Dow Chemical 2014 Annual Report Download - page 88

64
Information regarding environmental sites is provided below:
Environmental Sites Dow-owned Sites (1) Superfund Sites (2)
2014 2013 2014 2013
Number of sites at January 1 200 290 121 126
Sites added during year 6 3 5 2
Sites closed during year (22) (93) (2) (7)
Number of sites at December 31 184 200 124 121
(1) Dow-owned sites are sites currently or formerly owned by Dow, where remediation obligations are
imposed in the United States by the Resource Conservation Recovery Act or analogous state law.
At December 31, 2014, 46 of these sites (64 sites at December 31, 2013) were formerly owned by
Dowell Schlumberger, Inc., a group of companies in which the Company previously owned a
50 percent interest. Dow sold its interest in Dowell Schlumberger in 1992.
(2) Superfund sites are sites, including sites not owned by Dow, where remediation obligations are
imposed by Superfund Law.
Additional information is provided below for the Company’s Midland, Michigan, manufacturing site and Midland off-site
locations (collectively, the "Midland sites"), as well as a Superfund site in Wood-Ridge, New Jersey, the locations for which the
Company has the largest potential environmental liabilities.
In the early days of operations at the Midland manufacturing site, wastes were usually disposed of on-site, resulting in soil and
groundwater contamination, which has been contained and managed on-site under a series of Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act permits and regulatory agreements. The most recent Hazardous Waste Operating License for the Midland
manufacturing site, issued in 2003, also included provisions for the Company to conduct an investigation to determine the
nature and extent of off-site contamination from historic Midland manufacturing site operations. In January 2010, the
Company, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and the State of Michigan ("State") entered into an
administrative order on consent that requires the Company to conduct a remedial investigation, a feasibility study and a
remedial design for the Tittabawassee River, the Saginaw River and the Saginaw Bay, and pay the oversight costs of the EPA
and the State under the authority of CERCLA. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional
information. At December 31, 2014, the Company had an accrual of $93 million ($77 million at December 31, 2013) for
environmental remediation and investigation associated with the Midland sites. In 2014, the Company spent $22 million
($27 million in 2013) for environmental remediation at the Midland sites.
Rohm and Haas is a PRP at the Wood-Ridge, New Jersey Ventron/Velsicol Superfund Site, and the adjacent Berry’s Creek
Study Area ("BCSA") (collectively, the "Wood-Ridge sites"). Rohm and Haas is a successor in interest to a company that
owned and operated a mercury processing facility, where wastewater and waste handling resulted in contamination of soils and
adjacent creek sediments. Currently, the Berry’s Creek Study Area PRP group is undertaking a multi-stage Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study ("RI/FS") to identify contamination in surface water, sediment and biota related to numerous
contaminated sites in the Berry's Creek watershed. The RI/FS eventually will support a remedial action plan for the BCSA and
is expected to require several more years to complete. At December 31, 2014, the Company had an accrual of $18 million
($15 million at December 31, 2013) for environmental remediation at the Wood-Ridge sites. In 2014, the Company spent
$6 million ($4 million in 2013) on environmental remediation at the Wood-Ridge sites.
In total, the Company’s accrued liability for probable environmental remediation and restoration costs was $706 million at
December 31, 2014, compared with $722 million at the end of 2013. This is management’s best estimate of the costs for
remediation and restoration with respect to environmental matters for which the Company has accrued liabilities, although it is
reasonably possible that the ultimate cost with respect to these particular matters could range up to approximately two and half
times that amount. Consequently, it is reasonably possible that environmental remediation and restoration costs in excess of
amounts accrued could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. It is
the opinion of the Company’s management, however, that the possibility is remote that costs in excess of the range disclosed
will have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The amounts charged to income on a pretax basis related to environmental remediation totaled $227 million in 2014,
$203 million in 2013 and $197 million in 2012. The amounts charged to income on a pretax basis related to operating the
Company’s current pollution abatement facilities totaled $762 million in 2014, $720 million in 2013 and $717 million in 2012.
Capital expenditures for environmental protection were $78 million in 2014, $102 million in 2013 and $145 million in 2012.