Background. We previously reported we faced significant uncertainties associated with environmental claims arising out of the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”) in sediments in the lower Fox River, on which our former Neenah facility was located, and in the Bay of Green Bay Wisconsin (collectively, the “Site”). We have resolved these uncertainties as described below.

Since the early 1990s, the United States, the State of Wisconsin (collectively, the “Governments”) and two Indian tribes have pursued the cleanup of a 39-mile stretch of river from Little Lake Butte des Morts into Green Bay and natural resource damages (“NRDs”).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has divided the Site into five “operable units”, including the most upstream portion of the Site on which our facility was located (“OU1”) and four downstream reaches of the river and bay (“OU2-5”).

The United States originally notified several entities that they were potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”). We, with contributions of certain other PRPs, implemented the remedial action in OU1 under a consent decree with the Governments. That work is complete, other than on-going monitoring and maintenance.

For OU2-5, after giving effect to settlements reached with the Governments, the remaining PRPs exposed to continuing obligations to implement the remainder of the cleanup consisted of us, Georgia Pacific Consumer Products, L.P. (“Georgia Pacific”) and NCR Corporation (“NCR”). The majority of the work in OU 2-5 has been funded or conducted by parties other than us. The cleanup is expected to continue at least through 2019, followed by decommissioning and post-remediation long-term monitoring and maintenance.

In 2017, the United States entered into a consent decree with the State of Wisconsin, NCR, and Appvion under which NCR agreed to complete the remaining cleanup and both NCR and Appvion agreed not to seek to recover from us or anyone else any amounts they have spent or would spend, and we and others would be barred from seeking claims against NCR or Appvion. Under the consent decree, the Governments agreed to seek long term monitoring and maintenance in OU2-5 from us and Georgia Pacific; as the result of earlier settlements, Georgia Pacific was only responsible for that work in the most downstream three miles of the river (“OU4b”) and the bay of Green Bay (“OU5”). The Governments agreed to seek their past and future oversight costs only from us.

We and Georgia Pacific had claims against each other to reallocate the costs that we had each incurred or would incur. In 2017, we entered into a settlement agreement with Georgia Pacific to settle these claims. Georgia Pacific agreed to implement the monitoring and maintenance in OU4b and OU5 and we agreed to monitoring and maintenance of all other upstream operable units. We paid Georgia Pacific $9.5 million in August 2017 in connection with this settlement.

After years of extensive and complex litigation, in January 2019, we reached an agreement with the United States, the State of Wisconsin, and Georgia-Pacific to resolve all remaining claims among those parties. A consent decree (“Glatfelter consent decree”) documenting that agreement was entered in the federal district court on March 14, 2019. Under the Glatfelter consent decree, we paid $20.5 million to settle the United States’ and Wisconsin’s claims for response costs incurred by them prior to October 2018 and for NRDs. We also agreed to reimburse the governments for future oversight costs incurred over the next 30 years. We anticipate that a significant portion of the oversight costs will be incurred in the next few years while the remediation is being completed. Once finished, costs will be an order of magnitude lower in most years during the period of long-term monitoring and maintenance. In addition to our previous agreement to be responsible for long-term monitoring and maintenance of OU-1, under this consent decree, we agreed to be primarily responsible for long-term monitoring and maintenance in OU2-OU4a.

Long term monitoring and maintenance will continue over a period of at least 30 years. The monitoring activities consist of, among others, testing fish tissue, sampling water quality and sediment, and inspections of the engineered caps. In the first quarter of 2018, we entered into a fixed-price, 30-year agreement with a third party for the performance of all of our monitoring and maintenance obligations in OU1 through OU4a with limited exceptions, such as, for extraordinary amounts of cap maintenance or replacement. Our obligation under this agreement is included in our total reserve for the Site. We are permitted to pay for this contract using the remaining balance of an escrow account established by us and WTM I Company under the OU1 consent decree during any period that the balance in that account exceeds the amount due under our fixed-price contract. The difference at present is approximately $2 million. We are also required to secure the payment of that difference with a renewal letter of credit or another instrument in the interim.

Reserves for the Site. Our reserve for past and future government oversight costs and long-term monitoring and maintenance is set forth below:

	Three months ended March 31
In thousands		2019			2018
Balance at January 1,	$	45,001		$	43,144
Payments		(20,535	)		(2,536	)
Reserve adjustment		(2,509	)		—
Accretion		56			—
Balance at March 31,	$	22,013		$	40,608

Of our total reserve for the Fox River, $5.0 million is recorded in the accompanying March 31, 2019 condensed consolidated balance sheet under the caption “Environmental liabilities” and the remaining $17.0 million is recorded under the caption “Other long term liabilities.” In connection with the court approval of our January 2019 consent decree, we reduced our reserve by $2.5 million and recorded the adjustment as a reduction in “Selling, general and administrative” expenses in the condensed consolidated statements of income.

Range of Reasonably Possible Outcomes. Based on our analysis of all available information, including but not limited to decisions of the courts, official documents such as records of decision, discussions with legal counsel, cost estimates for future monitoring and maintenance and other post-remediation costs to be performed at the Site, we do not believe that our costs associated with the Fox River matter could exceed the aggregate amounts accrued by a material amount.