Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies. Automotive Environmental Matters Federal-Mogul is a defendant in lawsuits filed, or the recipient of administrative orders issued or demand letters received, in various jurisdictions pursuant to the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”) or other similar national, provincial or state environmental remedial laws. These laws provide that responsible parties may be liable to pay for remediating contamination resulting from hazardous substances that were discharged into the environment by them, by prior owners or occupants of property they currently own or operate, or by others to whom they sent such substances for treatment or other disposition at third party locations. Federal-Mogul has been notified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, other national environmental agencies, and various provincial and state agencies that it may be a potentially responsible party (“PRP”) under such laws for the cost of remediating hazardous substances pursuant to CERCLA and other national and state or provincial environmental laws. PRP designation often results in the funding of site investigations and subsequent remedial activities. Many of the sites that are likely to be the costliest to remediate are often current or former commercial waste disposal facilities to which numerous companies sent wastes. Despite the potential joint and several liability that might be imposed on Federal-Mogul under CERCLA and some of the other laws pertaining to these sites, its share of the total waste sent to these sites has generally been small. Federal-Mogul believes its exposure for liability at these sites is limited. Federal-Mogul has also identified certain other present and former properties at which it may be responsible for cleaning up or addressing environmental contamination, in some cases as a result of contractual commitments and/or federal or state environmental laws. Federal-Mogul is actively seeking to resolve these actual and potential statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations. Although difficult to quantify based on the complexity of the issues, Federal-Mogul has accrued amounts corresponding to its best estimate of the costs associated with such regulatory and contractual obligations on the basis of available information from site investigations and best professional judgment of consultants. Total environmental liabilities, determined on an undiscounted basis, were $12 million and $14 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, and are included in accrued expenses and other liabilities in our condensed consolidated balance sheets. Federal-Mogul believes that recorded environmental liabilities will be adequate to cover its estimated liability for its exposure in respect to such matters. In the event that such liabilities were to significantly exceed the amounts recorded by Federal-Mogul, our Automotive segment's results of operations could be materially affected. At September 30, 2016, Federal-Mogul estimates reasonably possible material additional losses, above and beyond its best estimate of required remediation costs as recorded, to approximate $44 million. Asset Retirement Obligations Federal-Mogul has identified sites with contractual obligations and several sites that are closed or expected to be closed and sold. In connection with these sites, Federal-Mogul has accrued $16 million and $16 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, for asset retirement obligations ("ARO"), primarily related to anticipated costs of removing hazardous building materials at its facilities, and has considered impairment issues that may result from capitalization of these ARO amounts. Federal-Mogul has conditional asset retirement obligations ("CARO"), primarily related to removal costs of hazardous materials in buildings, for which it believes reasonable cost estimates cannot be made at this time because it does not believe it has a reasonable basis to assign probabilities to a range of potential settlement dates for these retirement obligations. Accordingly, Federal-Mogul is currently unable to determine amounts to accrue for CARO at such sites. Other Matters On April 25, 2014, a group of plaintiffs brought an action against Federal-Mogul Products, Inc. (“F-M Products”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Federal-Mogul, alleging injuries and damages associated with the discharge of chlorinated hydrocarbons by the former owner of a facility located in Kentucky. Since 1998, when F-M Products acquired the facility, it has been cooperating with the applicable regulatory agencies on remediating the prior discharges pursuant to an order entered into by the facility’s former owner. Federal-Mogul does not currently believe that the outcome of this litigation will have a material effect on its condensed consolidation financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Energy Unconditional Purchase Obligations CVR leases various equipment, including railcars, and real properties under long-term operating leases expiring at various dates. For each of the three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 lease expense was $2 million and for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 lease expense was $6 million and $7 million, respectively. The lease agreements have various remaining terms. Some agreements are renewable, at CVR's option, for additional periods. It is expected, in the ordinary course of business, that leases will be renewed or replaced as they expire. Additionally, in the normal course of business, CVR has long-term commitments to purchase oxygen, nitrogen, electricity, storage capacity and pipeline transportation services. Crude Oil Supply Agreement On August 31, 2012, Coffeyville Resources Refining & Marketing, LLC ("CRRM"), a subsidiary of CVR Refining, and Vitol Inc. ("Vitol") entered into an Amended and Restated Crude Oil Supply Agreement (the "Vitol Agreement"). Under the Vitol Agreement, Vitol supplies the petroleum business with crude oil and intermediation logistics, which helps to reduce the Refining Partnership's inventory position and mitigate crude oil pricing risk. The Vitol Agreement will automatically renew for successive one-year terms (each such term, a "Renewal Term") unless either party provides the other with notice of nonrenewal at least 180 days prior to the expiration of any Renewal Term. The Vitol Agreement currently extends through December 31, 2017. Litigation From time to time, CVR is involved in various lawsuits arising in the normal course of business, including matters such as those described below under "Environmental, Health and Safety Matters." Liabilities related to such litigation are recognized when the related costs are probable and can be reasonably estimated. These provisions are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impacts of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other information and events pertaining to a particular case. It is possible that management’s estimates of the outcomes will change due to uncertainties inherent in litigation and settlement negotiations. Except as described below for our Energy segment, there were no new proceedings or material developments in proceedings that we previously reported in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015. In the opinion of CVR's management, the ultimate resolution of any other litigation matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements. There can be no assurance that management’s beliefs or opinions with respect to liability for potential litigation matters are accurate. Rentech Nitrogen Mergers Litigation As previously disclosed in our 2015 Form 10-K, two class action lawsuits were filed in connection with the East Dubuque Merger, (i) the "Mustard Lawsuit", which was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, and (ii) the "Sloan Lawsuit" (together with Mustard Lawsuit, the "Merger Lawsuits"), which was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Merger Lawsuits alleged (among other things) breach of fiduciary duties and inadequate disclosure, in each case, in connection with the East Dubuque Merger. In February 2016, the parties to the Merger Lawsuits entered into a memorandum of understanding providing for the proposed settlement of the Merger Lawsuits. The parties subsequently entered into a stipulation of settlement, which was subject to customary conditions including court approval following notice to the CVR Nitrogen unitholders. In July 2016, the Mustard Lawsuit was dismissed, and in October 2016, the United States District Court for the Central District of California issued an order and judgment approving the settlement of the Sloan Lawsuit. The settlement resolves and releases all claims by unitholders of CVR Nitrogen challenging the East Dubuque Merger. The plaintiff’s counsel in the Sloan Lawsuit has filed a petition for the award of attorneys’ fees, which remains pending with the Court. CVR Partners does not believe the settlement or the award of attorneys’ fees will have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of operation. Environmental, Health and Safety Matters ("EHS") The petroleum and nitrogen fertilizer businesses are subject to various stringent federal, state, and local EHS rules and regulations. Liabilities related to EHS matters are recognized when the related costs are probable and can be reasonably estimated. Estimates of these costs are based upon currently available facts, existing technology, site-specific costs, and currently enacted laws and regulations. In reporting EHS liabilities, no offset is made for potential recoveries. CRRM, CRNF, Coffeyville Resources Crude Transportation, LLC ("CRCT"), Wynnewood Refining Company, LLC ("WRC") and Coffeyville Resources Terminal, LLC ("CRT") own and/or operate manufacturing and ancillary operations at various locations directly related to petroleum refining and distribution and nitrogen fertilizer manufacturing. Therefore, CRRM, CRNF, CRCT, WRC and CRT have exposure to potential EHS liabilities related to past and present EHS conditions at these locations. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"), and related state laws, certain persons may be liable for the release or threatened release of hazardous substances. These persons can include the current owner or operator of property where a release or threatened release occurred, any persons who owned or operated the property when the release occurred, and any persons who disposed of, or arranged for the transportation or disposal of, hazardous substances at a contaminated property. Liability under CERCLA is strict, and under certain circumstances, joint and several, so that any responsible party may be held liable for the entire cost of investigating and remediating the release of hazardous substances. Similarly, the Oil Pollution Act generally subjects owners and operators of facilities to strict, joint and several liability for all containment and clean-up costs, natural resource damages, and potential governmental oversight costs arising from oil spills into the waters of the United States, which has been broadly interpreted to include most water bodies including intermittent streams. CRRM, CRNF, CRCT, WRC and CRT are subject to extensive and frequently changing federal, state and local environmental and health and safety laws and regulations governing the emission and release of hazardous substances into the environment, the treatment and discharge of waste water, and the storage, handling, use and transportation of petroleum and nitrogen products, and the characteristics and composition of gasoline and diesel fuels. The ultimate impact of complying with evolving laws and regulations is not always clearly known or determinable due in part to the fact that our operations may change over time and certain implementing regulations for laws, such as the federal Clean Air Act, have not yet been finalized, are under governmental or judicial review or are being revised. These laws and regulations could result in increased capital, operating and compliance costs. As previously reported in our 2015 Form 10-K, the petroleum and nitrogen fertilizer businesses are party to, or otherwise subject to administrative orders and consent decrees with federal, state and local environmental authorities, as applicable, addressing corrective actions under RCRA, the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. The petroleum business also is subject to (i) the Mobile Source Air Toxic II ("MSAT II") rule which requires reductions of benzene in gasoline; (ii) the Renewable Fuel Standard ("RFS"), which requires refiners to either blend "renewable fuels" in with their transportation fuels or purchase renewable fuel credits, known as RINs, in lieu of blending; and (iii) "Tier 3" gasoline sulfur standards. Except as otherwise described below, there have been no new developments or material changes to the environmental accruals or expected capital expenditures related to compliance with the foregoing environmental matters from those provided in our 2015 Form 10-K. CRRM, CRNF, CRCT, WRC and CRT each believe it is in substantial compliance with existing EHS rules and regulations. There can be no assurance that the EHS matters described or referenced herein or other EHS matters which may develop in the future will not have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's business, financial condition, or results of operations. On August 1, 2016, CRCT received a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty and Proposed Compliance Order (the "NOPV") from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (the "PHMSA"). The NOPV alleges violations of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The alleged violations include alleged failures (during various time periods) to (i) conduct quarterly notification drills, (ii) maintain certain required records, (iii) utilize certain required safety equipment (including line markers), (iv) take certain pipeline integrity management activities, (v) conduct certain cathodic protection testing, and (vi) make certain atmospheric corrosion inspections. The preliminary assessed civil penalty is approximately $0.5 million and the NOPV contained a compliance order outlining remedial compliance steps to be undertaken by CRCT. CRCT paid approximately $160,000 of the preliminary assessed civil penalty, is contesting and requesting mitigation of the remainder, and is also requesting reconsideration of the proposed compliance order. Although CVR Refining cannot predict with certainty the ultimate resolution of the claims asserted, CVR Refining does not believe that the claims in the NOPV will have a material adverse effect on CVR Refining's business, financial condition or results of operations. As of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, our Energy segment had environmental accruals of $5 million