Other Contingencies and Commitments
Income Taxes The company calculates its income tax expense and liabilities quarterly. These liabilities generally are subject to audit and are not finalized with the individual taxing authorities until several years after the end of the annual period for which income taxes have been calculated. Refer to Note 15, beginning on page FS-43, for a discussion of the periods for which tax returns have been audited for the company’s major tax jurisdictions and a discussion for all tax jurisdictions of the differences between the amount of tax benefits recognized in the financial statements and the amount taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. As discussed on page FS-45, Chevron completed its assessment of the potential impact of the August 2012 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that disallowed the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits claimed by an unrelated taxpayer. The findings of this assessment did not result in a
material impact on the company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Guarantees The company’s guarantee of $524 is associated with certain payments under a terminal use agreement entered into by an equity affiliate. Over the approximate 14-year remaining term of the guarantee, the maximum guarantee amount will be reduced as certain fees are paid by the affiliate. There are numerous cross-indemnity agreements with the affiliate and the other partners to permit recovery of amounts paid under the guarantee. Chevron has recorded no liability for its obligation under this guarantee.
Indemnifications In the acquisition of Unocal, the company assumed certain indemnities relating to contingent environmental liabilities associated with assets that were sold in 1997. The acquirer of those assets shared in certain environmental remediation costs up to a maximum obligation of $200, which had been reached at December 31, 2009. Under the indemnification agreement, after reaching the $200 obligation, Chevron is solely responsible until April 2022, when the indemnification expires. The environmental conditions or events that are subject to these indemnities must have arisen prior to the sale of the assets in 1997.
Although the company has provided for known obligations under this indemnity that are probable and reasonably estimable, the amount of additional future costs may be material to results of operations in the period in which they are recognized. The company does not expect these costs will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position or liquidity.
Long-Term Unconditional Purchase Obligations and Commitments, Including Throughput and Take-or-Pay Agreements The company and its subsidiaries have certain other contingent liabilities with respect to long-term unconditional purchase obligations and commitments, including throughput and take-or-pay agreements, some of which relate to suppliers’ financing arrangements. The agreements typically provide goods and services, such as pipeline and storage capacity, drilling rigs, utilities, and petroleum products, to be used or sold in the ordinary course of the company’s business. The aggregate approximate amounts of required payments under these various commitments are: 2014 – $4,200; 2015 – $4,500; 2016 – $3,200; 2017 – $2,600; 2018 – $2,200; 2019 and after – $6,900. A portion of these commitments may ultimately be shared with project partners. Total payments under the agreements were approximately $3,600 in 2013, $3,600 in 2012 and $6,600 in 2011.
Environmental The company is subject to loss contingencies pursuant to laws, regulations, private claims and legal proceedings related to environmental matters that are subject to legal settlements or that in the future may require the company to take action to correct or ameliorate the effects on the environment of prior release of chemicals or petroleum substances, including MTBE, by the company or other parties. Such contingencies may exist for various sites, including, but not limited to, federal Superfund sites and analogous sites under state laws, refineries, crude oil fields, service stations, terminals, land development areas, and mining operations, whether operating, closed or divested. These future costs are not fully determinable due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible contamination, the unknown timing and extent of the corrective actions that may be required, the determination of the company’s liability in proportion to other responsible parties, and the extent to which such costs are recoverable from third parties.
Although the company has provided for known environmental obligations that are probable and reasonably estimable, the amount of additional future costs may be material to results of operations in the period in which they are recognized. The company does not expect these costs will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position or liquidity. Also, the company does not believe its obligations to make such expenditures have had, or will have, any significant impact on the company’s competitive position relative to other U.S. or international petroleum or chemical companies.
Chevron’s environmental reserve as of December 31, 2013, was $1,456. Included in this balance were remediation activities at approximately 174 sites for which the company had been identified as a potentially responsible party or otherwise involved in the remediation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or other regulatory agencies under the provisions of the federal Superfund law or analogous state laws. The company’s remediation reserve for these sites at year-end 2013 was $179. The federal Superfund law and analogous state laws provide for joint and several liability for all responsible parties. Any future actions by the EPA or other regulatory agencies to require Chevron to assume other potentially responsible parties’ costs at designated hazardous waste sites are not expected to have a material effect on the company’s results of operations, consolidated financial position or liquidity.
Of the remaining year-end 2013 environmental reserves balance of $1,277, $834 related to the company’s U.S. downstream operations, including refineries and other plants, marketing locations (i.e., service stations and terminals), chemical facilities, and pipelines. The remaining $443 was associated with various sites in international downstream $79, upstream $313 and other businesses $51. Liabilities at all sites, whether operating, closed or divested, were primarily associated with the company’s plans and activities to
remediate soil or groundwater contamination or both. These and other activities include one or more of the following: site assessment; soil excavation; offsite disposal of contaminants; onsite containment, remediation and/or extraction of petroleum hydrocarbon liquid and vapor from soil; groundwater extraction and treatment; and monitoring of the natural attenuation of the contaminants.
The company manages environmental liabilities under specific sets of regulatory requirements, which in the United States include the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and various state and local regulations. No single remediation site at year-end 2013 had a recorded liability that was material to the company’s results of operations, consolidated financial position or liquidity.
It is likely that the company will continue to incur additional liabilities, beyond those recorded, for environmental remediation relating to past operations. These future costs are not fully determinable due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible contamination, the unknown timing and extent of the corrective actions that may be required, the determination of the company’s liability in proportion to other responsible parties, and the extent to which such costs are recoverable from third parties.
Refer to Note 24 for a discussion of the company’s asset retirement obligations.
Other Contingencies On April 26, 2010, a California appeals court issued a ruling related to the adequacy of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) supporting the issuance of certain permits by the city of Richmond, California, to replace and upgrade certain facilities at Chevron’s refinery in Richmond. Settlement discussions with plaintiffs in the case ended late fourth quarter 2010, and on March 3, 2011, the trial court entered a final judgment and peremptory writ ordering the City to set aside the project EIR and conditional use permits and enjoining Chevron from any further work. On May 23, 2011, the company filed an application with the City Planning Department for a conditional use permit for a revised project to complete construction of the hydrogen plant, certain sulfur removal facilities and related infrastructure. On June 10, 2011, the City published its Notice of Preparation of the revised EIR for the project. The revised and recirculated EIR is intended to comply with the appeals court decision. Management believes the outcomes associated with the project are uncertain. Due to the uncertainty of the company’s future course of action, or potential outcomes of any action or combination of actions, management does not believe an estimate of the financial effects, if any, can be made at this time.
Chevron receives claims from and submits claims to customers; trading partners; U.S. federal, state and local regulatory bodies; governments; contractors; insurers; and suppliers. The amounts of these claims, individually and in the aggregate, may be significant and take lengthy periods to resolve.
The company and its affiliates also continue to review and analyze their operations and may close, abandon, sell, exchange, acquire or restructure assets to achieve operational or strategic benefits and to improve competitiveness and profitability. These activities, individually or together, may result in gains or losses in future periods.
us-gaap:CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock