Note 1: summary of significant accounting policies



NATURE OF OPERATIONS



Vulcan Materials Company (the “Company,” “Vulcan,” “we,” “our”), a New Jersey corporation, is the nation's largest supplier of construction aggregates (primarily crushed stone, sand and gravel) and a major producer of asphalt mix and ready-mixed concrete.



We operate primarily in the United States and our principal product — aggregates — is used in virtually all types of public and private construction projects and in the production of asphalt mix and ready-mixed concrete. We serve markets in twenty states, Washington D.C., and the local markets surrounding our operations in Mexico and the Bahamas. Our primary focus is serving metropolitan markets in the United States that are expected to experience the most significant growth in population, households and employment. These three demographic factors are significant drivers of demand for aggregates. While aggregates is our focus and primary business, we produce and sell asphalt mix and/or ready-mixed concrete in our mid-Atlantic, Georgia, Southwestern, Tennessee and Western markets.



BASIS OF PRESENTATION



Our accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements were prepared in compliance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X and thus do not include all of the information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America for complete financial statements. Our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2016 was derived from the audited financial statement, but it does not include all disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In the opinion of our management, the statements reflect all adjustments, including those of a normal recurring nature, necessary to present fairly the results of the reported interim periods. Operating results for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2017 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2017. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes included in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K.



Due to the 2005 sale of our Chemicals business as described in Note 2, the results of the Chemicals business are presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income.



SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION – ACCOUNTING STANDARDS UPDATE



We adopted Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016-09, “Improvement to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting,” in the fourth quarter of 2016. The provisions of this standard were applied as of the beginning of the year of adoption resulting in revisions to our 2016 interim financial statements.



Under ASU 2016-09, tax benefits resulting from tax deductions in excess of the compensation cost recognized (excess tax benefits) are reflected as discrete income tax benefits in the period of exercise or issuance. Before the adoption of this standard, excess tax benefits were recorded directly to equity (APIC). Net excess tax benefits are reflected as a reduction to our income tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 ($4,001,000 and $20,759,000, respectively) and revised three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 ($2,259,000 and $24,451,000, respectively). As a result, we also revised our September 30, 2016 diluted share calculation to exclude the assumption that proceeds from excess tax benefits would be used to purchase shares, resulting in an increase in dilutive shares of 790,000 for the quarter and 740,000 year-to-date.



Under ASU 2016-09, gross excess tax benefits are classified as operating cash flows rather than financing cash flows. As a result, for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 we increased our operating cash flows and decreased our financing cash flows by $26,747,000. Additionally, this ASU requires cash paid for shares withheld to satisfy statutory income tax withholding obligations be classified as financing activities rather than operating activities. As a result, for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 we increased our operating cash flows and decreased our financing cash flows by $32,414,000.



RECLASSIFICATIONS



Certain items previously reported in specific financial statement captions have been reclassified to conform with the 2017 presentation.



EARNINGS PER SHARE (EPS)



Earnings per share are computed by dividing net earnings by the weighted-average common shares outstanding (basic EPS) or weighted-average common shares outstanding assuming dilution (diluted EPS), as set forth below:







All dilutive common stock equivalents are reflected in our earnings per share calculations. In periods of loss, shares that otherwise would have been included in our diluted weighted-average common shares outstanding computation would be excluded.



Antidilutive common stock equivalents are not included in our earnings per share calculations. The number of antidilutive common stock equivalents for which the exercise price exceeds the weighted-average market price is as follows:





 

 

Note 2: Discontinued Operations



In 2005, we sold substantially all the assets of our Chemicals business to Basic Chemicals, a subsidiary of Occidental Chemical Corporation. The financial results of the Chemicals business are classified as discontinued operations in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for all periods presented. There were no revenues from discontinued operations for the periods presented. Results from discontinued operations are as follows:







Our discontinued operations include charges related to general and product liability costs, including legal defense costs, and environmental remediation costs associated with our former Chemicals business. The 2017 results noted above primarily reflect charges and related insurance recoveries, including those associated with the Texas Brine matter, as further discussed in Note 8.

 

 

Note 3: Income Taxes



Our estimated annual effective tax rate (EAETR) is based on full-year expectations of pretax earnings, statutory tax rates, permanent differences between book and tax accounting such as percentage depletion, and tax planning alternatives available in the various jurisdictions in which we operate. For interim financial reporting, we calculate our quarterly income tax provision in accordance with the EAETR. Each quarter, we update our EAETR based on our revised full-year expectation of pretax earnings and calculate the income tax provision so that the year-to-date income tax provision reflects the EAETR. Significant judgment is required in determining our EAETR.



