Contractual Commitments The following table summarizes the minimum annual payments due on noncancelable operating leases and other similar contractual obligations having initial or remaining terms in excess of one year:

In thousands	Leases		Other
2021	$	4,736	$	91,806
2022		3,277		12,304
2023		1,568		—
2024		1,005		—
2025		726		—
Thereafter		3,620		—

The amounts set forth for above includes commitments for leases that had not commenced as of December 31, 2019. Other contractual obligations primarily represent minimum purchase commitments under energy supply contracts and other purchase obligations.

At December 31, 2020, required minimum annual payments due under operating leases and other similar contractual obligations aggregated $14.9 million and $104.1 million, respectively.

Background. We have previously reported that we face liabilities 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”). Since the early 1990s, the United States, the State of Wisconsin and two Indian tribes (collectively, the “Governments”) have pursued a 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 originally notified several entities that they were potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”); however, after giving effect to settlements reached with the Governments, the remaining PRPs exposed to continuing obligations to implement the remainder of the cleanup consist of us, Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products, L.P. (“Georgia-Pacific”) and NCR Corporation.

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”).

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, work has proceeded primarily under a Unilateral Administrative Order (“UAO”) issued in November 2007 by the EPA to us and seven other respondents. The majority of the work in OU 2-5 has been funded or conducted by parties other than us. The cleanup was completed in 2020 and the site is being decommissioned.

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. Under the Glatfelter consent decree, we settled the United States’ and Wisconsin’s claims for response costs paid by them before October 2018 and for NRDs. In addition, we are primarily responsible for long-term monitoring and maintenance in OU2-OU4a and for reimbursement of government oversight costs paid after October 2018. Finally, we remain responsible for our obligation to continue long-term monitoring and maintenance under our OU1 consent decree.

Cost estimates. Under terms of the Glatfelter consent decree, in January 2019 we paid $20.5 million to the United States in satisfaction of the governments’ claims for costs incurred prior to October 2018, and NRDs.

We subject to our remaining obligations under the OU1 consent decree, which now consist of long-term monitoring and maintenance. Furthermore, we are primarily responsible for long term monitoring and maintenance in OU2-OU4a 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 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 obligated to make the regular payments under that fixed-price contract until the remaining amount due is less than the OU1 escrow account balance. We are permitted to pay for this contract using the remaining balance of the escrow account established by us and WTM I Company (“WTM I”) another PRP, under the OU1 consent decree during any period that the balance in the escrow account exceeds the amount due under our fixed-price contract. As of December 31, 2020, the balance in the escrow is less than amounts due under the fixed-price contract by approximately $1.5 million. Our obligation to pay this difference is secured by a letter of credit.

At December 31, 2020, the escrow account balance totaled $9.0 million which is included in the condensed consolidated balance sheet under the caption “Other assets.”

Under the consent decree, we are responsible for reimbursement of government oversight costs paid from October 2018 and later over approximately the next 30 years. We anticipate that oversight costs will decline as activities at the site transition from remediation to long-term monitoring and maintenance.

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

	Year ended December 31
In thousands		2020			2019
Balance at January 1,	$	21,870		$	45,001
Payments		(3,622	)		(20,805	)
Reserve adjustment		—			(2,509	)
Accretion		207		183
Balance at December 31,	$	18,455		$	21,870

The payments set forth above represent payments for government oversight costs, including the $20.5 million paid in 2019 pursuant to the Glatfelter consent decree and for amounts due under the long-term monitoring and maintenance agreement. Of our total reserve for the Fox River, $3.7 million is recorded in the accompanying December 31, 2020, consolidated balance sheet under the caption “Environmental liabilities” and the remaining $14.8 million is recorded under the caption “Other long term liabilities.”

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.