Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies

The company has entered into certain commitments with suppliers which are of a customary nature. Commitments have been entered into relating to future expected requirements for such commodities as electricity, natural gas and its transportation services, fuel, air products, and zinc. Certain commitments contain provisions which require that the company "take or pay" for specified quantities at fixed prices without regard to actual usage for periods of up to 46 months for physical commodity requirements, for up to 7 years for commodity transportation requirements, and for up to 14 years for air products. The company utilized such "take or pay" requirements during the past three years under these contracts. The company believes that production requirements will be such that consumption of the products or services purchased under these commitments will occur in the normal production process.

The company's commitments for these agreements with "take or pay" or other similar commitment provisions for the years ending December 31, as follows (in thousands):


2014	$	79,527
2015		9,439
2016		5,587
2017		3,744
2018		2,425
Thereafter		10,132


	$	110,854

The company purchases its electricity consumed at its Flat Roll Division pursuant to a contract which extends through December 2014, and designates 160 hours annually as "interruptible service." The contract also establishes an agreed fixed-rate energy charge per Mill/kWh consumed for each year through the expiration of the agreement.

At December 31, 2013, the company has outstanding commitments of $29.4 million related to ongoing construction of property, plant, and equipment related primarily to steel operations. The company's commitments for operating leases are discussed in Note 11.

The company is involved in various routine litigation matters, including administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, governmental investigations, environmental matters, and commercial and construction contract disputes, none of which are expected to have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

The company is involved, along with eight other steel manufacturing companies, in a class action antitrust complaint filed in federal court in Chicago, Illinois in September 2008, which alleges a conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize the price at which steel products were sold in the United States during a period between 2005 and 2007, by artificially restricting the supply of such steel products. All but one of the complaints were brought on behalf of a purported class consisting of all direct purchasers of steel products. The other complaint was brought on behalf of a purported class consisting of all indirect purchasers of steel products within the same time period. A ninth complaint, in December 2010, was brought on behalf of indirect purchasers of steel products in Tennessee and has been consolidated with the original complaints. All complaints seek treble damages and costs, including reasonable attorney fees, pre- and post-judgment interest and injunctive relief. In January 2009, Steel Dynamics and the other defendants filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss all of the direct purchaser lawsuits, but this motion was denied in June 2009. Following a period of preliminary discovery relating to class certification matters, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class Certification in May 2012, and on February 28, 2013, Defendants filed their Joint Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, together with joint motions to exclude the expert opinions of both of Plaintiffs' two retained experts. On October 15, 2013, Plaintiffs submitted their Reply papers, and the defendants have submitted their additional responses as well. A hearing on class certification and Daubert issues has been scheduled for March 5-7, 2014.

Due to the uncertain nature of litigation, the company cannot presently determine the ultimate outcome of this litigation. However, we have determined, based on the information available at this time, that there is not presently a "reasonable possibility" (as that term is defined in ASC 450-20-20), that the outcome of these legal proceedings would have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. Although not presently necessary or appropriate to make a dollar estimate of exposure to loss, if any, in connection with the above matter, we may in the future determine that a loss accrual is necessary. Although we may make loss accruals, if and as warranted, any amounts that we may accrue from time to time could vary significantly from the amounts we actually pay, due to inherent uncertainties and the inherent shortcomings of the estimation process, the uncertainties involved in litigation and other factors. Additionally, an adverse result could have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.