and $4 million, respectively. CVR's management periodically reviews and, as appropriate, revises its environmental accruals. Based on current information and regulatory requirements, CVR's management believes that the accruals established for environmental expenditures are adequate. Environmental expenditures are capitalized when such expenditures are expected to result in future economic benefits. Capital expenditures incurred for environmental compliance and efficiency of the operations were $7 million and $9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and $13 million and $27 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The cost of RINs was $58 million and $19 million for three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and $152 million and $93 million for nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively. As of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the petroleum business' biofuel blending obligation was $127 million and $10 million, respectively, which was recorded in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheets. Joint Venture Agreement On September 19, 2016, Coffeyville Resources Pipeline, LLC ("CRPLLC"), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of CVR, entered into an agreement with Velocity Central Oklahoma Pipeline LLC ("Velocity") related to their joint ownership of Velocity Pipeline Partners, LLC ("VPP"), which will construct, own and operate a crude oil pipeline. CRPLLC holds a 40% interest in VPP. Velocity holds a 60% interest in VPP and serves as the day-to-day operator of VPP. As of September 30, 2016, CRPLLC has contributed $3 million to VPP and expects to contribute a total of approximately $9 million during the pipeline construction. Metals Environmental Matters Certain of PSC Metals' facilities are environmentally impaired in part as a result of operating practices at the sites prior to their acquisition by PSC Metals and as a result of PSC Metals' operations. PSC Metals has established procedures to periodically evaluate these sites, giving consideration to the nature and extent of the contamination. PSC Metals has provided for the remediation of these sites based upon management's judgment and prior experience. PSC Metals has estimated the liability to remediate these sites to be $28 million and $29 million at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. Management believes, based on past experience, that the vast majority of these environmental liabilities and costs will be assessed and paid over an extended period of time. PSC Metals believes that it will be able to fund such costs in the ordinary course of business. Estimates of PSC Metals' liability for remediation of a particular site and the method and ultimate cost of remediation require a number of assumptions that are inherently difficult to make, and the ultimate outcome may be materially different from current estimates. Moreover, because PSC Metals has disposed of waste materials at numerous third-party disposal facilities, it is possible that PSC Metals will be identified as a PRP at additional sites. The impact of such future events cannot be estimated at the current time. PSC Metals has been designated as a PRP under U.S. federal and state superfund laws with respect to certain sites with which PSC Metals may have had a direct or indirect involvement. It is alleged that PSC Metals and its subsidiaries or their predecessors transported waste to the sites, disposed of waste at the sites or operated the sites in question. In addition, PSC Metals recently learned that its Knoxville location was the subject of investigations by the State of Tennessee under the federal Superfund law. These investigations were performed by the State of Tennessee pursuant to a contract with the EPA. PSC Metals is exploring a potential settlement of the matter. Currently, PSC Metals cannot assess the impact of any cost or liability associated with these investigations. With respect to all other matters in which PSC Metals has been designated as a PRP under U.S. federal and state superfund laws, PSC Metals has reviewed the nature and extent of the allegations, the number, connection and financial ability of other named and unnamed PRPs and the nature and estimated cost of the likely remedy. Based on reviewing the nature and extent of the allegations, PSC Metals has estimated its liability to remediate these sites to be immaterial as of both September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015. If it is determined that PSC Metals has liability to remediate those sites and that more expensive remediation approaches are required in the future, PSC Metals could incur additional obligations, which could be material. In November and December of 2011, PSC Metals received three notices of violation ("NOV") from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (“MDNR”) for hazardous waste and water violations related to its Festus, Missouri location. PSC Metals has entered into a settlement with MDNR that resolves these NOVs. Currently, PSC Metals believes that it has established adequate reserves for the cost of this settlement. In addition, PSC Metals believes that it has a claim for indemnification against the prior owner of the facility associated with the above-referenced notices of violation. MDNR and PSC Metals, as part of the resolution of MDNR's NOVs, have undertaken sampling for lead at residences near PSC Metals' Festus yard. Approximately 67 residences were sampled and tested, and of those, approximately 15 tested above residential standards for lead contamination. PSC Metals has entered into a settlement agreement with MDNR which resolves MNDR’s claims and requires limited soil remediation at the 15 residences. PSC Metals is in the process of completing the remediation required by the settlement agreement. Currently, PSC Metals believes that it has adequately reserved for the cost of remediation associated with its Festus yard and the residential areas near the yard. However, PSC Metals cannot assess its liability with certainty at this time. Additionally, PSC Metals believes that liability for off-site contamination was retained by the prior owner of the Festus yard and accordingly, it would have a claim for indemnification against the prior owner. In late February 2016, the PSC Metals shredder in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania unknowingly processed scrap obtained from a third party containing radioactive material. Processing and transfer of that material resulted in the contamination of equipment there, and two other PSC Metals facilities. PSC Metals notified the appropriate governmental authorities and is working with those agencies and qualified specialist companies to properly remediate the contaminated facilities and dispose of the contaminated material. PSC Metals believes that the cost of the remediation effort and any business interruption costs are covered by insurance and its financial exposure would be immaterial. Remediation efforts are ongoing and PSC Metals expects that the impacted facilities will be operational in the fourth quarter of 2016. Railcar On October 24, 2014, ARI filed a complaint in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Gyansys, Inc. ("Gyansys"). The complaint asserts a claim against Gyansys for breaching its contract with ARI to implement an enterprise resource planning system. ARI seeks to recover monetary damages in an amount still to be determined, but which ARI alleged exceeds $25 million. Gyansys filed a response to the suit denying its responsibility. It also counterclaimed against ARI for a breach of contract and wrongful termination, seeking damages in excess of $10 million and equitable relief. At this time, ARI does not have sufficient information to reasonably form an estimate of the potential outcome (gain or loss) of this litigation. On September 12, 2015, the court denied ARI's motion to dismiss the wrongful termination counterclaim. A trial date has been tentatively scheduled for January 17, 2017. However, ARI believes that Gyansys' counterclaims lack merit and will continue to vigorously defend against these counterclaims. FRA Directive On September 30, 2016, the Federal Railroad Administration ("FRA") released Railworthiness Directive Number 2016-01 (the "FRA Directive"). The FRA Directive addressed certain welding practices in one weld area in specified DOT 111 tank railcars manufactured between 2009 and 2015 by ARI and ACF. The FRA became involved as a result of one tank railcar manufactured by ARI having a leak that was identified in 2014. The FRA Directive indicated that approximately 14,800 general purpose tank railcars could be subject to the FRA Directive. The FRA Directive requires owners of all subject railcars to identify tank railcars in their respective fleets covered by the FRA Directive by October 30, 2016 and to ensure appropriate inspection, testing and repairs, if needed, during a period that ranges from 12 to 24 months from September 30, 2016, depending on the commodity service of the railcar. Owners, including our Railcar segment as a railcar lessor, and lessees of the subject railcars will likely incur future costs associated with compliance with this requirement including but not limited to, freight costs for transporting these railcars to and from repair facilities, inspection, cleaning and repair, if necessary. Lessors of subject railcars, including our Railcar segment in its capacity as a lessor, may also experience loss of revenue during periods of rent abatement, if applicable, as a result of railcars being out of service due to compliance with the FRA Directive. The incurrence of such costs and/or any such loss of revenue may be subject to the terms of any applicable warranty coverage and the terms of any applicable lease. Our Railcar segment's contractual obligations under its operating leases for railcars in its lease fleet may vary from lease to lease. Our Railcar segment has evaluated its potential exposure related to the FRA Directive and has established a loss contingency of $32 million to cover its probable and estimable liabilities, as of September 30, 2016, with respect to its remedial response to the FRA Directive, taking into account currently available information and its contractual obligations in its capacity as both a manufacturer and lessor of railcars subject to the FRA Directive. This amount is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheet and will continue to be evaluated as our Railcar segment and its customers' compliance with the FRA Directive progresses and our Railcar segment's understanding of the impact the FRA Directive may have on its business, including results of operations and cash flows, evolves. Legal fees incurred with respect to this matter will be expensed in the period in which they occur, in accordance with our Railcar segment's accounting policy. Other Matters Mr. Icahn, through certain affiliates, owns 100% of Icahn Enterprises GP and approximately 89.7% of Icahn Enterprises' outstanding depositary units as of September 30, 2016. Applicable pension and tax laws make each member of a “controlled group” of entities, generally defined as entities in which there is at least an 80% common ownership interest, jointly and severally liable for certain pension plan obligations of any member of the controlled group. These pension obligations include ongoing contributions to fund the plan, as well as liability for any unfunded liabilities that may exist at the time the plan is terminated. In addition, the failure to pay these pension obligations when due may result in the creation of liens in favor of the pension plan or the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation ("PBGC") against the assets of each member of the controlled group. As a result of the more than 80% ownership interest in us by Mr. Icahn’s affiliates, we and our subsidiaries are subject to the pension liabilities of entities in which Mr. Icahn has a direct or indirect ownership interest of at least 80%. As a result of our ownership of more than 80% in our subsidiaries, we and our subsidiaries are subject to the pension liabilities of all entities in which Mr. Icahn has a direct or indirect ownership interest of at least 80%. ACF and Federal-Mogul, are the sponsors of several pension plans. All the minimum funding requirements of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended by the Pension Protection Act of 2006, for these plans have been met as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015. If the plans were voluntarily terminated, they would be underfunded by approximately $550 million and $589 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. These results are based on the most recent information provided by the plans’ actuaries. These liabilities could increase or decrease, depending on a number of factors, including future changes in benefits, investment returns, and the assumptions used to calculate the liability. As members of the controlled group, we would be liable for any failure of ACF and Federal-Mogul to make ongoing pension contributions or to pay the unfunded liabilities upon a termination of the pension plans of ACF and Federal-Mogul. In addition, other entities now or in the future within the controlled group in which we are included may have pension plan obligations that are, or may become, underfunded and we would be liable for any failure of such entities to make ongoing pension contributions or to pay the unfunded liabilities upon termination of such plans. The current underfunded status of the pension plans of ACF and Federal-Mogul requires them to notify the PBGC of certain “reportable events,” such as if we cease to be a member of the ACF and Federal-Mogul controlled group, or if we make certain extraordinary dividends or stock redemptions. The obligation to report could cause us to seek to delay or reconsider the occurrence of such reportable events. Starfire Holding Corporation ("Starfire") which is 99.4% owned by Mr. Icahn, has undertaken to indemnify us and our subsidiaries from losses resulting from any imposition of certain pension funding or termination liabilities that may be imposed on us and our subsidiaries or our assets as a result of being a member of the Icahn controlled group. The Starfire indemnity (which does not extend to pension liabilities of our subsidiaries that would be imposed on us as a result of our interest in these subsidiaries and not as a result of Mr. Icahn and his affiliates holding more than an 80% ownership interest in us, and as such would not extend to the unfunded pension termination liability for Federal-Mogul) provides, among other things, that so long as such contingent liabilities exist and could be imposed on us, Starfire will not make any distributions to its stockholders that would reduce its net worth to below $250 million. Nonetheless, Starfire may not be able to fund its indemnification obligations to us.

Commitments and Contingencies.

Automotive

Environmental Matters

Federal-Mogul is a defendant in lawsuits filed, or the recipient of administrative orders issued or demand letters received, in various jurisdictions pursuant to the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”) or other similar national, provincial or state environmental remedial laws. These laws provide that responsible parties may be liable to pay for remediating contamination resulting from hazardous substances that were discharged into the environment by them, by prior owners or occupants of property they currently own or operate, or by others to whom they sent such substances for treatment or other disposition at third party locations. Federal-Mogul has been notified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, other national environmental agencies, and various provincial and state agencies that it may be a potentially responsible party (“PRP”) under such laws for the cost of remediating hazardous substances pursuant to CERCLA and other national and state or provincial environmental laws. PRP designation often results in the funding of site investigations and subsequent remedial activities.

Many of the sites that are likely to be the costliest to remediate are often current or former commercial waste disposal facilities to which numerous companies sent wastes. Despite the potential joint and several liability that might be imposed on Federal-Mogul under CERCLA and some of the other laws pertaining to these sites, its share of the total waste sent to these sites has generally been small. Federal-Mogul believes its exposure for liability at these sites is limited.

Federal-Mogul has also identified certain other present and former properties at which it may be responsible for cleaning up or addressing environmental contamination, in some cases as a result of contractual commitments and/or federal or state environmental laws. Federal-Mogul is actively seeking to resolve these actual and potential statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations. Although difficult to quantify based on the complexity of the issues, Federal-Mogul has accrued amounts corresponding to its best estimate of the costs associated with such regulatory and contractual obligations on the basis of available information from site investigations and best professional judgment of consultants.

Total environmental liabilities, determined on an undiscounted basis, were $12 million and $14 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, and are included in accrued expenses and other liabilities in our condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Federal-Mogul believes that recorded environmental liabilities will be adequate to cover its estimated liability for its exposure in respect to such matters. In the event that such liabilities were to significantly exceed the amounts recorded by Federal-Mogul, our Automotive segment's results of operations could be materially affected. At September 30, 2016, Federal-Mogul estimates reasonably possible material additional losses, above and beyond its best estimate of required remediation costs as recorded, to approximate $44 million.

Asset Retirement Obligations

Federal-Mogul has identified sites with contractual obligations and several sites that are closed or expected to be closed and sold. In connection with these sites, Federal-Mogul has accrued $16 million and $16 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, for asset retirement obligations ("ARO"), primarily related to anticipated costs of removing hazardous building materials at its facilities, and has considered impairment issues that may result from capitalization of these ARO amounts.

Federal-Mogul has conditional asset retirement obligations ("CARO"), primarily related to removal costs of hazardous materials in buildings, for which it believes reasonable cost estimates cannot be made at this time because it does not believe it has a reasonable basis to assign probabilities to a range of potential settlement dates for these retirement obligations. Accordingly, Federal-Mogul is currently unable to determine amounts to accrue for CARO at such sites.

Other Matters

On April 25, 2014, a group of plaintiffs brought an action against Federal-Mogul Products, Inc. (“F-M Products”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Federal-Mogul, alleging injuries and damages associated with the discharge of chlorinated hydrocarbons by the former owner of a facility located in Kentucky. Since 1998, when F-M Products acquired the facility, it has been cooperating with the applicable regulatory agencies on remediating the prior discharges pursuant to an order entered into by the facility’s former owner. Federal-Mogul does not currently believe that the outcome of this litigation will have a material effect on its condensed consolidation financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Energy

Unconditional Purchase Obligations

CVR leases various equipment, including railcars, and real properties under long-term operating leases expiring at various dates. For each of the three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 lease expense was $2 million and for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 lease expense was $6 million and $7 million, respectively. The lease agreements have various remaining terms. Some agreements are renewable, at CVR's option, for additional periods. It is expected, in the ordinary course of business, that leases will be renewed or replaced as they expire. Additionally, in the normal course of business, CVR has long-term commitments to purchase oxygen, nitrogen, electricity, storage capacity and pipeline transportation services.

Crude Oil Supply Agreement

On August 31, 2012, Coffeyville Resources Refining & Marketing, LLC ("CRRM"), a subsidiary of CVR Refining, and Vitol Inc. ("Vitol") entered into an Amended and Restated Crude Oil Supply Agreement (the "Vitol Agreement"). Under the Vitol Agreement, Vitol supplies the petroleum business with crude oil and intermediation logistics, which helps to reduce the Refining Partnership's inventory position and mitigate crude oil pricing risk. The Vitol Agreement will automatically renew for successive one-year terms (each such term, a "Renewal Term") unless either party provides the other with notice of nonrenewal at least 180 days prior to the expiration of any Renewal Term. The Vitol Agreement currently extends through December 31, 2017.

Litigation

From time to time, CVR is involved in various lawsuits arising in the normal course of business, including matters such as those described below under "Environmental, Health and Safety Matters." Liabilities related to such litigation are recognized when the related costs are probable and can be reasonably estimated. These provisions are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impacts of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other information and events pertaining to a particular case. It is possible that management’s estimates of the outcomes will change due to uncertainties inherent in litigation and settlement negotiations. Except as described below for our Energy segment, there were no new proceedings or material developments in proceedings that we previously reported in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015. In the opinion of CVR's management, the ultimate resolution of any other litigation matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements. There can be no assurance that management’s beliefs or opinions with respect to liability for potential litigation matters are accurate.

Rentech Nitrogen Mergers Litigation

As previously disclosed in our 2015 Form 10-K, two class action lawsuits were filed in connection with the East Dubuque Merger, (i) the "Mustard Lawsuit", which was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, and (ii) the "Sloan Lawsuit" (together with Mustard Lawsuit, the "Merger Lawsuits"), which was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Merger Lawsuits alleged (among other things) breach of fiduciary duties and inadequate disclosure, in each case, in connection with the East Dubuque Merger. In February 2016, the parties to the Merger Lawsuits entered into a memorandum of understanding providing for the proposed settlement of the Merger Lawsuits. The parties subsequently entered into a stipulation of settlement, which was subject to customary conditions including court approval following notice to the CVR Nitrogen unitholders. In July 2016, the Mustard Lawsuit was dismissed, and in October 2016, the United States District Court for the Central District of California issued an order and judgment approving the settlement of the Sloan Lawsuit. The settlement resolves and releases all claims by unitholders of CVR Nitrogen challenging the East Dubuque Merger. The plaintiff’s counsel in the Sloan Lawsuit has filed a petition for the award of attorneys’ fees, which remains pending with the Court. CVR Partners does not believe the settlement or the award of attorneys’ fees will have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of operation.

Environmental, Health and Safety Matters ("EHS")

The petroleum and nitrogen fertilizer businesses are subject to various stringent federal, state, and local EHS rules and regulations. Liabilities related to EHS matters are recognized when the related costs are probable and can be reasonably estimated. Estimates of these costs are based upon currently available facts, existing technology, site-specific costs, and currently enacted laws and regulations. In reporting EHS liabilities, no offset is made for potential recoveries.

CRRM, CRNF, Coffeyville Resources Crude Transportation, LLC ("CRCT"), Wynnewood Refining Company, LLC ("WRC") and Coffeyville Resources Terminal, LLC ("CRT") own and/or operate manufacturing and ancillary operations at various locations directly related to petroleum refining and distribution and nitrogen fertilizer manufacturing. Therefore, CRRM, CRNF, CRCT, WRC and CRT have exposure to potential EHS liabilities related to past and present EHS conditions at these locations. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"), and related state laws, certain persons may be liable for the release or threatened release of hazardous substances. These persons can include the current owner or operator of property where a release or threatened release occurred, any persons who owned or operated the property when the release occurred, and any persons who disposed of, or arranged for the transportation or disposal of, hazardous substances at a contaminated property. Liability under CERCLA is strict, and under certain circumstances, joint and several, so that any responsible party may be held liable for the entire cost of investigating and remediating the release of hazardous substances. Similarly, the Oil Pollution Act generally subjects owners and operators of facilities to strict, joint and several liability for all containment and clean-up costs, natural resource damages, and potential governmental oversight costs arising from oil spills into the waters of the United States, which has been broadly interpreted to include most water bodies including intermittent streams.

CRRM, CRNF, CRCT, WRC and CRT are subject to extensive and frequently changing federal, state and local environmental and health and safety laws and regulations governing the emission and release of hazardous substances into the environment, the treatment and discharge of waste water, and the storage, handling, use and transportation of petroleum and nitrogen products, and the characteristics and composition of gasoline and diesel fuels. The ultimate impact of complying with evolving laws and regulations is not always clearly known or determinable due in part to the fact that our operations may change over time and certain implementing regulations for laws, such as the federal Clean Air Act, have not yet been finalized, are under governmental or judicial review or are being revised. These laws and regulations could result in increased capital, operating and compliance costs.

As previously reported in our 2015 Form 10-K, the petroleum and nitrogen fertilizer businesses are party to, or otherwise subject to administrative orders and consent decrees with federal, state and local environmental authorities, as applicable, addressing corrective actions under RCRA, the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. The petroleum business also is subject to (i) the Mobile Source Air Toxic II ("MSAT II") rule which requires reductions of benzene in gasoline; (ii) the Renewable Fuel Standard ("RFS"), which requires refiners to either blend "renewable fuels" in with their transportation fuels or purchase renewable fuel credits, known as RINs, in lieu of blending; and (iii) "Tier 3" gasoline sulfur standards. Except as otherwise described below, there have been no new developments or material changes to the environmental accruals or expected capital expenditures related to compliance with the foregoing environmental matters from those provided in our 2015 Form 10-K. CRRM, CRNF, CRCT, WRC and CRT each believe it is in substantial compliance with existing EHS rules and regulations. There can be no assurance that the EHS matters described or referenced herein or other EHS matters which may develop in the future will not have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's business, financial condition, or results of operations.

On August 1, 2016, CRCT received a Notice of Probable Violation, Proposed Civil Penalty and Proposed Compliance Order (the "NOPV") from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (the "PHMSA"). The NOPV alleges violations of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The alleged violations include alleged failures (during various time periods) to (i) conduct quarterly notification drills, (ii) maintain certain required records, (iii) utilize certain required safety equipment (including line markers), (iv) take certain pipeline integrity management activities, (v) conduct certain cathodic protection testing, and (vi) make certain atmospheric corrosion inspections. The preliminary assessed civil penalty is approximately $0.5 million and the NOPV contained a compliance order outlining remedial compliance steps to be undertaken by CRCT. CRCT paid approximately $160,000 of the preliminary assessed civil penalty, is contesting and requesting mitigation of the remainder, and is also requesting reconsideration of the proposed compliance order. Although CVR Refining cannot predict with certainty the ultimate resolution of the claims asserted, CVR Refining does not believe that the claims in the NOPV will have a material adverse effect on CVR Refining's business, financial condition or results of operations.

As of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, our Energy segment had environmental accruals of $5 million and $4 million, respectively. CVR's management periodically reviews and, as appropriate, revises its environmental accruals. Based on current information and regulatory requirements, CVR's management believes that the accruals established for environmental expenditures are adequate.

