Kimberly-Clark 2007 Annual Report Download - page 34

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 34 of the 2007 Kimberly-Clark annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 123

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123

PART I
(Continued)
system and a wastewater treatment facility serving industrial and municipal customers, including
Kimberly-Clark’s Chester Mill. Delcora also regulates the discharge of wastewater from the Chester Mill.
Delcora has alleged in the summons and the administrative action that the Corporation underreported the quantity
of effluent discharged to Delcora from the Chester Mill for several years due to an inaccurate effluent metering
device and owes additional amounts. The Corporation’s action for declaratory judgment in the Federal District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania was dismissed in December 2007. The Corporation continues to
believe that Delcora’s allegations lack merit and intends to vigorously defend against Delcora’s actions. In
management’s opinion, this matter is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Corporation’s
business, financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.
The Corporation received a notice of violation from the Washington State Department of Ecology (“DOE”)
in October 2007 alleging a violation of certain Washington State environmental regulations at the Corporation’s
property in Everett, Washington. In December 2007, the DOE notified the Corporation of its intention to seek a
penalty of $235,000, based on the alleged violation. The Corporation believes that it has already corrected the
alleged non-compliant activity.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2007.
14