ASSETS HELD FOR DEVELOPMENT

Assets held for development, which is comprised of assets associated with our Echelon development project, consists of the following:



	June 30,		December 31,
	2012		2011
	(In thousands)
Echelon Project Infrastructure
Land	$	215,969	$	215,969
Construction and development costs	501,166		500,787
Project management and other costs	115,712		115,712
Professional and design fees	93,545		93,545

Central Energy Facility
Construction and development costs	163,806		163,806
Total assets held for development	$	1,090,198	$	1,089,819

Echelon Project Infrastructure

At June 30, 2012, and December 31, 2011, the capitalized costs related to the Echelon project included land and construction in progress. The construction and development costs consist primarily of site preparation work, underground utility installation and infrastructure and common area development. Professional and design fees include architectural design, development and permitting fees, inspections, consulting and legal fees.

We expect to capitalize certain costs of $4.2 million, principally related to site beautification during the year ending December 31, 2012. Additionally we expect to incur recurring costs ranging from $0.3 million to $0.5 million annually, principally related to such items as site preparation work, underground utility installation, infrastructure and consulting.

In addition, we expect recurring project costs, consisting primarily of monthly charges related to the central energy center, site security, property taxes, rent and insurance, ranging from $15.5 million to $17.0 million per annum that will be charged to preopening or other expense as incurred during the project's suspension period.

As referenced in Note 12, Commitments and Contingencies, these capitalized costs and recurring project costs are in addition to other contingencies with respect to our various commitments, including commitments and contingencies with respect to the ESA entered into between Echelon and LVE.

Impairment Consideration

The further delay of the suspension of development on the Echelon project implied that the carrying amounts of the assets related to the development may not be recoverable; therefore, at the time, we performed an impairment test of these assets. These impairment tests were comprised of an appraisal of the development and an analysis of its future undiscounted cash flow, and contemplated several viable alternative plans for the future development of Echelon. The cash inflows related to the revenue projections for the individual components associated with each planned construction scenario, offset by outflows for estimated costs to complete the development and ongoing maintenance and operating costs. Because no specific strategic plan can be determined with certainty at this time, the analysis considered the net cash flows related to each alternative, weighted against its projected likelihood.

We initially performed this evaluation during the year ended December 31, 2009, when the continued suspension was announced, and have reconsidered our assumptions on a regular basis since such date. However, due to the degradation in economic conditions in the intervening period, we re-performed these analyses during the year ended December 31, 2011 to evaluate any further depression in real estate or land values as well as any deterioration in our initial cash flow assumptions. The outcome of this evaluation did not result in an impairment of Echelon's assets, as the estimated weighted net undiscounted cash flows from the project exceed the current carrying value of the assets of approximately $1.1 billion at December 31, 2011. As we further develop and explore the viability of alternatives for the project, we will continue to monitor these assets for recoverability.

Our analysis is predicated on the most viable options for the conversion of this development. One such scenario includes the outright sale of the project as is, which is primarily based upon land value. We considered the land value by analyzing recent sales transactions of sites with similar characteristics such as location, zoning, access, and visibility, to establish a general understanding of the potential comparable sales. The recoverability under this option represented any excess sales price, net of estimated selling costs, from the land over the carrying value of the assets, including land held for development.

Another scenario is the full development of the project, as designed, at a later date. The cash inflows related to this option represent the revenue projections for the individual components associated with each planned construction element (casino, hotel, food and beverage, retail, convention and other), based upon the estimated respective dates of completion and particular graduated absorption rates. These projections are offset by outflows for incurred and estimated costs to complete the development. For costs already incurred, and to compensate for potential losses due to the delay, we adjusted for (i) physical deterioration; (ii) functional obsolescence; and (iii) economic obsolescence. Physical deterioration is impairment to the condition of the asset brought about by “wear and tear,” disintegration, and/or the action of the elements. Functional obsolescence is the impairment in the efficiency of the asset brought about by such factors as inadequacy or change in technology that affect the asset. Economic obsolescence is the impairment in the desirability of the asset arising from external economic forces, building code enhancements or changes in supply and demand relationships. For estimated costs to complete, we applied selected construction expense growth rates to our present cost analysis. In addition to these hard and soft construction costs, we estimated outflows for preservation costs that are intended and required to maintain the development site and the existing structures as well as development materials for future use. These net outflows were incrementally added to our estimated operating and ongoing maintenance costs, to establish the undiscounted net cash flow of the project.

Our final scenario is a scaled-down version of the full project, whereby only certain components would be developed. This cash flow projection considered the inflows and outflows discussed above, with relevant curtailment for revenue from, and costs related to, the amenities not completed.

Because no specific strategic plan can be determined with certainty at this time, the analysis considered the net cash flows related to each alternative, weighted against its projected likelihood. The outcome of this evaluation resulted in the determination that there was no impairment of the assets held for development, as the estimated weighted net undiscounted cash flows from the project exceed the current carrying value of the assets held for development. As we further explore the viability of alternatives for the project, we will continue to monitor these assets for recoverability.

Central Energy Facility

The capitalized construction costs of the central energy facility include labor, materials, construction overhead and capitalized interest, all of which has been directly incurred by LVE. Depreciation is generally recorded on a straight line basis over useful lives of property ranging from 5 to 50 years, but has not commenced on the components of the facility, as it has not been placed into service. The costs of repairs, maintenance, including planned major maintenance activities and minor replacements of property are charged to maintenance expense as incurred.

These assets are tested for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that such amounts may be recoverable. Impairment is the condition that exists when the carrying amount of a long-lived asset exceeds its fair value. An impairment loss shall be recognized only if the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable and exceeds its fair value. The carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable if it exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. That assessment shall be based on the carrying amount of the asset at the date it is tested for recoverability. An impairment loss shall be measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of a long-lived asset exceeds its fair value. There was no identified impairment of these assets during the years ended December 31, 2011.

The assets of the central energy facility are pledged as collateral to the outstanding debt obligations of LVE, as further discussed in Note 9, Non-recourse Obligations of Variable Interest Entity.