In the third quarter of 2017, we recorded income tax expense from continuing operations of $39,080,000 compared to income tax expense from continuing operations of $49,803,000 in the third quarter of 2016. The decrease in our income tax expense resulted largely from applying the statutory rate to the decrease in our pretax earnings.



For the first nine months of 2017, we recorded income tax expense from continuing operations of $81,557,000 compared to $91,575,000 for the first nine months of 2016. The decrease in our income tax expense resulted largely from applying the statutory rate to the decrease in our pretax earnings.



We recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities (which reflect our best assessment of the future taxes we will pay) based on the differences between the book basis and tax basis of assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets represent items to be used as a tax deduction or credit in future tax returns while deferred tax liabilities represent items that will result in additional tax in future tax returns.



Each quarter we analyze the likelihood that our deferred tax assets will be realized. A valuation allowance is recorded if, based on the weight of all available positive and negative evidence, it is more likely than not (a likelihood of more than 50%) that some portion, or all, of a deferred tax asset will not be realized.



Based on our third quarter 2017 analysis, we believe it is more likely than not that we will realize the benefit of all our deferred tax assets with the exception of certain state net operating loss carryforwards. For December 31, 2017, we project deferred tax assets related to state net operating loss carryforwards of $53,751,000, of which $52,552,000 relates to Alabama. The Alabama net operating loss carryforward, if not utilized, would expire in years 2023 – 2029. Before 2015, this Alabama deferred tax asset carried a full valuation allowance. During 2015, we restructured our legal entities which resulted in a partial release of the valuation allowance in the amount of $4,655,000. During the fourth quarter of 2016, we achieved three consecutive years of positive Alabama adjusted earnings which resulted in an additional partial release of the valuation allowance in the amount of $4,791,000. We expect one additional significant partial release of this valuation allowance once we have returned to sustained profitability, which we project will occur in the fourth quarter of 2017 (“Alabama adjusted earnings” and “sustained profitability” are defined in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K).



We recognize a tax benefit associated with a tax position when, in our judgment, it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained based upon the technical merits of the position. For a tax position that meets the more likely than not recognition threshold, we measure the income tax benefit as the largest amount that we judge to have a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized. A liability is established for the unrecognized portion of any tax benefit. Our liability for unrecognized tax benefits is adjusted periodically due to changing circumstances, such as the progress of tax audits, case law developments and new or emerging legislation.



A summary of our deferred tax assets is included in Note 9 “Income Taxes” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.

 

 

Note 4: deferred revenue



In 2013 and 2012, we sold a percentage interest in future production structured as volumetric production payments (VPPs).



The VPPs:





Our consolidated total revenues exclude the sales of aggregates owned by the VPP purchaser.



We received net cash proceeds from the sale of the VPPs of $153,282,000 and $73,644,000 for the 2013 and 2012 transactions, respectively. These proceeds were recorded as deferred revenue on the balance sheet and are amortized to revenue on a unit-of-sales basis over the terms of the VPPs (expected to be approximately 25 years, limited by volume rather than time).



Reconciliation of the deferred revenue balances (current and noncurrent) is as follows:







Based on expected sales from the specified quarries, we expect to recognize approximately $8,080,000 of deferred revenue as income during the 12-month period ending September 30, 2018 (reflected in other current liabilities in our 2017 Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet).

 

 

Note 5: Fair Value Measurements



Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value hierarchy prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels as described below:



Level 1: Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities

Level 2: Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data

Level 3: Inputs that are unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement



Our assets subject to fair value measurement on a recurring basis are summarized below:









We have two Rabbi Trusts for the purpose of providing a level of security for the employee nonqualified retirement and deferred compensation plans and for the directors' nonqualified deferred compensation plans. The fair values of these investments are estimated using a market approach. The Level 1 investments include mutual funds and equity securities for which quoted prices in active markets are available. Level 2 investments are stated at estimated fair value based on the underlying investments in the fund (short-term, highly liquid assets in commercial paper, short-term bonds and certificates of deposit).



Net gains of the Rabbi Trust investments were $1,950,000 and $1,379,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. The portions of the net gains related to investments still held by the Rabbi Trusts at September 30, 2017 and 2016 were $1,424,000 and $273,000,  respectively.



