• No se han encontrado resultados

CAPITULO 3 METODOLOGIA DE LA INFORMACIÓN

3.4 Investigación cuantitativa

3.4.5 Perfil de los encuestados

We are the subject of, or party to, a number of pending or threatened legal actions, contingencies and commitments involving a variety of matters, including laws and regulations relating to the environment. Certain of these matters are discussed below. The ultimate resolution of these contingencies could, individually or in the aggregate, be material to our consolidated financial statements. However, management believes that we will remain a viable and competitive enterprise even though it is possible that these contingencies could be resolved unfavorably.

Environmental matters – We are subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations relating to

the environment. These laws generally provide for control of pollutants released into the environment and require responsible parties to undertake remediation of hazardous waste disposal sites. Penalties may be imposed for noncompliance. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, accrued liabilities for remediation totaled $116 million and $111 million. It is not presently possible to estimate the ultimate amount of all remediation costs that might be incurred or the penalties that may be imposed. Receivables for recoverable costs from certain states, under programs to assist companies in clean-up efforts related to underground storage tanks at retail marketing outlets, were $59 and $60 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008.

Legal cases – We, along with other refining companies, settled a number of lawsuits pertaining to methyl

tertiary-butyl ether (“MTBE”) in 2008. Presently, we are a defendant, along with other refining companies, in 27 cases arising in four states alleging damages for MTBE contamination. Like the cases that we settled in 2008, 12 of the remaining cases are consolidated in a multi-district litigation (“MDL”) in the Southern District of New York for pretrial proceedings. The other 15 cases are in New York state courts (Nassau and Suffolk Counties). Plaintiffs in 26 of the 27 cases allege damages to water supply wells from contamination of groundwater by MTBE, similar to the damages claimed in the cases settled in 2008. In the remaining case, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection is seeking the cost of remediating MTBE contamination and natural resources damages allegedly resulting from contamination of groundwater by MTBE. We are vigorously defending these cases. We have engaged in settlement discussions related to the majority of these cases. We do not expect our share of liability for these cases to significantly impact our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows. We voluntarily discontinued producing MTBE in 2002.

We are currently a party to one qui tam case, which alleges that Marathon and other defendants violated the False Claims Act with respect to the reporting and payment of royalties on natural gas and natural gas liquids for federal and Indian leases. A qui tam action is an action in which the relator files suit on behalf of himself as well as the federal government. The case currently pending is U.S. ex rel Harrold E. Wright v. Agip Petroleum Co. et al. It is primarily a gas valuation case. Marathon has reached a settlement with the Relator and the DOJ which will be finalized after the Indian Tribes review and approve the settlement terms. Such settlement is not expected to significantly impact our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

Guarantees – We have provided certain guarantees, direct and indirect, of the indebtedness of other

companies. Under the terms of most of these guarantee arrangements, we would be required to perform should the guaranteed party fail to fulfill its obligations under the specified arrangements. In addition to these financial guarantees, we also have various performance guarantees related to specific agreements.

MARATHON OIL CORPORATION

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Guarantees related to indebtedness of equity method investees – We hold interests in an offshore oil port, LOOP LLC, and a crude oil pipeline system, LOCAP LLC. Both LOOP LLC and LOCAP LLC have secured various project financings with throughput and deficiency agreements. Under the agreements, we are required to advance funds if the investees are unable to service their debt. Any such advances are considered prepayments of future transportation charges. The terms of the agreements vary but tend to follow the terms of the underlying debt. Our maximum potential undiscounted payments under these agreements totaled $172 million as of December 31, 2009.

We hold an interest in a refined products pipeline through our investment in Centennial, and have guaranteed the repayment of Centennial’s outstanding balance under a Master Shelf Agreement which expires in 2024. The guarantee arose in order for Centennial to obtain adequate financing. Our maximum potential undiscounted payments under this agreement totaled $60 million as of December 31, 2009.

Other guarantees – We have entered into other guarantees with maximum potential undiscounted payments totaling $190 million as of December 31, 2009, which consist primarily of leases of corporate assets containing general lease indemnities and guaranteed residual values, a commitment to contribute cash to an equity method investee for certain catastrophic events in lieu of procuring insurance coverage, a legal indemnification, a performance guarantee and a long-term transportation services agreement.

United States Steel was the sole general partner of Clairton 1314B Partnership, L.P., which owned certain cokemaking facilities formerly owned by United States Steel. We have agreed, under certain circumstances, to indemnify the limited partners if the partnership’s product sales fail to qualify for the credit under Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Code. The Clairton 1314B Partnership was terminated on October 31, 2008, but we were not released from our obligations. United States Steel has estimated the maximum potential amount of this indemnity obligation, including interest and tax gross-up, was approximately $100 million as of December 31, 2009.

General guarantees associated with dispositions – Over the years, we have sold various assets in the normal course of our business. Certain of the related agreements contain performance and general guarantees, including guarantees regarding inaccuracies in representations, warranties, covenants and agreements, and environmental and general indemnifications that require us to perform upon the occurrence of a triggering event or condition. These guarantees and indemnifications are part of the normal course of selling assets. We are typically not able to calculate the maximum potential amount of future payments that could be made under such contractual provisions because of the variability inherent in the guarantees and indemnities. Most often, the nature of the guarantees and indemnities is such that there is no appropriate method for quantifying the exposure because the underlying triggering event has little or no past experience upon which a reasonable prediction of the outcome can be based.

Existing guarantees of our subsidiaries’ performance issued to Irish government entities will remain in place after the 2009 sales until the purchasers issue similar guarantees to replace them. The guarantees, related to asset retirement obligations and natural gas production levels, have been indemnified by the purchasers. Our maximum potential undiscounted payments under these guarantees as of December 31, 2009 are $157 million.

Contract commitments – At December 31, 2009 and 2008, our contract commitments to acquire property,

plant and equipment totaled $ 2,938 million and $4,070 million.

Other contingencies – In November 2006, the government of Equatorial Guinea enacted a new hydrocarbon

law governing petroleum operations in Equatorial Guinea. The transitional provision of the law provides that all contractors and the terms of any contract to which they are a party will be subject to the law. The governmental agency responsible for the energy industry was given the authority to renegotiate any contract for the purpose of adapting any terms and conditions that are inconsistent with the new law. We are in the process of determining what impact this law may have on our existing operations in Equatorial Guinea.

MARATHON OIL CORPORATION

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements