XML 128 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
Commitments & Contingencies
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2013
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments & Contingencies

8. COMMITMENTS & CONTINGENCIES

Commitments

The Company has certain guarantees and indemnifications outstanding which could result in future payments to third parties. These guarantees generally result from the conduct of the Company’s business in the normal course.

The Company’s outstanding guarantees as of June 30, 2013 were as follows:

 

     Maximum undiscounted
future payments
 

Performance and payment bonds*

   $ 6.1   

Standby letters of credit*:

  

Insurance related

     4.9   

Other

     0.8   
  

 

 

 

 

* These instruments require no associated liability on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

The Company’s banks issue standby letters of credit (“LOCs”) on the Company’s behalf under the Unsecured Credit Agreement (the “Credit Agreement”) as discussed more fully in the “Long-Term Debt and Borrowing Agreements” note. As of June 30, 2013, the majority of the balance of the Company’s outstanding LOCs was issued to insurance companies to serve as collateral for the Company’s deductibles. These LOCs may be drawn upon in the event that the Company does not reimburse the insurance companies for the Company’s deductibles. These LOCs renew automatically on an annual basis unless either the LOCs are returned to the bank by the beneficiaries or the banks elect not to renew them.

 

Bonds are provided on the Company’s behalf by certain insurance carriers. The beneficiaries under these performance and payment bonds may request payment from the Company’s insurance carriers in the event that the Company does not perform under the project or if subcontractors are not paid. The Company does not expect any amounts to be paid under its outstanding bonds as of June 30, 2013. In addition, the Company believes that its bonding lines will be sufficient to meet its bid and performance bonding needs for at least the next year.

In the fourth quarter of 2009, the Company divested Baker Energy and indemnified the buyer for certain legacy costs, including insurance and taxes, in excess of amounts accrued as of the transaction date. As part of the sale of Baker Energy, the buyer agreed to assume workers compensation insurance liabilities, subject to certain indemnifications, as of September 30, 2009. However, corresponding liabilities representing the reserves associated with this insurance are included in the unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as this insurance was written to the Company, rather than to a Baker Energy entity. As the buyer assumed the liabilities associated with this insurance as of the closing balance sheet, the Company has also recorded a corresponding receivable from the buyer representing the amount of the aggregate insurance liabilities as of September 30, 2009 for Baker Energy, less reimbursements made to the Company through June 30, 2013. As of June 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, there were approximately $2.4 million and $2.7 million, respectively, of Baker Energy insurance liabilities primarily related to workers’ compensation recorded in the Company’s unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, with corresponding receivables of approximately $1.5 million and $1.7 million as of June 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

Contingencies

Legal Proceedings. The Company has been named as a defendant or co-defendant in certain legal proceedings wherein damages are claimed. Such proceedings are not uncommon to the Company’s business. After consultations with counsel, management believes that it has recognized adequate provisions for probable and reasonably estimable liabilities associated with these proceedings, and that their ultimate resolutions will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”) or applicable state agencies. The Company’s federal and state government contracts are subject to the U.S. Federal Acquisition Regulations (“FAR”). All contracts with federal, state and local public agencies are subject to periodic routine audits, which generally are performed by the DCAA or applicable state or local agencies. These agencies’ audits typically apply to the Company’s overhead rates, cost proposals, incurred government contract costs and internal control systems. During the course of its audits, the auditors may question incurred costs if it believes the Company has accounted for such costs in a manner inconsistent with the requirements of the FAR or the U.S. Cost Accounting Standards, and may recommend that certain costs be disallowed. Historically, the Company has not experienced significant disallowed costs as a result of these audits; however, management cannot provide assurance that future audits will not result in material disallowances of incurred costs. For certain cost-plus type contracts, the Company will invoice based on preliminary overhead rates; such rates are then adjusted to actual overhead rates through the audit process. The Company provides reserves for contracts for which it believes its preliminary overhead rates are in excess of its actual overhead rates. In cases where the actual overhead rates are in excess of its preliminary overhead rates, the Company does not record any amounts associated with this incremental reimbursable amount until realized, as these types of contracts frequently have clauses that cast some doubt upon ultimate realization, such as funding limitations.

Self-Insurance. Insurance coverage is obtained for catastrophic exposures, as well as those risks required to be insured by law or contract. The Company requires its insurers to meet certain minimum financial ratings at the time the coverages are placed; however, insurance recoveries remain subject to the risk that the insurer will be financially able to pay the claims as they arise. The Company is insured with respect to its workers’ compensation and general liability exposures subject to certain deductibles or self-insured retentions. Loss provisions for these exposures are recorded based upon the Company’s estimates of the total liability for claims incurred. Such estimates utilize certain actuarial assumptions followed in the insurance industry.

The Company is self-insured for its primary layer of professional liability insurance through a wholly-owned captive insurance subsidiary. The secondary layer of the professional liability insurance continues to be provided, consistent with industry practice, under a “claims-made” insurance policy placed with an independent insurance company. Under claims-made policies, coverage must be in effect when a claim is made. This insurance is subject to standard exclusions.

The Company is self-insured with respect to its primary medical benefits program subject to individual retention limits. As part of the medical benefits program, the Company contracts with national service providers to provide benefits to its employees for medical and prescription drug services. The Company reimburses these service providers as claims related to the Company’s employees are paid by the service providers.

The Company establishes reserves for insurance-related claims that are known and have been asserted against the Company, as well as for insurance-related claims that are believed to have been incurred but have not yet been reported to the Company’s claims administrators as of the respective balance sheet dates. The Company includes any adjustments to such insurance reserves in its consolidated results of operations.

Reliance Liquidation. The Company’s professional liability insurance coverage had been placed on a claims-made basis with Reliance Insurance Group (“Reliance”) for the period July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1999. In 2001, the Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner placed Reliance into liquidation. Due to the subsequent liquidation of Reliance, the Company is currently uncertain what amounts paid by the Company to settle certain claims totaling in excess of $2.5 million will be recoverable under the insurance policy with Reliance. During the first quarter of 2012, the Company received a $1.1 million distribution from Reliance related to these claims, which is included in “Cost of work performed” in the unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the six months ended July 1, 2012. This distribution was not the final settlement and the Company may recover additional amounts in future periods. The Company continues to pursue a claim in the Reliance liquidation and believes that some additional recovery will result from the liquidation, but the amount of such recovery cannot currently be estimated. The Company had no related receivables recorded from Reliance as of both June 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012.