FWLT » Topics » United States

These excerpts taken from the FWLT 10-K filed Feb 24, 2009.
United States
Biokinetics, Inc., Delaware
Camden County Energy Recovery Associates L.P., New Jersey
Camden County Energy Recovery Corp., Delaware
Energia Holdings, LLC, Delaware
Equipment Consultants, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Andes, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Arabia Ltd., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Asia Limited, Delaware
Foster Wheeler Avon, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Constructors, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Continental U.S., LLC, Delaware
Foster Wheeler Development Corporation, Delaware
Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, Delaware
Foster Wheeler Energy Manufacturing, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Energy Services, Inc., California
Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation, Texas
Foster Wheeler Facilities Management, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Intercontinental Corporation, Delaware
Foster Wheeler International Corporation, Delaware
Foster Wheeler International Holdings, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler LLC, Delaware
Foster Wheeler Maintenance, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Martinez, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler North America Corp., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Operations, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Power Systems, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Pyropower, Inc., New York
Foster Wheeler Real Estate Development Corp., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Realty Services Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Santiago, Inc., Delaware
Foster Wheeler Twin Cities, Inc., Delaware


 

United States
A/C Power, Maryland (50%)
Martinez Cogen Limited Partnership, New Jersey (50.5%)
 
United
States




Biokinetics, Inc., Delaware



Camden County Energy Recovery Associates L.P., New Jersey



Camden County Energy Recovery Corp., Delaware



Energia Holdings, LLC, Delaware



Equipment Consultants, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Andes, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Arabia Ltd., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Asia Limited, Delaware



Foster Wheeler Avon, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Constructors, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Continental U.S., LLC, Delaware



Foster Wheeler Development Corporation, Delaware



Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, Delaware



Foster Wheeler Energy Manufacturing, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Energy Services, Inc., California



Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation, Texas



Foster Wheeler Facilities Management, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Intercontinental Corporation, Delaware



Foster Wheeler International Corporation, Delaware



Foster Wheeler International Holdings, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler LLC, Delaware



Foster Wheeler Maintenance, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Martinez, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler North America Corp., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Operations, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Power Systems, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Pyropower, Inc., New York



Foster Wheeler Real Estate Development Corp., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Realty Services Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Santiago, Inc., Delaware



Foster Wheeler Twin Cities, Inc., Delaware








 







United
States




A/C Power, Maryland (50%)



Martinez Cogen Limited Partnership, New Jersey (50.5%)


 




These excerpts taken from the FWLT 10-K filed Feb 26, 2008.
United States
A/C Power, Maryland (50%)
Martinez Cogen Limited Partnership, New Jersey (50.5%)
 
United
States




A/C Power, Maryland (50%)



Martinez Cogen Limited Partnership, New Jersey (50.5%)


 




These excerpts taken from the FWLT 8-K filed Dec 28, 2005.

United States

A summary of claim activity for each of the three months ended September 30, 2005, July 1, 2005 and September 24, 2004 is as follows:

19


      Number of Claims       

Third Quarter
2005
   Second Quarter
2005
   Third Quarter
2004



Balance at beginning of quarter 165,900   167,800   170,810  
New claims 3,930   4,420   4,290  
Claims closed (3,920 )  (6,320 )  (4,960 ) 
 
 
 
 
Balance at end of quarter * 165,910   165,900   170,140  
 
 
 
 
             

* Includes claims on inactive court dockets of approximately 22,500 at September 30, 2005, 22,500 at July 1, 2005 and 22,300 at September 24, 2004. Additionally, the balance of claims includes claims assumed to be abandoned of 10,100 at September 30, 2005, 10,300 at July 1, 2005 and 7,400 at September 24, 2004.

The overall average combined indemnity and defense cost per closed claim since 1993 was approximately $2.2. We believe that the average cost per closed claim is increasing and will continue to increase in the future.

The amount spent on asbestos litigation defense and case resolution, substantially all of which was reimbursed from insurance coverage, was $64,600 and $74,700 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and September 24, 2004, respectively.

As of September 30, 2005, we had recorded total liabilities of $415,900 comprised of an estimated liability relating to open (outstanding) claims of $192,900 and an estimated liability relating to future unasserted claims of $223,000. Of the total, $85,000 is recorded in accrued expenses and $330,900 is recorded in asbestos-related liability on the condensed consolidated statement of financial position. These estimates are based upon the following information and/or assumptions: number of open claims, forecasted number of future claims, estimated average cost per claim by disease type (i.e., mesothelioma vs. non-mesothelioma) and the breakdown of known and future claims into disease type (i.e., mesothelioma vs. non-mesothelioma). Claims that have not been settled and are six or more years old are considered abandoned and are no longer valued in the estimated liability; however, such claims are included within the above chart. There were approximately 10,100 such cases that are not valued within the estimated liability at September 30, 2005. The total estimated liability includes both the estimate of forecasted indemnity amounts and forecasted defense expenses. Total estimated defense costs and indemnity payments are estimated to be incurred through the year 2019, during which period new claims are expected to decline from year to year. We believe that there will be new claims filed after 2019, but in light of uncertainties inherent in long-term forecasts, we do not believe that we can reasonably estimate defense and/or indemnity costs, which might be incurred after 2019. Historically, defense costs have represented approximately 21% of total defense and indemnity costs. Through September 30, 2005, total indemnity costs paid, prior to insurance recoveries, were approximately $495,600 and total defense costs paid were approximately $132,500.

The number and type of claims received and the average cost to settle claims can vary from quarter to quarter and sometimes by substantial amounts. In the first nine months of 2005, the number of claims received (including the number of mesothelioma claims) and the average cost to settle claims exceeded our forecast prepared at year-end 2004 to estimate the asbestos liability by a material amount. Although our forecast contemplates that new claims requiring indemnity will decline from year-to-year, we do not believe that nine months of data is sufficient evidence to currently necessitate a change in the underlying assumptions used to estimate the asbestos liability. However, we intend to review the assumptions used to estimate our asbestos liability at year-end 2005 and compare actual experience to projected results. Changes to the underlying estimates may be required at that time and may result in a modification of the asbestos liability and associated asset.

As of September 30, 2005, we had recorded assets of $323,300 relating to actual and probable insurance recoveries, of which $24,000 is recorded in accounts and notes receivable, and $299,300 is recorded as asbestos-related insurance recovery receivable on the condensed consolidated statement of financial position. The amount recorded in current assets within accounts and notes receivable reflects amounts due under executed settlement agreements with insurers and does not include any estimate for future settlements. The amount recorded as asbestos-related insurance recovery receivable includes an estimate of recoveries from insurers based upon assumptions relating to cost allocation and resolution of pending legal proceedings with certain insurers, as well as recoveries under settlements with other insurers.

20


As of September 30, 2005, $165,200 was contested by our subsidiaries’ insurers in ongoing litigation. The litigation relates to the proper allocation of the coverage liability among our subsidiaries’ various insurers and our subsidiaries as self-insurers. We believe that any amounts that our subsidiaries might be allocated as self-insurer would be immaterial.

An adverse outcome in pending insurance litigation on coverage issues could materially limit our insurance recoveries. In this regard, on January 10, 2005, a New York state trial court entered an order finding that New York, rather than New Jersey, law applies in the litigation described above regarding the allocation of liability for asbestos-related personal injury claims among the Foster Wheeler entities and their various insurers. Prior to the New York order, we had calculated estimated insurance recoveries applying New Jersey law. The application of New York, rather than New Jersey, law would result in our subsidiaries realizing lower insurance recoveries. Thus, as a result of this decision and other factors, we estimated our insurance asset assuming application of New York law and we recorded a charge to earnings in the fourth quarter of 2004 of approximately $76,000 and reduced the year-end 2004 carrying value of our probable insurance recoveries by a similar amount. Unless this decision is reversed, we expect that we will be required to fund a portion of our asbestos liabilities from our own cash. The amount and timing of these funding requirements will be dependent upon, among other things, litigated or negotiated resolution of the various disputes with our insurers with whom we have not yet settled. On February 16, 2005, our subsidiaries filed separate motions seeking (i) the re-argument of this decision and (ii) an appeal of this decision to a higher court. On May 19, 2005, our motion seeking re-argument was denied. Our appeal is currently pending, but there can be no assurances as to the timing or the outcome.

In addition, even if these coverage issues are resolved in a manner favorable to Foster Wheeler, we may not be able to collect all of the amounts due under our insurance policies. Our recoveries will be limited by insolvencies among our insurers. We have not assumed recovery in the estimate of our asbestos insurance recovery asset from two of our significant insurers, which are currently insolvent. Other insurers may become insolvent in the future and our insurers may also fail to reimburse amounts owed to us on a timely basis. If we do not receive timely payment from our insurers, we may be unable to make required payments under settlement agreements with asbestos plaintiffs or to fund amounts required to be posted with courts in order to appeal trial judgments. If we are unable to file such appeals, our subsidiaries may be ordered to pay large damage awards arising from adverse jury verdicts, and such awards may exceed available cash. Any failure to realize expected insurance recoveries, and any delays in receiving from our insurers amounts owed to our subsidiaries, will reduce cash flow and adversely affect liquidity and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

The pending coverage litigation and negotiations with other insurers is continuing.

We have entered into several settlement agreements calling for certain insurers that were parties to the coverage litigation to make lump-sum payments, as well as payments over time, for use by our subsidiaries to fund asbestos-related indemnity and defense costs and, in certain cases, for reimbursement for portions of out-of-pocket costs previously incurred. We intend to negotiate additional settlements where achievable on a reasonable basis in order to minimize the amount of future costs that we would be required to fund out of our working capital.

We funded $2,000 of asbestos liabilities from our cash flow during the third quarter of 2005. We continue to project that, net of payments from our insurers and except as set forth below, we will not be required to further fund any asbestos liabilities from our own cash flow before 2010, although we may be required to fund a portion of such liabilities from our own cash thereafter. However, this forecast assumes that we will be able to resolve the insurance coverage litigation described above with respect to the remaining insurers in a timely fashion. While we expect to continue settlement discussions with such insurers during 2005 and 2006, we may determine that the appropriate course of action is to fund a portion of our asbestos liabilities during 2005 and 2006 while the coverage litigation and settlement discussions continue. If we elect this course of action, we may spend from our cash flow up to $10,000 in the fourth quarter of 2005 and up to $51,000 in the first three quarters of 2006; such amounts have been considered in our liquidity forecast.

Proposed asbestos trust fund legislation has been introduced in both houses of Congress in Washington D.C. and, if enacted in the form currently under discussion, would have a material adverse impact on our cash flow and results of operations. We remain part of a consortium of companies actively lobbying against the enactment of such proposed legislation, as currently drafted.

It should be noted that the estimate of the assets and liabilities related to asbestos claims and recoveries is subject to a number of uncertainties that may result in significant changes in the current estimates. Among these are uncertainties as to the ultimate number of claims filed, the amounts of claim costs, the impact of bankruptcies of other companies with asbestos claims, uncertainties surrounding the litigation process from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and from case to case, as well as potential legislative changes. Increases in the number of claims filed or costs to resolve those claims will cause us to increase further the estimates of the costs associated with asbestos claims and could have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

21


United States

A summary of claim activity for each of the three months ended September 30, 2005, July 1, 2005 and September 24, 2004 is as follows:

  Number of Claims  
 
 
  Third Quarter   Second Quarter   Third Quarter  
  2005   2005   2004  
 
 
 
 
Balance at beginning of quarter 165,900   167,800   170,810  
New claims 3,930   4,420   4,290  
Claims closed (3,920 ) (6,320 ) (4,960 )
 
 
 
 
Balance at end of quarter * 165,910   165,900   170,140  
 
 
 
 

The overall average combined indemnity and defense cost per closed claim since 1993 was approximately $2.2. We believe that the average cost per closed claim is increasing and will continue to increase in the future.

The amount spent on asbestos litigation defense and case resolution, substantially all of which was reimbursed from insurance coverage, was $64,600 and $74,700 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and September 24, 2004, respectively.