The carrying values of our cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts and notes receivable, short-term debt, trade payables and accruals, and other current liabilities approximate their fair values because of the short-term nature of these instruments. Additional disclosures for derivative instruments and interest-bearing debt are presented in Notes 6 and 7, respectively.



Assets subject to fair value measurement on a nonrecurring basis are summarized below:







We recorded $10,506,000 of losses on impairment of long-lived assets for the nine months ended September 30, 2016, reducing the carrying value of these Aggregates segment assets to their estimated fair value of  $0. Fair value was estimated using a market approach (observed transactions involving comparable assets in similar locations).

 

 

Note 6: Derivative Instruments



During the normal course of operations, we are exposed to market risks including interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and commodity prices. From time to time, and consistent with our risk management policies, we use derivative instruments to balance the cost and risk of such exposure. We do not use derivative instruments for trading or other speculative purposes.



The accounting for gains and losses that result from changes in the fair value of derivative instruments depends on whether the derivatives have been designated and qualify as hedging instruments and the type of hedging relationship. The interest rate lock agreements described below were designated as cash flow hedges. The changes in fair value of our cash flow hedges are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) and are reclassified into interest expense in the same period the hedged items affect earnings.



CASH FLOW HEDGES



During 2007, we entered into fifteen forward starting interest rate locks on $1,500,000,000 of future debt issuances to hedge the risk of higher interest rates. Upon the 2007 and 2008 issuances of the related fixed-rate debt, underlying interest rates were lower than the rate locks and we terminated and settled these forward starting locks for cash payments of $89,777,000. This amount was booked to AOCI and is being amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.



This amortization was reflected in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income as follows:







The 2017 losses reclassified from AOCI include the acceleration of deferred losses in the amount of $1,405,000 referable to the July debt purchases as described in Note 7.



For the 12-month period ending September 30, 2018, we estimate that $344,000 of the pretax loss in AOCI will be reclassified to earnings.

 

 

Note 7: Debt



Debt is detailed as follows:













Our total long-term debt - book value is presented in the table above net of unamortized discounts/premiums and unamortized deferred debt issuance costs. Discounts/premiums and debt issuance costs are amortized using the effective interest method over the terms of the respective notes resulting in $4,473,000 of net interest expense for these items for the nine months ended September 30, 2017.



The estimated fair value of our debt presented in the table above was determined by: (1) averaging several asking price quotes for the publicly traded notes and (2) assuming par value for the remainder of the debt. The fair value estimates for the publicly traded notes were based on Level 2 information (as defined in Note 5) as of their respective balance sheet dates.





LINE OF CREDIT



In December 2016, among other favorable changes, we extended the maturity date of our unsecured $750,000,000 line of credit from June 2020 to December 2021. The credit agreement contains affirmative, negative and financial covenants customary for an unsecured investment-grade facility. The primary negative covenant limits our ability to incur secured debt. The financial covenants are: (1) a maximum ratio of debt to EBITDA of 3.5:1 (upon certain acquisitions, the maximum ratio can be 3.75:1 for three quarters), and (2) a minimum ratio of EBITDA to net cash interest expense of 3.0:1. As of September 30, 2017, we were in compliance with the line of credit covenants.



Borrowings on our line of credit are classified as short-term debt if we intend to repay within twelve months and as long-term debt if we have the intent and ability to extend repayment beyond twelve months. Borrowings bear interest, at our option, at either LIBOR plus a credit margin ranging from 1.00% to 1.75%, or SunTrust Bank’s base rate (generally, its prime rate) plus a credit margin ranging from 0.00% to 0.75%. The credit margin for both LIBOR and base rate borrowings is determined by our credit ratings. Standby letters of credit, which are issued under the line of credit and reduce availability, are charged a fee equal to the credit margin for LIBOR borrowings plus 0.175%. We also pay a commitment fee on the daily average unused amount of the line of credit that ranges from 0.10% to 0.25% determined by our credit ratings. As of September 30, 2017, the credit margin for LIBOR borrowings was 1.25%, the credit margin for base rate borrowings was 0.25%, and the commitment fee for the unused amount was 0.15%.



