration projects to be funded by the settlements. Phase 3, which has not yet commenced, will involve the full implementation of the AP and the final injury and damage determination. The Company has not yet commenced discussions with the Trustee Council regarding early settlements under Phase 2, and therefore it is uncertain whether it will enter into an early settlement for natural resource damages or what costs it may incur in any such early settlement. On January 30, 2017, one of the Trustees, the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, which withdrew from the council in 2009, filed a suit against approximately 30 parties, including the Company, seeking reimbursement of certain past and future response costs in connection with remedial action at the Site and recovery of assessment costs related to natural resources damages from releases at and from the Site to the Multnomah Channel and the Lower Columbia River. The Company intends to defend against such claims and does not have sufficient information to determine the likelihood of a loss in this matter or to estimate the amount of damages being sought or the amount of such damages that could be allocated to the Company. Estimates of the cost of remedial action for the cleanup of the in-river portion of the Site have varied widely in various drafts of the FS and in the EPA’s final FS issued in June 2016 from approximately $170 million to over $2.5 billion (net present value), depending on the remedial alternative and a number of other factors. In comments submitted to the EPA, the Company and certain other stakeholders identified a number of serious concerns regarding the EPA's risk and remedial alternatives assessments, cost estimates, scheduling assumptions and conclusions regarding the feasibility and effectiveness of remediation technologies. In January 2017, the EPA issued a Record of Decision (“ROD”) that identified the selected remedy for the Site. The selected remedy is a modified version of one of the alternative remedies evaluated in the EPA’s FS that was expanded to include additional work at a greater cost. The EPA has estimated the total cost of the selected remedy at $1.7 billion with a net present value cost of $1.05 billion (at a 7% discount rate) and an estimated construction period of 13 years following completion of the remedial designs. In the ROD, the EPA stated that the cost estimate is an order-of-magnitude engineering estimate that is expected to be within + 50% to -30% of the actual project cost and that changes in the cost elements are likely to occur as a result of new information and data collected during the engineering design. The Company has identified a number of concerns regarding the remedy described in the ROD, which is based on data more than a decade old, and the EPA's estimates for the costs and time required to implement the selected remedy. Because of ongoing questions regarding cost effectiveness, technical feasibility, and the use of stale data, it is uncertain whether the ROD will be implemented as issued. In addition, the ROD did not determine or allocate the responsibility for remediation costs among the PRPs. In the ROD, the EPA acknowledged that much of the data used in preparing the ROD was more than a decade old and would need to be updated with a new round of “baseline” sampling to be conducted prior to the remedial design phase. Accordingly, the ROD provided for additional pre-remedial design investigative work and baseline sampling to be conducted in order to provide a baseline of current conditions and delineate particular remedial actions for specific areas within the Site. This additional sampling needs to occur prior to proceeding with the next phase in the process which is the remedial design. The remedial design phase is an engineering phase during which additional technical information and data will be collected, identified and incorporated into technical drawings and specifications developed for the subsequent remedial action. Moreover, the ROD provided only Site-wide cost estimates and did not provide sufficient detail to estimate costs for specific sediment management areas within the Site. Following issuance of the ROD, EPA proposed that the PRPs, or a subgroup of PRPs, perform the additional investigative work identified in the ROD under a new consent order. In December 2017, the Company and three other PRPs entered into a new Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent with EPA to perform such pre-remedial design investigation and baseline sampling over a two -year period. The Company estimates that its share of the costs of performing such work will be approximately $2 million , which it recorded to environmental liabilities and selling, general and administrative expense in the consolidated financial statements in the first quarter of fiscal 2018. The Company believes that such costs will be fully covered by existing insurance coverage and, thus, has also recorded an insurance receivable for $2 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2018, resulting in no net impact to the Company's consolidated results of operations. Except for certain early action projects in which the Company is not involved, remediation activities are not expected to commence for a number of years. In addition, as discussed above, responsibility for implementing and funding the remedy will be determined in a separate allocation process. The Company does not expect the allocation process to proceed until after the additional pre-remedial design data is collected. Because there has not been a determination of the specific remediation actions that will be required, the amount of natural resource damages or the allocation of costs of the investigations and any remedy and natural resource damages among the PRPs, the Company believes it is not possible to reasonably estimate the amount or range of costs which it is likely to or which it is reasonably possible that it will incur in connection with the Site, although such costs could be material to the Company’s financial position, results of operations, cash flows and liquidity. Among the facts currently being developed are detailed information on the history of ownership of and the nature of the uses of and activities and operations performed on each property within the Site, which are factors that will play a substantial role in determining the allocation of investigation and remedy costs among the PRPs. The Company has insurance policies that it believes will provide