Environmental expenditures are capitalized when such expenditures are expected to result in future economic benefits. Capital expenditures incurred for environmental compliance and efficiency of the operations were $7 million and $9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and $13 million and $27 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

The cost of RINs was $58 million and $19 million for three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and $152 million and $93 million for nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively. As of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the petroleum business' biofuel blending obligation was $127 million and $10 million, respectively, which was recorded in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Joint Venture Agreement

On September 19, 2016, Coffeyville Resources Pipeline, LLC ("CRPLLC"), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of CVR, entered into an agreement with Velocity Central Oklahoma Pipeline LLC ("Velocity") related to their joint ownership of Velocity Pipeline Partners, LLC ("VPP"), which will construct, own and operate a crude oil pipeline. CRPLLC holds a 40% interest in VPP. Velocity holds a 60% interest in VPP and serves as the day-to-day operator of VPP. As of September 30, 2016, CRPLLC has contributed $3 million to VPP and expects to contribute a total of approximately $9 million during the pipeline construction.

Metals

Environmental Matters

Certain of PSC Metals' facilities are environmentally impaired in part as a result of operating practices at the sites prior to their acquisition by PSC Metals and as a result of PSC Metals' operations. PSC Metals has established procedures to periodically evaluate these sites, giving consideration to the nature and extent of the contamination. PSC Metals has provided for the remediation of these sites based upon management's judgment and prior experience. PSC Metals has estimated the liability to remediate these sites to be $28 million and $29 million at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. Management believes, based on past experience, that the vast majority of these environmental liabilities and costs will be assessed and paid over an extended period of time. PSC Metals believes that it will be able to fund such costs in the ordinary course of business.

Estimates of PSC Metals' liability for remediation of a particular site and the method and ultimate cost of remediation require a number of assumptions that are inherently difficult to make, and the ultimate outcome may be materially different from current estimates. Moreover, because PSC Metals has disposed of waste materials at numerous third-party disposal facilities, it is possible that PSC Metals will be identified as a PRP at additional sites. The impact of such future events cannot be estimated at the current time.

PSC Metals has been designated as a PRP under U.S. federal and state superfund laws with respect to certain sites with which PSC Metals may have had a direct or indirect involvement. It is alleged that PSC Metals and its subsidiaries or their predecessors transported waste to the sites, disposed of waste at the sites or operated the sites in question. In addition, PSC Metals recently learned that its Knoxville location was the subject of investigations by the State of Tennessee under the federal Superfund law. These investigations were performed by the State of Tennessee pursuant to a contract with the EPA. PSC Metals is exploring a potential settlement of the matter. Currently, PSC Metals cannot assess the impact of any cost or liability associated with these investigations. With respect to all other matters in which PSC Metals has been designated as a PRP under U.S. federal and state superfund laws, PSC Metals has reviewed the nature and extent of the allegations, the number, connection and financial ability of other named and unnamed PRPs and the nature and estimated cost of the likely remedy. Based on reviewing the nature and extent of the allegations, PSC Metals has estimated its liability to remediate these sites to be immaterial as of both September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015. If it is determined that PSC Metals has liability to remediate those sites and that more expensive remediation approaches are required in the future, PSC Metals could incur additional obligations, which could be material.

In November and December of 2011, PSC Metals received three notices of violation ("NOV") from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (“MDNR”) for hazardous waste and water violations related to its Festus, Missouri location. PSC Metals has entered into a settlement with MDNR that resolves these NOVs. Currently, PSC Metals believes that it has established adequate reserves for the cost of this settlement. In addition, PSC Metals believes that it has a claim for indemnification against the prior owner of the facility associated with the above-referenced notices of violation. MDNR and PSC Metals, as part of the resolution of MDNR's NOVs, have undertaken sampling for lead at residences near PSC Metals' Festus yard. Approximately 67 residences were sampled and tested, and of those, approximately 15 tested above residential standards for lead contamination. PSC Metals has entered into a settlement agreement with MDNR which resolves MNDR’s claims and requires limited soil remediation at the 15 residences. PSC Metals is in the process of completing the remediation required by the settlement agreement. Currently, PSC Metals believes that it has adequately reserved for the cost of remediation associated with its Festus yard and the residential areas near the yard. However, PSC Metals cannot assess its liability with certainty at this time. Additionally, PSC Metals believes that liability for off-site contamination was retained by the prior owner of the Festus yard and accordingly, it would have a claim for indemnification against the prior owner.

In late February 2016, the PSC Metals shredder in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania unknowingly processed scrap obtained from a third party containing radioactive material. Processing and transfer of that material resulted in the contamination of equipment there, and two other PSC Metals facilities. PSC Metals notified the appropriate governmental authorities and is working with those agencies and qualified specialist companies to properly remediate the contaminated facilities and dispose of the contaminated material. PSC Metals believes that the cost of the remediation effort and any business interruption costs are covered by insurance and its financial exposure would be immaterial. Remediation efforts are ongoing and PSC Metals expects that the impacted facilities will be operational in the fourth quarter of 2016.

Railcar

On October 24, 2014, ARI filed a complaint in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Gyansys, Inc. ("Gyansys"). The complaint asserts a claim against Gyansys for breaching its contract with ARI to implement an enterprise resource planning system. ARI seeks to recover monetary damages in an amount still to be determined, but which ARI alleged exceeds $25 million. Gyansys filed a response to the suit denying its responsibility. It also counterclaimed against ARI for a breach of contract and wrongful termination, seeking damages in excess of $10 million and equitable relief. At this time, ARI does not have sufficient information to reasonably form an estimate of the potential outcome (gain or loss) of this litigation. On September 12, 2015, the court denied ARI's motion to dismiss the wrongful termination counterclaim. A trial date has been tentatively scheduled for January 17, 2017. However, ARI believes that Gyansys' counterclaims lack merit and will continue to vigorously defend against these counterclaims.

FRA Directive

On September 30, 2016, the Federal Railroad Administration ("FRA") released Railworthiness Directive Number 2016-01 (the "FRA Directive"). The FRA Directive addressed certain welding practices in one weld area in specified DOT 111 tank railcars manufactured between 2009 and 2015 by ARI and ACF. The FRA became involved as a result of one tank railcar manufactured by ARI having a leak that was identified in 2014. The FRA Directive indicated that approximately 14,800 general purpose tank railcars could be subject to the FRA Directive.

The FRA Directive requires owners of all subject railcars to identify tank railcars in their respective fleets covered by the FRA Directive by October 30, 2016 and to ensure appropriate inspection, testing and repairs, if needed, during a period that ranges from 12 to 24 months from September 30, 2016, depending on the commodity service of the railcar. Owners, including our Railcar segment as a railcar lessor, and lessees of the subject railcars will likely incur future costs associated with compliance with this requirement including but not limited to, freight costs for transporting these railcars to and from repair facilities, inspection, cleaning and repair, if necessary. Lessors of subject railcars, including our Railcar segment in its capacity as a lessor, may also experience loss of revenue during periods of rent abatement, if applicable, as a result of railcars being out of service due to compliance with the FRA Directive. The incurrence of such costs and/or any such loss of revenue may be subject to the terms of any applicable warranty coverage and the terms of any applicable lease. Our Railcar segment's contractual obligations under its operating leases for railcars in its lease fleet may vary from lease to lease.

Our Railcar segment has evaluated its potential exposure related to the FRA Directive and has established a loss contingency of $32 million to cover its probable and estimable liabilities, as of September 30, 2016, with respect to its remedial response to the FRA Directive, taking into account currently available information and its contractual obligations in its capacity as both a manufacturer and lessor of railcars subject to the FRA Directive. This amount is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheet and will continue to be evaluated as our Railcar segment and its customers' compliance with the FRA Directive progresses and our Railcar segment's understanding of the impact the FRA Directive may have on its business, including results of operations and cash flows, evolves. Legal fees incurred with respect to this matter will be expensed in the period in which they occur, in accordance with our Railcar segment's accounting policy.

Other Matters

Mr. Icahn, through certain affiliates, owns 100% of Icahn Enterprises GP and approximately 89.7% of Icahn Enterprises' outstanding depositary units as of September 30, 2016. Applicable pension and tax laws make each member of a “controlled group” of entities, generally defined as entities in which there is at least an 80% common ownership interest, jointly and severally liable for certain pension plan obligations of any member of the controlled group. These pension obligations include ongoing contributions to fund the plan, as well as liability for any unfunded liabilities that may exist at the time the plan is terminated. In addition, the failure to pay these pension obligations when due may result in the creation of liens in favor of the pension plan or the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation ("PBGC") against the assets of each member of the controlled group.

As a result of the more than 80% ownership interest in us by Mr. Icahn’s affiliates, we and our subsidiaries are subject to the pension liabilities of entities in which Mr. Icahn has a direct or indirect ownership interest of at least 80%. As a result of our ownership of more than 80% in our subsidiaries, we and our subsidiaries are subject to the pension liabilities of all entities in which Mr. Icahn has a direct or indirect ownership interest of at least 80%. ACF and Federal-Mogul, are the sponsors of several pension plans. All the minimum funding requirements of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended by the Pension Protection Act of 2006, for these plans have been met as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015. If the plans were voluntarily terminated, they would be underfunded by approximately $550 million and $589 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. These results are based on the most recent information provided by the plans’ actuaries. These liabilities could increase or decrease, depending on a number of factors, including future changes in benefits, investment returns, and the assumptions used to calculate the liability. As members of the controlled group, we would be liable for any failure of ACF and Federal-Mogul to make ongoing pension contributions or to pay the unfunded liabilities upon a termination of the pension plans of ACF and Federal-Mogul. In addition, other entities now or in the future within the controlled group in which we are included may have pension plan obligations that are, or may become, underfunded and we would be liable for any failure of such entities to make ongoing pension contributions or to pay the unfunded liabilities upon termination of such plans.

The current underfunded status of the pension plans of ACF and Federal-Mogul requires them to notify the PBGC of certain “reportable events,” such as if we cease to be a member of the ACF and Federal-Mogul controlled group, or if we make certain extraordinary dividends or stock redemptions. The obligation to report could cause us to seek to delay or reconsider the occurrence of such reportable events.

Starfire Holding Corporation ("Starfire") which is 99.4% owned by Mr. Icahn, has undertaken to indemnify us and our subsidiaries from losses resulting from any imposition of certain pension funding or termination liabilities that may be imposed on us and our subsidiaries or our assets as a result of being a member of the Icahn controlled group. The Starfire indemnity (which does not extend to pension liabilities of our subsidiaries that would be imposed on us as a result of our interest in these subsidiaries and not as a result of Mr. Icahn and his affiliates holding more than an 80% ownership interest in us, and as such would not extend to the unfunded pension termination liability for Federal-Mogul) provides, among other things, that so long as such contingent liabilities exist and could be imposed on us, Starfire will not make any distributions to its stockholders that would reduce its net worth to below $250 million. Nonetheless, Starfire may not be able to fund its indemnification obligations to us.