As of September 30, 2017, our available borrowing capacity was $706,712,000. Utilization of the borrowing capacity was as follows:







TERM DEBT



All of our term debt is unsecured. $2,596,188,000 of such debt is governed by two essentially identical indentures that contain customary investment-grade type covenants. The primary covenant in both indentures limits the amount of secured debt we may incur without ratably securing such debt. $250,000,000 of such debt is governed, as described below, by the same credit agreement that governs our line of credit. As of September 30, 2017, we were in compliance with all term debt covenants.



In June 2017, we issued $1,000,000,000 of debt composed of three issuances as follows: (1) $700,000,000 of 4.50% senior notes due June 2047, (2) $50,000,000 of 3.90% senior notes due April 2027 (these notes are a further issuance of, and form a single series with, the 3.90% notes issued in March 2017), and (3) $250,000,000 of floating-rate senior notes due June 2020. These issuances resulted in proceeds of $989,512,000 (net of original issue discounts/premiums, underwriter fees and other transaction costs). The proceeds will be used to partially finance the pending acquisition of Aggregates USA, LLC as described in Note 16 and were used to early retire the notes due in 2018 ($272,512,000 @ 7.00% and $250,000,000 @ 10.375%). This early retirement was completed in July at a cost of $565,560,000 including a $43,020,000 premium above the principal amount of the notes and transaction costs of $28,000. As a result, in the third quarter, we recognized $3,029,000 of net noncash expense associated with the acceleration of unamortized discounts, deferred debt issuance costs and deferred interest rate derivative settlement losses. The combined charge of $46,077,000 was a component of interest expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017.



In June 2017, we drew the full $250,000,000 on the unsecured delayed draw term loan entered into in December 2016. These funds were used to repay the $235,000,000 borrowed on our line of credit and for general corporate purposes. Borrowings bear interest in the same manner as the line of credit. The term loan principal will be repaid quarterly beginning March 2018 as follows: quarters 5 - 8 @ $1,562,500/quarter; 9 - 12 @ $3,125,000/quarter; 13 - 19 @ $4,687,500/quarter and $198,437,500 for quarter 20 (December 2021). The term loan may be prepaid at any time without penalty. It is provided by the same group of banks that provides our line of credit, and is governed by the same credit agreement as the line of credit. As such, it is subject to the same affirmative, negative, and financial covenants.



In March 2017, we issued $350,000,000 of 3.90% senior notes due April 2027 for proceeds of $345,450,000 (net of original issue discounts, underwriter fees and other transaction costs). The proceeds were used for general corporate purposes. This series of notes now totals $400,000,000 due to the additional $50,000,000 of notes issued in June (as described above).





STANDBY LETTERS OF CREDIT



We provide, in the normal course of business, certain third-party beneficiaries with standby letters of credit to support our obligations to pay or perform according to the requirements of an underlying agreement. Such letters of credit typically have an initial term of one year, typically renew automatically, and can only be modified or cancelled with the approval of the beneficiary. All of our standby letters of credit are issued by banks that participate in our $750,000,000 line of credit, and reduce the borrowing capacity thereunder. Our standby letters of credit as of September 30, 2017 are summarized by purpose in the table below:





 

 

Note 8: Commitments and Contingencies



As summarized by purpose directly above in Note 7, our standby letters of credit totaled $43,288,000 as of September 30, 2017.



As described in Note 9, our asset retirement obligations totaled $222,888,000 as of September 30, 2017.



LITIGATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS



We are subject to occasional governmental proceedings and orders pertaining to occupational safety and health or to protection of the environment, such as proceedings or orders relating to noise abatement, air emissions or water discharges. As part of our continuing program of stewardship in safety, health and environmental matters, we have been able to resolve such proceedings and to comply with such orders without any material adverse effects on our business.



We have received notices from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or similar state or local agencies that we are considered a potentially responsible party (PRP) at a limited number of sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) or similar state and local environmental laws. Generally, we share the cost of remediation at these sites with other PRPs or alleged PRPs in accordance with negotiated or prescribed allocations. There is inherent uncertainty in determining the potential cost of remediating a given site and in determining any individual party's share in that cost. As a result, estimates can change substantially as additional information becomes available regarding the nature or extent of site contamination, remediation methods, other PRPs and their probable level of involvement, and actions by or against governmental agencies or private parties.



We have reviewed the nature and extent of our involvement at each Superfund site, as well as potential obligations arising under other federal, state and local environmental laws. While ultimate resolution and financial liability is uncertain at a number of the sites, in our opinion based on information currently available, the ultimate resolution of claims and assessments related to these sites will not have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows, although amounts recorded in a given period could be material to our results of operations or cash flows for that period.