reimbursement for costs it incurs for defense (including the pre-remedial design investigative activities), remediation and mitigation for natural resource damages claims in connection with the Site, although there is no assurance that those policies will cover all of the costs which the Company may incur. As of November 30, 2017, the Company's total liability for its estimated share of the costs of the investigation was $3 million . The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality is separately providing oversight of voluntary investigations by the Company involving the Company’s sites adjacent to the Portland Harbor which are focused on controlling any current “uplands” releases of contaminants into the Willamette River. No liabilities have been established in connection with these investigations because the extent of contamination (if any) and the Company’s responsibility for the contamination (if any) have not yet been determined. Other Legacy Environmental Loss Contingencies The Company’s environmental loss contingencies as of November 30, 2017 and August 31, 2017 , other than Portland Harbor, include actual or possible investigation and cleanup costs from historical contamination at sites currently or formerly owned or operated by the Company or at other sites where the Company may have responsibility for such costs due to past disposal or other activities ("legacy environmental loss contingencies"). These legacy environmental loss contingencies relate to the potential remediation of waterways and soil and groundwater contamination and may also involve natural resource damages, governmental fines and penalties and claims by third parties for personal injury and property damage. The Company has been notified that it is or may be a potentially responsible party at certain of these sites, and investigation and cleanup activities are ongoing or may be required in the future. The Company recognizes a liability for such matters when the loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated. Where investigation and cleanup activities are ongoing or where the Company has not yet been identified as having responsibility or the contamination has not yet been identified, it is reasonably possible that the Company may need to recognize additional liabilities in connection with such sites but the Company cannot currently reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss absent additional information or developments. Such additional liabilities, individually or in the aggregate, may have a material adverse effect on the Company's results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. During the first quarter of fiscal 2018, the Company accrued $4 million in expense at its Corporate division for the estimated costs related to remediation of shredder residue disposed of in or around the 1970s at third-party sites located near each other. Investigation activities have been conducted under oversight of the applicable state regulatory agency. It is reasonably possible that the Company may recognize additional liabilities in connection with this matter at the time such losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. The Company estimates a range of reasonably possible losses in excess of current accruals at between zero and $28 million based on a range of remedial alternatives and subject to development and approval by regulators of a specific remedy implementation plan. The Company is investigating whether a portion or all of the current and future losses, if incurred, are covered by existing insurance coverage or may be offset by contributions from other responsible parties. Steel Manufacturing Operations The Company's steel manufacturing operations had no environmental liabilities as of November 30, 2017 and August 31, 2017 . The steel mill's electric arc furnace generates dust (“EAF dust”) that is classified as hazardous waste by the EPA because of its zinc and lead content. As a result, the Company captures the EAF dust and ships it in specialized rail cars to firms that apply treatments that allow for the ultimate disposal of the EAF dust. The Company's steel mill has an operating permit issued under Title V of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, which governs certain air quality standards. The permit is based on an annual production capacity of 950 thousand tons. The permit was first issued in 1998 and has since been renewed through February 1, 2018 . The permit renewal process occurs every five years and is underway for the next renewal period. Summary - Environmental Contingencies Other than the Portland Harbor Superfund site and legacy environmental loss contingencies, which are discussed separately above, management currently believes that adequate provision has been made for the potential impact of these issues and that the ultimate outcomes will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial statements as a whole. Historically, the amounts the Company has ultimately paid for such remediation activities have not been material in any given period. Contingencies - Other The Company is a party to various legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. The Company recognizes a liability for such matters when the loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated. Legal proceedings include those arising from accidents involving Company-owned vehicles, including Company tractor trailers. In some instances, such accidents and the related litigation involve accidents that have resulted in third party fatalities. It is reasonably possible that the Company may recognize additional losses in connection with such lawsuits at the time such losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. Such losses may be material to the Company's consolidated financial statements. At this time, the amount of such additional reasonably possible losses cannot be reasonably estimated. To the extent that circumstances change and the Company determines that a loss is reasonably possible, can be reasonably estimated, and is material, the Company would then disclose an estimate of the possible loss or range of loss. The Company believes that such losses, if incurred, would be substantially covered by existing insurance coverage. The Company does not anticipate that the resolution of legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business, after taking into consideration expected insurance recoveries, will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows. |