As of September 30, 2005, we had recorded total liabilities of $415,900 comprised of an estimated liability relating to open (outstanding) claims of $192,900 and an estimated liability relating to future unasserted claims of $223,000. Of the total, $85,000 is recorded in accrued expenses and $330,900 is recorded in asbestos-related liability on the condensed consolidated balance sheet. These estimates are based upon the following information and/or assumptions: number of open claims, forecasted number of future claims, estimated average cost per claim by disease type (i.e., mesothelioma vs. non-mesothelioma) and the breakdown of known and future claims into disease type (i.e., mesothelioma vs. non-mesothelioma). Claims that have not been settled and are six or more years old are considered abandoned and are no longer valued in the estimated liability; however, such claims are included within the above chart. There were approximately 10,100 such cases that are not valued within the estimated liability at September 30, 2005. The total estimated liability includes both the estimate of forecasted indemnity amounts and forecasted defense expenses. Total estimated defense costs and indemnity payments are estimated to be incurred through the year 2019, during which period new claims are expected to decline from year to year. We believe that there will be new claims filed after 2019, but in light of uncertainties inherent in long-term forecasts, we do not believe that we can reasonably estimate defense and/or indemnity costs, which might be incurred after 2019. Historically, defense costs have represented approximately 21% of total defense and indemnity costs. Through September 30, 2005, total indemnity costs paid, prior to insurance recoveries, were approximately $495,600 and total defense costs paid were approximately $132,500.

19


The number and type of claims received and the average cost to settle claims can vary from quarter to quarter and sometimes by substantial amounts. In the first nine months of 2005, the number of claims received (including the number of mesothelioma claims) and the average cost to settle claims exceeded our forecast prepared at year-end 2004 to estimate the asbestos liability by a material amount. Although our forecast contemplates that new claims requiring indemnity will decline from year-to-year, we do not believe that nine months of data is sufficient evidence to currently necessitate a change in the underlying assumptions used to estimate the asbestos liability. However, we intend to review the assumptions used to estimate our asbestos liability at year-end 2005 and compare actual experience to projected results. Changes to the underlying estimates may be required at that time and may result in a modification of the asbestos liability and associated asset.

As of September 30, 2005, we had recorded assets of $323,300 relating to actual and probable insurance recoveries, of which $24,000 is recorded in accounts and notes receivable, and $299,300 is recorded as asbestos-related insurance recovery receivable on the condensed consolidated balance sheet. The amount recorded in current assets within accounts and notes receivable reflects amounts due under executed settlement agreements with insurers and does not include any estimate for future settlements. The amount recorded as asbestos-related insurance recovery receivable includes an estimate of recoveries from insurers based upon assumptions relating to cost allocation and resolution of pending legal proceedings with certain insurers, as well as recoveries under settlements with other insurers.

As of September 30, 2005, $165,200 was contested by our subsidiaries’ insurers in ongoing litigation. The litigation relates to the proper allocation of the coverage liability among our subsidiaries’ various insurers and our subsidiaries as self-insurers. We believe that any amounts that our subsidiaries might be allocated as self-insurer would be immaterial.

An adverse outcome in pending insurance litigation on coverage issues could materially limit our insurance recoveries. In this regard, on January 10, 2005, a New York state trial court entered an order finding that New York, rather than New Jersey, law applies in the litigation described above regarding the allocation of liability for asbestos-related personal injury claims among the Foster Wheeler entities and their various insurers. Prior to the New York order, we had calculated estimated insurance recoveries applying New Jersey law. The application of New York, rather than New Jersey, law would result in our subsidiaries realizing lower insurance recoveries. Thus, as a result of this decision and other factors, we estimated our insurance asset assuming application of New York law and we recorded a charge to earnings in the fourth quarter of 2004 of approximately $76,000 and reduced the year-end 2004 carrying value of our probable insurance recoveries by a similar amount. Unless this decision is reversed, we expect that we will be required to fund a portion of our asbestos liabilities from our own cash. The amount and timing of these funding requirements will be dependent upon, among other things, litigated or negotiated resolution of the various disputes with our insurers with whom we have not yet settled. On February 16, 2005, our subsidiaries filed separate motions seeking (i) the re-argument of this decision and (ii) an appeal of this decision to a higher court. On May 19, 2005, our motion seeking re-argument was denied. Our appeal is currently pending, but there can be no assurances as to the timing or the outcome.

In addition, even if these coverage issues are resolved in a manner favorable to Foster Wheeler, we may not be able to collect all of the amounts due under our insurance policies. Our recoveries will be limited by insolvencies among our insurers. We have not assumed recovery in the estimate of our asbestos insurance recovery asset from two of our significant insurers, which are currently insolvent. Other insurers may become insolvent in the future and our insurers may also fail to reimburse amounts owed to us on a timely basis. If we do not receive timely payment from our insurers, we may be unable to make required payments under settlement agreements with asbestos plaintiffs or to fund amounts required to be posted with courts in order to appeal trial judgments. If we are unable to file such appeals, our subsidiaries may be ordered to pay large damage awards arising from adverse jury verdicts, and such awards may exceed available cash. Any failure to realize expected insurance recoveries, and any delays in receiving from our insurers amounts owed to our subsidiaries, will reduce cash flow and adversely affect liquidity and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

The pending coverage litigation and negotiations with other insurers is continuing.

We have entered into several settlement agreements calling for certain insurers that were parties to the coverage litigation to make lump-sum payments, as well as payments over time, for use by our subsidiaries to fund asbestos-related indemnity and defense costs and, in certain cases, for reimbursement for portions of out-of-pocket costs previously incurred. We intend to negotiate additional settlements where achievable on a reasonable basis in order to minimize the amount of future costs that we would be required to fund out of our working capital.

20


We funded $2,000 of asbestos liabilities from our cash flow during the third quarter of 2005. We continue to project that, net of payments from our insurers and except as set forth below, we will not be required to further fund any asbestos liabilities from our own cash flow before 2010, although we may be required to fund a portion of such liabilities from our own cash thereafter. However, this forecast assumes that we will be able to resolve the insurance coverage litigation described above with respect to the remaining insurers in a timely fashion. While we expect to continue settlement discussions with such insurers during 2005 and 2006, we may determine that the appropriate course of action is to fund a portion of our asbestos liabilities during 2005 and 2006 while the coverage litigation and settlement discussions continue. If we elect this course of action, we may spend from our cash flow up to $10,000 in the fourth quarter of 2005 and up to $51,000 in the first three quarters of 2006; such amounts have been considered in our liquidity forecast.

Proposed asbestos trust fund legislation has been introduced in both houses of Congress in Washington D.C. and, if enacted in the form currently under discussion, would have a material adverse impact on our cash flow and results of operations. We remain part of a consortium of companies actively lobbying against the enactment of such proposed legislation, as currently drafted.

It should be noted that the estimate of the assets and liabilities related to asbestos claims and recoveries is subject to a number of uncertainties that may result in significant changes in the current estimates. Among these are uncertainties as to the ultimate number of claims filed, the amounts of claim costs, the impact of bankruptcies of other companies with asbestos claims, uncertainties surrounding the litigation process from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and from case to case, as well as potential legislative changes. Increases in the number of claims filed or costs to resolve those claims will cause us to increase further the estimates of the costs associated with asbestos claims and could have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Wikinvest © 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Use of this site is subject to express Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimer. By continuing past this page, you agree to abide by these terms. Any information provided by Wikinvest, including but not limited to company data, competitors, business analysis, market share, sales revenues and other operating metrics, earnings call analysis, conference call transcripts, industry information, or price targets should not be construed as research, trading tips or recommendations, or investment advice and is provided with no warrants as to its accuracy. Stock market data, including US and International equity symbols, stock quotes, share prices, earnings ratios, and other fundamental data is provided by data partners. Stock market quotes delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and AMEX. Market data by Xignite. See data providers for more details. Company names, products, services and branding cited herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The use of trademarks or service marks of another is not a representation that the other is affiliated with, sponsors, is sponsored by, endorses, or is endorsed by Wikinvest.
Powered by MediaWiki