We are a defendant in various lawsuits in the ordinary course of business. It is not possible to determine with precision the outcome, or the amount of liability, if any, under these lawsuits, especially where the cases involve possible jury trials with as yet undetermined jury panels.



In addition to these lawsuits in which we are involved in the ordinary course of business, certain other material legal proceedings are more specifically described below:





Efforts to remediate the River have been underway for many years and have involved hundreds of entities that have had operations on or near the River at some point during the past several decades. We formerly owned a chemicals operation near the mouth of the River, which was sold in 1974. The major risk drivers in the River have been identified as dioxins, PCBs, DDx and mercury. We did not manufacture any of these risk drivers and have no evidence that any of these were discharged into the River by Vulcan.



The AOC does not obligate us to fund or perform the remedial action contemplated by either the draft RI/FS or the ROD. Furthermore, the parties who will participate in funding the remediation and their respective allocations have not been determined. We do not agree that a bank-to-bank remedy is warranted, and we are not obligated to fund any of the remedial action at this time; nevertheless, we previously estimated the cost to be incurred by us as a potential participant in a bank-to-bank dredging remedy and recorded an immaterial loss for this matter in 2015.





There are numerous defendants, including Texas Brine and Occidental, to the litigation in state and federal court. Vulcan was first brought into the litigation as a third-party defendant in August 2013 by Texas Brine. We have since been added as a direct and third-party defendant by other parties, including a direct claim by the state of Louisiana. Damage categories encompassed within the litigation include individual plaintiffs’ claims for property damage, a claim by the state of Louisiana and Texas Brine for response costs, claims for physical damages to nearby oil and gas pipelines and storage facilities (pipelines),  and business interruption claims. In addition to the plaintiffs’ claims, we were also sued for contractual indemnity and comparative fault by both Texas Brine and Occidental. It is alleged that the sinkhole was caused, in whole or in part, by our negligent actions or failure to act. It is also alleged that we breached the salt lease with Occidental, as well as an operating agreement and related contracts with Texas Brine; that we are strictly liable for certain property damages in our capacity as a former lessee of the salt lease; and that we violated certain covenants and conditions in the agreement under which we sold our Chemicals Division to Occidental. We have likewise made claims for contractual indemnity and on a basis of comparative fault against Texas Brine and Occidental. Vulcan and Occidental have since dismissed all of their claims against one another. Texas Brine has claims that remain pending against Vulcan and against Occidental. Discovery remains ongoing in various cases.



In December 2016, we settled with plaintiffs in one of the cases involving individual property damages. During the first nine months of 2017, we settled with the plaintiffs in the cases involving physical damages to  pipelines. Our insurers have funded the settlements in excess of our self-insured retention amount. Each of the pipeline plaintiffs signed a release in favor of Vulcan and agreed that we would not be responsible to the pipelines for any amount beyond the settlement amount. A bench trial (judge only) began in September 2017 and ended in October in two of the three pipeline cases. The trial was limited in scope to the allocation of comparative fault or liability for causing the sinkhole, with a damages trial to be held at a later date. Vulcan participated in the trial, as it encompassed cross-party and third-party claims against us. The court ordered post-trial briefs to be filed early November 2017, and scheduled closing arguments for later that month. We do not know at this time when the judge will issue his ruling.



We cannot reasonably estimate a range of liability pertaining to the open cases at this time.





Operation of the on-site pilot-scale treatment system began in January 2017, and was completed in April 2017. With completion of the pilot testing and other investigative work to date, we submitted an amendment to the IRAP (AIRAP) to RWQCB in August 2017 proposing the use of a 300 gallon per minute pump, treat and reinjection system. Based on the preliminary design of this system, we accrued $14,216,000 in the second quarter of 2017 (reflected in other operating expense). We are currently responding to comments and planning for implementation of the AIRAP.



We are also engaged in an ongoing dialogue with the EPA, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and other stakeholders regarding the potential contribution of the Hewitt Landfill to groundwater contamination in the North Hollywood Operable Unit (NHOU) of the San Fernando Valley Superfund Site. We are gathering and analyzing data and developing technical information to determine the extent of possible contribution by the Hewitt Landfill to the groundwater contamination in the area. This work is also intended to assist in identification of other PRPs that may have contributed to groundwater contamination in the area.



