COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The Company leases certain buildings and equipment. The Company’s facility and equipment leases may provide for escalations of rent or rent abatements and payment of pro rata portions of building operating expenses. Minimum lease payments are recognized on a straight-line basis over the minimum lease term. The total expenses under operating leases for the three and six months ended June 30, 2016 was $1.1 million and $2.1 million, respectively, compared to $1.1 million and $2.1 million for the same periods in 2015, respectively. The Company also has non-capital purchase commitments that primarily relate to gas, gypsum, paper and other raw materials. The total amounts purchased under such commitments were $15.5 million and $33.1 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2016, respectively, compared to $16.0 million and $32.8 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2015, respectively.



F9: Future Minimum Lease Payments Due Under Noncancellable Operating Leases and Purchase Commitments by Year
	Future Minimum Lease Payments		Purchase Commitments
	(in thousands)
July 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016	$	770	$	21,994
2017	1,183		31,019
2018	616		29,463
2019	1,494		19,870
2020	—		14,185
2021	—		3,232
Thereafter	—		27,173
Total	$	4,063	$	146,936

Under certain circumstances, the Company provides letters of credit related to its natural gas and other supply purchases. As of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the Company had outstanding letters of credit of approximately $2.1 million and $3.0 million, respectively.

In March 2015, a group of homebuilders commenced a lawsuit against the Company and other U.S. wallboard manufacturers, alleging that such manufacturers had conspired to fix the price of wallboard in violation of antitrust and unfair competition laws. The complaint, as amended in October 2015, December 2015 and March 2016, also alleged that the manufacturers agreed to abolish the use of "job quotes" and agreed to restrict the supply of wallboard in order to support the allegedly collusive price increases. The case was transferred to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for coordinated and consolidated pretrial proceedings with existing antitrust litigation in that district. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the case with respect to the Company in April 2016 and denied any wrongdoing of the type alleged in the amended complaint. In June 2016, the Court granted the Company's motion to dismiss the case with respect to the Company, with prejudice. In July 2016, the plaintiffs filed a Motion to Certify Order for Interlocutory Appeal seeking to challenge the Court's decision to grant the Company's motion to dismiss. The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the allegations and does not believe the lawsuit will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operation or liquidity.

In July 2015, the Company received a grand jury subpoena directing it to provide certain documents in connection with an investigation being conducted by the Department of Justice regarding antitrust matters in the gypsum drywall industry. The Company is cooperating fully with the Department of Justice in responding to the subpoena. The Company does not believe the investigation will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company executes contracts involving indemnifications standard in the industry. These indemnifications might include claims relating to any of the following: environmental and tax matters; intellectual property rights; governmental regulations and employment-related matters; customer, supplier, and other commercial contractual relationships; and financial matters. While the maximum amount to which the Company may be exposed under such agreements cannot be estimated, it is the opinion of management that these guarantees and indemnifications are not expected to have a materially adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is involved in certain legal actions and claims, including proceedings under laws and regulations relating to environmental and other matters. Because such matters are subject to many uncertainties and the outcomes are not predictable with assurance, the total liability for these legal actions and claims cannot be determined with certainty. When the Company determines that it is probable that a liability for environmental matters, legal actions or other contingencies has been incurred and the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable, an estimate of the costs to be incurred is recorded as a liability in the financial statements. As of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, such liabilities were not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. While management believes its accruals for such liabilities are adequate, the Company may incur costs in excess of the amounts provided. Although the ultimate amount of liability that may result from these matters or actions is not ascertainable, any amounts exceeding the recorded accruals are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.