In July 2016, the EPA sent us a letter requesting that we enter into an AOC for remedial design work at the NHOU. We entered into an AOC and Statement of Work with the EPA in September 2017, for the design of two extraction wells south of the Hewitt Site to protect the North Hollywood West well field. The AOC provides for Vulcan to undertake a preliminary evaluation of the appropriateness of the two-well remedy. Estimated costs to comply with this AOC are immaterial and have been accrued. Until the remedial design work and evaluation of the two-well remedy is complete, we cannot identify an appropriate remedial action or reasonably estimate a loss pertaining to this matter.



It is not possible to predict with certainty the ultimate outcome of these and other legal proceedings in which we are involved and a number of factors, including developments in ongoing discovery or adverse rulings, or the verdict of a particular jury, could cause actual losses to differ materially from accrued costs. No liability was recorded for claims and litigation for which a loss was determined to be only reasonably possible or for which a loss could not be reasonably estimated. Legal costs incurred in defense of lawsuits are expensed as incurred. In addition, losses on certain claims and litigation described above may be subject to limitations on a per occurrence basis by excess insurance, as described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

 

Note 9: Asset Retirement Obligations



Asset retirement obligations (AROs) are legal obligations associated with the retirement of long-lived assets resulting from the acquisition, construction, development and/or normal use of the underlying assets.



Recognition of a liability for an ARO is required in the period in which it is incurred at its estimated fair value. The associated asset retirement costs are capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the underlying asset and depreciated over the estimated useful life of the asset. The liability is accreted through charges to operating expenses. If the ARO is settled for other than the carrying amount of the liability, we recognize a gain or loss on settlement.



We record all AROs for which we have legal obligations for land reclamation at estimated fair value. Essentially all these AROs relate to our underlying land parcels, including both owned properties and mineral leases. For the three and nine month periods ended September 30, we recognized ARO operating costs related to accretion of the liabilities and depreciation of the assets as follows:







ARO operating costs are reported in cost of revenues. AROs are reported within other noncurrent liabilities in our accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.



Reconciliations of the carrying amounts of our AROs are as follows:







ARO liabilities settled during the first nine months of 2017 and 2016 include $8,117,000 and $10,373,000, respectively, of reclamation activities required under a development agreement and conditional use permits at two adjacent aggregates sites on owned property in Southern California. The reclamation required under the reclamation agreement will result in the restoration and development of 90 acres of previously mined property suitable for retail and commercial development.

 

 

Note 10: Benefit Plans



We sponsor three qualified, noncontributory defined benefit pension plans. These plans cover substantially all employees hired before July 2007, other than those covered by union-administered plans. Normal retirement age is 65, but the plans contain provisions for earlier retirement. Benefits for the Salaried Plan and the Chemicals Hourly Plan are generally based on salaries or wages and years of service; the Construction Materials Hourly Plan provides benefits equal to a flat dollar amount for each year of service. In addition to these qualified plans, we sponsor three unfunded, nonqualified pension plans.



Effective July 2007, we amended our defined benefit pension plans to no longer accept new participants. Effective December 2013, we amended our defined benefit pension plans to freeze future benefit accruals for salaried pension participants effective December 31, 2015.



The following table sets forth the components of net periodic pension benefit cost:





The contributions to pension plans for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, as reflected on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, pertain to benefit payments under nonqualified plans and a third quarter 2017 discretionary qualified plan contribution of $10,600,000.



In addition to pension benefits, we provide certain healthcare and life insurance benefits for some retired employees. In 2012, we amended our postretirement healthcare plan to cap our portion of the medical coverage cost at the 2015 level. Substantially all our salaried employees and, where applicable, certain of our hourly employees may become eligible for these benefits if they reach a qualifying age and meet certain service requirements. Generally, Company-provided healthcare benefits end when covered individuals become eligible for Medicare benefits, become eligible for other group insurance coverage or reach age 65, whichever occurs first.



The following table sets forth the components of net periodic other postretirement benefit cost:





 

 

Note 11: other Comprehensive Income



Comprehensive income comprises two subsets: net earnings and other comprehensive income (OCI). The components of other comprehensive income are presented in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income, net of applicable taxes.



Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI), net of tax, are as follows:







Changes in AOCI, net of tax, for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 are as follows:







Amounts reclassified from AOCI to earnings, are as follows: