2017
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2017
Commission file number 1-16811
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware | 25-1897152 | |
(State of Incorporation) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) | |
600 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15219-2800
(Address of principal executive offices)
Tel. No. (412) 433-1121
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12 (b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class | Name of Exchange on which Registered | |
United States Steel Corporation Common Stock, par value $1.00 | New York Stock Exchange, Chicago Stock Exchange | |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes þ No
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
Yes No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for at least the past 90 days. Yes þ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes þ No
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or emerging growth company. See the definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer," “smaller reporting company” and "emerging growth company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.(Check one):
Large accelerated filer P | Accelerated filer | Non-accelerated filer | Smaller reporting company | Emerging growth company(a) __ | ||||
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | ||||||||
(a) If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ___ | ||||||||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes No þ
Aggregate market value of Common Stock held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2017 (the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter): $3.9 billion. The amount shown is based on the closing price of the registrant’s Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange composite tape on that date. Shares of Common Stock held by executive officers and directors of the registrant are not included in the computation. However, the registrant has made no determination that such individuals are “affiliates” within the meaning of Rule 405 under the Securities Act of 1933.
There were 175,883,206 shares of United States Steel Corporation Common Stock outstanding as of February 15, 2018.
Documents Incorporated By Reference:
Portions of the Proxy Statement for the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated into Part III.
INDEX
Item 1. | |||
Item 1A | |||
Item 1B | |||
Item 2. | |||
Item 3. | |||
Item 4. | |||
Item 5. | |||
Item 6. | |||
Item 7. | |||
Item 7A | |||
Item 8. | |||
Item 9. | |||
Item 9A | |||
Item 9B | |||
Item 10. | |||
Item 11. | |||
Item 12. | |||
Item 13. | |||
Item 14. | |||
Item 15. | |||
Item 16. | |||
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES | 110 | ||
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report contains information that may constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We intend the forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements in those sections. Generally, we have identified such forward-looking statements by using the words “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “project,” “target,” “forecast,” “aim,” "should," “will” and similar expressions or by using future dates in connection with any discussion of, among other things, operating performance, trends, events or developments that we expect or anticipate will occur in the future, statements relating to volume growth, share of sales and earnings per share growth, and statements expressing general views about future operating results. However, the absence of these words or similar expressions does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements are not historical facts, but instead represent only the Company’s beliefs regarding future events, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and outside of the Company’s control. It is possible that the Company’s actual results and financial condition may differ, possibly materially, from the anticipated results and financial condition indicated in these forward-looking statements. Management believes that these forward-looking statements are reasonable as of the time made. However, caution should be taken not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements because such statements speak only as of the date when made. Our Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law. In addition, forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from our Company's historical experience and our present expectations or projections. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to the risks and uncertainties described in this report in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and those described from time to time in our future reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
References in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to "U. S. Steel," "the Company," "we," "us," and "our" refer to United States Steel Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries unless otherwise indicated by the context.
Non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (non-GAAP) Financial Measures
This report contains certain non-GAAP financial measures such as earnings (loss) before interest, income taxes, depreciation, depletion and amortization (EBITDA), adjusted EBITDA, adjusted net earnings (loss), adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share and cash conversion cycle.
We believe that EBITDA, considered along with the net earnings (loss), is a relevant indicator of trends relating to cash generating activity and provides management and investors with additional information for comparison of our operating results to the operating results of other companies.
Adjusted net earnings (loss) and adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share are non-GAAP measures that exclude the effects of gains (losses) associated with our retained interest in U. S. Steel Canada Inc., gains (losses) on the sale of ownership interests in equity investees, restructuring charges, impairment charges, significant temporary idling charges, debt extinguishment and other related costs and effects of tax reform that are not part of the Company's core operations. Adjusted EBITDA is also a non-GAAP measure that excludes the effects of gains (losses) associated with our retained interest in U. S. Steel Canada Inc., gains (losses) on the sale of ownership interests in equity investees, restructuring charges, impairment charges and significant temporary idling charges. We present adjusted net earnings (loss), adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share and adjusted EBITDA to enhance the understanding of our ongoing operating performance and established trends affecting our core operations, by excluding the effects of gains (losses) associated with our retained interest in U. S. Steel Canada Inc., gains (losses) on the sale of ownership interests in equity investees, restructuring charges, impairment charges, significant temporary idling charges, debt extinguishment and other related costs and effects of tax reform that can obscure underlying trends. U. S. Steel's management considers adjusted net earnings (loss), adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share and adjusted EBITDA as alternative measures of operating performance and not alternative measures of the Company's liquidity. U. S. Steel’s management considers adjusted net earnings (loss), adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share and adjusted EBITDA useful to investors by facilitating a comparison of our operating performance to the operating performance of our competitors. Additionally, the presentation of adjusted net earnings (loss), adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share and adjusted EBITDA provides insight into management’s view and assessment of the Company’s ongoing operating performance, because management does not consider the adjusting items when evaluating the Company’s financial performance or in preparing the Company’s annual financial Outlook. Adjusted net earnings (loss), adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share and adjusted EBITDA should not be considered a substitute for net earnings
3
(loss), earnings (loss) per diluted share or other financial measures as computed in accordance with U.S. GAAP and is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures used by other companies.
We believe the cash conversion cycle is a useful measure in providing investors with information regarding our cash management performance and is a widely accepted measure of working capital management efficiency. The cash conversion cycle should not be considered in isolation or as an alternative to other GAAP metrics as an indicator of performance.
4
10-K SUMMARY
Our vision is to transform our company in meaningful ways that strategically position us for the future. This vision is about more than U. S. Steel; it is about reinforcing the economic and societal benefits associated with strong domestic manufacturing capabilities, of which steel is a foundational industry.
Underlying our efforts is our belief that we must operate as a principled company committed to a code of conduct that is rooted in our Gary Principles and our core values, the most important of which is safety - of our employees, our environment, and our facilities and equipment. These core beliefs have served us well for much of our history, and our commitment to them remains as strong as the products we make every day.
During 2017, we continued to transform U. S. Steel through a disciplined approach committed to finding ways to innovate, grow, and overcome obstacles in order to create value and benefit the long-term interests of all U. S. Steel stakeholders, including employees, customers, stockholders, and the communities where we do business.
We are focused on execution of a two-phased stockholder value creation strategy: (1) earn the right to grow, and (2) drive and sustain profitable growth. Earning the right to grow means delivering consistent, reliable EBITDA across the business cycle by achieving operational excellence through a focused effort by our talented workforce to deliver superior results in four business-critical areas: safety, quality, delivery, and cost. Driving and sustaining profitable growth, economic profit across the business cycle and above-average returns for long-term stockholders, is enabled through stable, reliable facilities that produce innovative product and service solutions for discerning steel customers. Underlying both phases is our unwavering commitment to strengthen our balance sheet, with an emphasis on cash flow, liquidity, and financial flexibility.
We are on a mission to become an industry leader by striving to create a sustainable competitive advantage with a customer-centric focus on: delivering high-quality, on time value-added products; collaborating with customers to develop innovative solutions that address their most challenging needs, including new advanced high-strength steels to meet fuel efficiency and safety requirements for automotive customers and new premium connections that provide strong, durable connections between pipes used by energy customers in oil and gas drilling; generating economic profit through active participation in relevant markets; and creating and maintaining a competitive cost structure centered around operational flexibility.
We have launched a series of initiatives that we believe will enable us to achieve true operational excellence by improving our performance across our core business processes, including commercial, supply chain, manufacturing, procurement, innovation, and operational and functional support. Our highly talented, capable and collaborative employees are the driving force behind many of these continuous improvement projects, and their efforts are creating a culture where accountability and high performance are valued and celebrated.
5
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
This section provides an overview of select key performance indicators for U. S. Steel which management and investors use to assess the Company's financial performance. It does not contain all of the information you should consider. Fluctuations for year to year changes are explained in Item 7. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations." Please read the entire Annual Report on Form 10-K.
• | While we continue to face challenges driven primarily by uncertain geopolitical factors, our successful navigation through the industry downturn positioned us to benefit from improved industry conditions in 2017. |
• | Our investments in our assets helped to provide a more stable operating performance in 2017. |
• | Our 2017 results include a favorable impact of $344 million related to our previously disclosed change in accounting method for property, plant and equipment. |
• | Our 2017 net earnings includes an $81 million income tax benefit from tax reform. |
6
• | The increase in net sales in 2017 as compared to 2016 is primarily due to higher average realized prices in all of our reportable segments. Improved market conditions for our Flat-Rolled segment, notably for hot-rolled, resulted in spot price increases in 2017 as well as price increases for both market-based and firm priced contracts from 2016 to 2017. Lower imports resulted in higher average realized prices for our USSE segment. Improved market conditions for our Tubular segment resulted in higher average realized prices and higher shipments. |
7
• | These amounts are derived starting from net earnings (loss) as shown on page 6. For a full reconciliation of adjusted EBITDA see page 15. |
• | EBITDA increased for all three reportable segments in 2017 as compared to 2016 with higher average realized prices in all three segments. Our long-term strategic goals of improving our balance sheet, enhancing operational efficiency and reliability and seeking robust enforcement of our trade laws led to a successful year. |
• | Our 2017 adjusted EBITDA includes a favorable impact of $381 million related to our previously disclosed change in accounting method for property, plant and equipment. |
8
• | These amounts are derived starting from net earnings (loss) as shown on page 6. For a full reconciliation of adjusted net earnings (loss) see page 15. |
• | Our efforts towards achieving economic profit across the business cycle continue, and are reflected in our improved results in 2017 as compared to 2016. |
• | Our 2017 results include a favorable impact of $344 million related to our previously disclosed change in accounting method for property, plant and equipment. |
• | See reconciliation from diluted net earnings (loss) per share to adjusted diluted net earnings (loss) per share on page 16. |
• | Our 2017 results include a favorable impact of $1.95 per diluted share related to our previously disclosed change in accounting method for property, plant and equipment. |
9
• | The increase in our cash from operations in 2016 as compared to 2015 was due to efficient working capital management. |
• | In 2017, improved financial performance more than offset the changes in working capital. |
• | Our cash conversion cycle was 63, 43 and 30 days for 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Financial Condition, Cash Flows and Liquidity – Cash Flows” for the calculation of our cash conversion cycle. |
10
Flat-Rolled Segment Asset Revitalization Program Performance Scorecard
• | We have developed a performance scorecard that includes two financial and two non-financial metrics for |
tracking our progress on implementing our Flat-Rolled Segment asset revitalization program. We believe these metrics will effectively measure how successfully we are implementing the program.
• | We made good progress in 2017, exceeding the EBITDA, quality, and reliability improvements we had |
committed to for 2017 for this asset revitalization program. We established the additional improvement goals we expect to achieve in 2018.
11
• | Maintaining strong cash and liquidity continues to be a strategic priority. |
• | Total liquidity improved significantly from 2015 to 2016 due to improved cash levels. |
• | Total liquidity further improved from 2016 to 2017 primarily due to higher Asset Based Loan (ABL) availability and improved cash levels, which was driven by higher values of inventory and trade receivable that serve as collateral for the ABL, as well as improved profitability levels. |
12
• | The decrease in pension and OPEB expense from 2015 to 2016 was primarily due to the freezing of benefit accruals for non-represented participants effective December 31, 2015. |
• | The increase in 2017 pension and OPEB expense from 2016 is primarily due to a lower return on assets assumption for OPEB benefits as a result of actions taken in 2016 to de-risk the OPEB benefit plan. |
• | 2018 pension and OPEB expense is expected to be approximately $195 million. |
• | For further details, see Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. |
13
• | As we continue to focus on strengthening the balance sheet, the funded status of our benefit plans is improving. This is partially attributable to the decision to freeze benefit accruals for non-represented participants in the defined benefit pension plan effective December 31, 2015 and the closure of OPEB plans to represented employees hired or rehired under certain conditions on or after January 1, 2016. |
• | Our funded status continued to improve in 2017 due to strong asset returns. Additionally, U. S. Steel made a voluntary contribution of $75 million in 2017 to the Company's main defined benefit pension plan. |
• | On a U.S. GAAP basis the funded status of our pension and OPEB obligations improved to 93% and 86% respectively, at December 31, 2017 from 88% and 82% respectively, at December 31, 2016. |
• | For further details, see Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. |
14
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
As disclosed on page 3 of this report, we present EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA, adjusted net earnings (loss) and adjusted net earnings (loss) per diluted share, which are non-GAAP measures, as an additional measurement to enhance the understanding of our operating performance and facilitate a comparison with that of our competitors.
RECONCILIATION TO ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS (LOSS) (a) | ||||||||||||
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Reconciliation to adjusted net earnings (loss) attributable to United States Steel Corporation | ||||||||||||
Net earnings (loss) attributable to United States Steel Corporation, as reported | $ | 387 | $ | (440 | ) | $ | (1,642 | ) | ||||
Loss on shutdown of certain tubular pipe mill assets (b) | 35 | 126 | — | |||||||||
(Gain) loss associated with U. S. Steel Canada Inc. | (72 | ) | — | 266 | ||||||||
Loss on shutdown of Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations (b) (c) | — | — | 53 | |||||||||
Loss on shutdown of coke production facilities (b) | — | — | 65 | |||||||||
Restructuring and other charges (b) (d) | — | (2 | ) | 64 | ||||||||
Granite City Works temporary idling charges | 17 | 18 | 99 | |||||||||
Post-employment benefit actuarial adjustment | — | — | 26 | |||||||||
(Gain) loss on equity investee transactions | (2 | ) | 12 | 18 | ||||||||
Deferred tax asset valuation allowance | — | — | 753 | |||||||||
Impairment of intangible assets | — | 14 | — | |||||||||
Loss on extinguishment of debt and other related costs | 57 | 22 | 36 | |||||||||
Effect of tax reform | (81 | ) | — | — | ||||||||
Total Adjustments | (46 | ) | 190 | 1,380 | ||||||||
Adjusted net earnings (loss) attributable to United States Steel Corporation | $ | 341 | $ | (250 | ) | $ | (262 | ) | ||||
(b) Included in restructuring and other charges on the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
(c) Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations includes the blast furnace and associated steelmaking operations, along with most of the flat-rolled finishing operations at the former Fairfield Works. The #5 coating line continues to operate.
(d) The 2015 amount consists primarily of employee related costs, including costs for severance, supplemental unemployment benefits and continuation of health care benefits.
15
RECONCILIATION TO ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE (a) | ||||||||||||
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Reconciliation to adjusted diluted net earnings (loss) per share | ||||||||||||
Diluted net earnings (loss) per share, as reported | $ | 2.19 | $ | (2.81 | ) | $ | (11.24 | ) | ||||
Loss on shutdown of certain tubular pipe mill assets (b) | 0.20 | 0.80 | — | |||||||||
(Gain) loss associated with U. S. Steel Canada Inc. | (0.41 | ) | — | 1.82 | ||||||||
Loss on shutdown of Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations (b) (c) | — | — | 0.37 | |||||||||
Loss on shutdown of coke production facilities (b) | — | — | 0.44 | |||||||||
Restructuring and other charges (b) (d) | — | (0.01 | ) | 0.44 | ||||||||
Granite City Works temporary idling charges | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.68 | |||||||||
Post-employment benefit actuarial adjustment | — | — | 0.18 | |||||||||
(Gain) loss on equity investee transactions | (0.01 | ) | 0.08 | 0.12 | ||||||||
Deferred tax asset valuation allowance | — | — | 5.15 | |||||||||
Impairment of intangible assets | — | 0.09 | — | |||||||||
Loss on extinguishment of debt and other related costs | 0.33 | 0.14 | 0.25 | |||||||||
Effect of tax reform | (0.46 | ) | — | — | ||||||||
Total adjustments | (0.25 | ) | 1.21 | 9.45 | ||||||||
Adjusted diluted net earnings (loss) per share | $ | 1.94 | $ | (1.60 | ) | $ | (1.79 | ) | ||||
(a) The adjustments included in this table have been tax affected at the quarterly effective tax rate through the third quarter of 2015. Subsequent to the third quarter of 2015, the adjustments have been tax affected at a 0% tax rate due to the recognition of a full valuation allowance which was established in the fourth quarter of 2015.
(b)Included in restructuring and other charges and cost of sales in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
(c) Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations includes the blast furnace and associated steelmaking operations, along with most of the flat-rolled finishing operations at the former Fairfield Works. The #5 coating line continues to operate.
(d) The 2015 amount consists primarily of employee related costs, including costs for severance, supplemental unemployment benefits and continuation of health care benefits.
16
RECONCILIATION TO EBITDA AND ADJUSTED EBITDA | ||||||||||||
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Reconciliation to EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA | ||||||||||||
Net earnings (loss) attributable to U. S. Steel Corporation | $ | 387 | $ | (440 | ) | $ | (1,642 | ) | ||||
Income tax (benefit) provision | (86 | ) | 24 | 183 | ||||||||
Net interest and other financial costs | 307 | 251 | 257 | |||||||||
Depreciation, depletion and amortization expense | 501 | 507 | 547 | |||||||||
EBITDA | 1,109 | 342 | (655 | ) | ||||||||
Loss on shutdown of certain tubular pipe mill assets (a) | 35 | 126 | — | |||||||||
(Gain) loss associated with U. S. Steel Canada Inc. | (72 | ) | — | 392 | ||||||||
Loss on shutdown of Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations (a) (b) | — | — | 91 | |||||||||
Loss on shutdown of coke production facilities (a) | — | — | 153 | |||||||||
Restructuring and other charges (a) (c) | — | (2 | ) | 78 | ||||||||
Granite City Works temporary idling charges | 17 | 18 | 99 | |||||||||
Post-employment benefit actuarial adjustment | — | — | 26 | |||||||||
(Gain) loss on equity investee transactions | (2 | ) | 12 | 18 | ||||||||
Impairment of intangible assets | — | 14 | — | |||||||||
Adjusted EBITDA | $ | 1,087 | $ | 510 | $ | 202 | ||||||
(a) Included in restructuring and other charges in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
(b) Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations includes the blast furnace and associated steelmaking operations, along with most of the flat-rolled finishing operations at Fairfield Works. The #5 coating line continues to operate.
(c) The 2015 amount consists primarily of employee related costs, including costs for severance, supplemental unemployment benefits and continuation of health care benefits.
17
PART I
Item 1. BUSINESS
United States Steel Corporation (U. S. Steel) is an integrated steel producer of flat-rolled and tubular products with major production operations in the United States and Europe. An integrated steel producer uses iron ore and coke as primary raw materials for steel production. U. S. Steel has annual raw steel production capability of 22.0 million net tons (17.0 million tons in the United States and 5.0 million tons in Europe). U. S. Steel supplies customers throughout the world primarily in the automotive, consumer, industrial and oil country tubular goods (OCTG) markets. According to World Steel Association’s latest published statistics, in 2016 U. S. Steel was the third largest steel producer in the United States and the twenty-fourth largest steel producer in the world. U. S. Steel is also engaged in other business activities consisting primarily of railroad services and real estate operations.
Segments
U. S. Steel has three reportable operating segments: Flat-Rolled Products (Flat-Rolled), U. S. Steel Europe (USSE) and Tubular Products (Tubular). The results of our railroad and real estate businesses that do not constitute reportable segments are combined and disclosed in the Other Businesses category.
Flat-Rolled
The Flat-Rolled segment includes the operating results of U. S. Steel’s integrated steel plants and equity investees in North America involved in the production of slabs, strip mill plates, sheets and tin mill products, as well as all iron ore and coke production facilities in the United States. These operations primarily serve North American customers in the service center, conversion, transportation (including automotive), construction, container, and appliance and electrical markets.
The Flat-Rolled segment is structured to specifically address customer needs through three "commercial entities." Our Flat-Rolled segment commercial entities are focused on customers in the: (1) automotive, (2) consumer and (3) industrial, service center and mining industries.
Automotive Solutions collaborates with customers to develop solutions such as the next generation of advanced high strength steel (AHSS) to address challenges facing the automotive industry, including increased fuel economy standards and enhanced safety requirements.
Consumer Solutions partners with customers in the appliance, packaging, container and construction markets. Consumer Solutions has a robust presence with our tin customers, who represent roughly one quarter of this market category. Additional product lines within the market category include the Company's COR-TEN AZP®, ACRYLUME®, GALVALUME® and Weathered Metals Series®.
Industrial, Service Center and Mining Solutions focuses on the Company's customers in the service center business, pipe and tube manufacturing markets, and agricultural and industrial equipment markets.
Flat-Rolled has aggregate annual raw steel production capability of 17.0 million tons produced at our Gary Works, Mon Valley Works, Great Lakes Works and Granite City Works facilities. Prior to the permanent shut down of the Fairfield Flat-Rolled operations beginning in August 2015, annual raw steel production capability for Flat-Rolled was 19.4 million tons. Raw steel production was 10.8 million tons in 2017, 10.7 million tons in 2016 and 11.3 million tons in 2015. Raw steel production averaged 64 percent of capability in 2017, 63 percent of capability in 2016 and 60 percent of capability in 2015. In December 2015 Granite City Works was temporarily idled and if its production capability is excluded, Flat-Rolled production would have been 76 percent and 75 percent of capability in 2017 and 2016 respectively.
European Operations
The USSE segment includes the operating results of U. S. Steel Košice (USSK), U. S. Steel’s integrated steel plant and coke production facilities in Slovakia, and its subsidiaries. USSE primarily serves customers in the Eastern European construction, service center, conversion, container, transportation (including automotive), appliance and electrical, and oil, gas and petrochemical markets. USSE produces and sells slabs, sheet, strip mill plate, tin mill products and spiral welded pipe, as well as heating radiators and refractory ceramic materials.
18
USSE has annual raw steel production capability of 5.0 million tons. USSE’s raw steel production was 5.1 million tons in 2017, 5.0 million tons in 2016, and 4.7 million tons in 2015. USSE’s raw steel production averaged 102 percent of capability in 2017, 99 percent of capability in 2016 and 93 percent of capability in 2015.
Tubular
The Tubular segment includes the operating results of U. S. Steel’s tubular production facilities, in the United States, and equity investees in the United States and Brazil. Our ownership interest in the equity investment in Brazil was sold in December of 2017. These operations produce and sell seamless and electric resistance welded (ERW) steel casing and tubing (commonly known as OCTG), and standard and line pipe and mechanical tubing and primarily serve customers in the oil, gas and petrochemical markets. Tubular's annual production capability is 1.5 million tons.
U. S. Steel Tubular Products, Inc. (USSTP), a wholly owned subsidiary of U. S. Steel, is designing and developing a range of premium and semi-premium connections to address the growing needs for technical solutions for our end users' well site production challenges. Through its wholly owned subsidiary, U. S. Steel Oilwell Services, LLC, USSTP also offers rig site services, which provides the technical expertise for proper installation of our tubular products and proprietary connections at the well site.
For further information, see "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" and Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
19
Financial and Operational Highlights
Steel Shipments by Product and Segment
The following table shows steel shipments to end customers, joint ventures and equity investees of U. S. Steel.
(Thousands of Tons) | Flat-Rolled | USSE | Tubular | Total | ||||||||
Product—2017 | ||||||||||||
Hot-rolled Sheets | 3,262 | 1,151 | — | 4,413 | ||||||||
Cold-rolled Sheets | 3,281 | 499 | — | 3,780 | ||||||||
Coated Sheets | 2,394 | 872 | — | 3,266 | ||||||||
Tin Mill Products | 800 | 441 | — | 1,241 | ||||||||
Oil country tubular goods (OCTG) | — | — | 575 | 575 | ||||||||
Standard and line pipe | — | 61 | 113 | 174 | ||||||||
Semi-finished and Plates | 148 | 1,561 | — | 1,709 | ||||||||
Other | 2 | — | — | 2 | ||||||||
TOTAL | 9,887 | 4,585 | 688 | 15,160 | ||||||||
Memo: Intersegment shipments from Flat-Rolled to Tubular, hot-rolled sheets | 158 | |||||||||||
Memo: Intersegment shipments from USSK to Flat-Rolled, slabs | 47 | |||||||||||
Product—2016 | ||||||||||||
Hot-rolled Sheets | 2,784 | 1,337 | — | 4,121 | ||||||||
Cold-rolled Sheets | 3,775 | 459 | — | 4,234 | ||||||||
Coated Sheets | 2,655 | 849 | — | 3,504 | ||||||||
Tin Mill Products | 831 | 439 | — | 1,270 | ||||||||
Oil country tubular goods (OCTG) | — | — | 351 | 351 | ||||||||
Standard and line pipe | — | 60 | 49 | 109 | ||||||||
Semi-finished and Plates | 23 | 1,352 | — | 1,375 | ||||||||
Other | 26 | — | — | 26 | ||||||||
TOTAL | 10,094 | 4,496 | 400 | 14,990 | ||||||||
Memo: Intersegment shipments from Flat-Rolled to Tubular | ||||||||||||
Hot-rolled sheets | 42 | |||||||||||
Product—2015 | ||||||||||||
Hot-rolled Sheets | 3,283 | 1,165 | — | 4,448 | ||||||||
Cold-rolled Sheets | 3,507 | 470 | — | 3,977 | ||||||||
Coated Sheets | 2,511 | 865 | — | 3,376 | ||||||||
Tin Mill Products | 927 | 428 | — | 1,355 | ||||||||
Oil country tubular goods (OCTG) | — | — | 345 | 345 | ||||||||
Standard and line pipe | — | 55 | 248 | 303 | ||||||||
Semi-finished and Plates | 47 | 1,374 | — | 1,421 | ||||||||
Other | 320 | — | — | 320 | ||||||||
TOTAL | 10,595 | 4,357 | 593 | 15,545 | ||||||||
Memo: Intersegment shipments from Flat-Rolled to Tubular | ||||||||||||
Hot-rolled sheets | 219 | |||||||||||
Rounds | 197 | |||||||||||
20
Steel Shipments by Market and Segment
The following table does not include shipments to end customers by joint ventures and other equity investees of U. S. Steel. Shipments of materials to these entities are included in the “Further Conversion – Joint Ventures” market classification. No single customer accounted for more than 10 percent of gross annual revenues.
(Thousands of Tons) | Flat-Rolled | USSE | Tubular | Total | ||||||||
Major Market – 2017 | ||||||||||||
Steel Service Centers | 1,587 | 761 | — | 2,348 | ||||||||
Further Conversion – Trade Customers | 2,951 | 284 | — | 3,235 | ||||||||
– Joint Ventures | 1,513 | — | — | 1,513 | ||||||||
Transportation (Including Automotive) | 1,453 | 708 | — | 2,161 | ||||||||
Construction and Construction Products | 665 | 1,831 | 41 | 2,537 | ||||||||
Containers | 597 | 438 | — | 1,035 | ||||||||
Appliances and Electrical Equipment | 406 | 247 | — | 653 | ||||||||
Oil, Gas and Petrochemicals | — | 10 | 631 | 641 | ||||||||
Exports from the United States | 452 | — | 16 | 468 | ||||||||
All Other | 263 | 306 | — | 569 | ||||||||
TOTAL | 9,887 | 4,585 | 688 | 15,160 | ||||||||
Major Market – 2016 | ||||||||||||
Steel Service Centers | 1,765 | 801 | — | 2,566 | ||||||||
Further Conversion – Trade Customers | 2,650 | 274 | — | 2,924 | ||||||||
– Joint Ventures | 1,423 | — | — | 1,423 | ||||||||
Transportation (Including Automotive) | 1,725 | 660 | — | 2,385 | ||||||||
Construction and Construction Products | 725 | 1,811 | 40 | 2,576 | ||||||||
Containers | 600 | 436 | — | 1,036 | ||||||||
Appliances and Electrical Equipment | 420 | 236 | — | 656 | ||||||||
Oil, Gas and Petrochemicals | — | 4 | 340 | 344 | ||||||||
Exports from the United States | 436 | — | 20 | 456 | ||||||||
All Other | 350 | 274 | — | 624 | ||||||||
TOTAL | 10,094 | 4,496 | 400 | 14,990 | ||||||||
Major Market – 2015 | ||||||||||||
Steel Service Centers | 1,702 | 718 | — | 2,420 | ||||||||
Further Conversion – Trade Customers | 3,039 | 304 | — | 3,343 | ||||||||
– Joint Ventures | 1,254 | — | — | 1,254 | ||||||||
Transportation (Including Automotive) | 2,011 | 705 | — | 2,716 | ||||||||
Construction and Construction Products | 649 | 1,703 | 55 | 2,407 | ||||||||
Containers | 692 | 424 | — | 1,116 | ||||||||
Appliances and Electrical Equipment | 429 | 236 | — | 665 | ||||||||
Oil, Gas and Petrochemicals | — | — | 513 | 513 | ||||||||
Exports from the United States | 234 | — | 25 | 259 | ||||||||
All Other | 585 | 267 | — | 852 | ||||||||
TOTAL | 10,595 | 4,357 | 593 | 15,545 | ||||||||
21
Business Strategy
We are committed to improving our operations, revitalizing our assets, and developing our talent. Foundational to all our efforts is our belief that we must operate as a principled company committed to a code of conduct that is rooted in our Gary Principles and our core values, the most important of which is safety - of our employees, our environment, and our facilities and equipment. This core belief has served us well for much of our history, and our commitment to it remains as strong as the products we make every day.
We are focused on execution of our two-phased stockholder value creation strategy: (1) earn the right to grow, and (2) drive and sustain profitable growth. Earning the right to grow means delivering consistent, reliable EBITDA across the business cycle by achieving operational excellence through a focused effort by our talented workforce to deliver superior results in four business-critical areas: safety, quality, delivery, and cost. Driving and sustaining profitable growth, economic profit across the business cycle and above-average returns for long-term stockholders, is enabled through stable, reliable facilities that produce innovative product and service solutions for discerning steel customers. Underlying both phases is our unwavering commitment to strengthen our balance sheet, with an emphasis on cash flow, liquidity, and financial flexibility.
We are on a mission to become an industry leader by striving to create a sustainable competitive advantage with a customer-centric focus on: delivering high-quality, value-added products on time every time; collaborating with customers to develop innovative solutions that address their most challenging needs, including new advanced high-strength steels to meet fuel efficiency and safety requirements for automotive customers and new premium connections that provide strong, durable connections between pipes used by energy customers in oil and gas drilling; generating economic profit through active participation in relevant markets; and creating and maintaining a competitive cost structure centered around operational flexibility. The strategic positioning of operations within the commercial entities enhances our ability to better hear the voice of the customer, ensuring that we deliver superior value and drive results in the markets we choose to serve.
U. S. Steel will continue to evaluate potential strategic and organizational opportunities, which may include the acquisition, divestiture or consolidation of assets. Given recent market conditions, the cyclicality of our industry, and the continued challenges faced by the Company, we are focused on strategically maintaining and spending cash (including capital investments under our asset revitalization program), in order to invest in areas consistent with our long-term strategy, and are considering various possibilities, including exiting lines of business and the sale of certain assets, that we believe would ultimately result in a stronger balance sheet and greater stockholder value. The Company will pursue opportunities based on its long-term strategy, and what the Board of Directors determines to be in the best interests of the Company's stockholders at the time.
Changes to Operational Footprint
On December 22, 2017, a subsidiary of U. S. Steel completed the sale of its 50% ownership interest in Apolo Tubulars, S.A. joint venture for $11 million. As a result of the transaction, U. S. Steel recognized a non-cash loss of approximately $18 million.
On September 29, 2017, a subsidiary of U. S. Steel completed the sale of its 15% ownership interest in Tilden Mining Company L.C. for $105 million. As a result of the transaction, U. S. Steel recognized a gain of approximately $26 million.
On June 30, 2017, U. S. Steel completed the restructuring and disposition of USSC through a sale and transfer of all of the issued and outstanding shares in USSC to an affiliate of Bedrock Industries Group LLC (Bedrock). In accordance with the Second Amended and Restated Plan of Compromise, Arrangement and Reorganization, approved by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on June 9, 2017, U. S. Steel received approximately $127 million in satisfaction of its secured claims, including interest, which resulted in a gain of $72 million on the Company's retained interest in USSC. U. S. Steel also agreed to the discharge and cancellation of its unsecured claims for nominal consideration. The terms of the settlement also included mutual releases among key stakeholders, including a release of all claims against the Company regarding environmental, pension and other liabilities.
In March 2017, U. S. Steel made a strategic decision to permanently shutdown the Lorain No. 6 Quench & Temper Mill and relocate the equipment.
22
In February 2017, the Company restarted production on the hot strip mill at Granite City Works to provide better alignment with customer needs and improve service while increasing the pace of our asset revitalization program. The hot strip mill had been temporarily idle since January 2016.
In December 2016, the Company reached agreements to supply iron ore pellets to third party customers over the next several years. The Keetac Iron Ore Operations restarted production in the first quarter of 2017 to take full advantage of these business opportunities. It had previously been idle since May 2015 due to significantly lower steel production.
In December 2016, the Company made the strategic decision to permanently close the Lorain #4 and Lone Star #1 pipe mills and the Bellville Tubular Operations after considering a number of factors, including challenging market conditions for tubular products, reduced rig counts, and high levels of unfairly traded imports.
In April 2016, U. S. Steel temporarily idled its Lone Star tubular operations. These operations were restarted in April 2017.
During 2015, the Company adjusted operating levels at several of its tubular operations as declining oil prices and rig counts have significantly reduced demand for OCTG products.
In August 2015, U. S. Steel permanently shut down most of the Fairfield Flat-Rolled operations.
In 2015, the Company permanently closed the coke making operations at Granite City Works and Gary Works. Also, in 2015, U. S. Steel temporarily idled steelmaking operations at Granite City Works.
Steel Innovation
In addition to the increased focus on our operations, we are continuing to develop the next generation of steel products for our customers. Our Generation 3 (GEN3) steels will provide superior formability and high-strength properties while using a low-alloyed approach for robust weldability. To expand our capabilities in GEN3 steels, a new continuous galvanizing line will be constructed at our PRO-TEC Coating Company joint venture (PRO-TEC), which will allow PRO-TEC to produce these GEN3 steels with a hot-dipped zinc coating. This line will be the first of its kind and will utilize proprietary technology capable of producing the high-quality, cutting-edge advanced high-strength steels that will meet our automotive customers’ needs and solve some of their most pressing challenges. Our GEN3 steels reinforce why steel will remain the lowest cost, strongest, safest, and most environmentally efficient material of choice.
Asset Revitalization
Our Flat-Rolled segment asset revitalization program is a comprehensive $2 billion investment plan with a focus on continually improving safety, quality, delivery and cost. We currently expect capital spending for this program to be approximately $1.5 billion from 2017 through 2020. As we revitalize our assets, we expect to increase profitability, productivity and operational stability, and reduce volatility. This program is designed to prioritize investment in the areas with the highest returns. Importantly, while this is a large program, the majority of projects are not complex projects. This means that projects are easier to execute. Due to the smaller nature of many of the projects, we do not have to complete the entire program in order to start seeing benefits. Also, by breaking the program down into a series of smaller projects, we have greater flexibility to adjust the scope and pace of project implementation based on changes in business conditions. Our asset revitalization program covers investments in our existing assets and involves investments beyond routine capital and maintenance spending. These projects are expected to deliver both operational and commercial benefits, with most of the benefits coming from operational improvements. The commercial benefits we expect to realize will be driven primarily by things we can control, such as better product quality, improved delivery performance, and increased throughput on constrained assets. Being regarded as a top quartile performer in the eyes of our customers will support sustainable commercial benefits from these investments. After we complete our full asset revitalization program, we expect to have well maintained facilities with a strong core infrastructure, and strong reliability centered maintenance organizations. We will deliver products to our customers with improved reliability and quality. While this program only covers our existing assets, it will create a stable foundation for our future as we continue to evaluate strategic growth projects to strengthen our position as the markets we serve continue to grow and evolve. Refer to our Flat-Rolled segment Asset Revitalization Program Performance Scorecard on page 11 in the 10-K summary section of this document for how we measure success in this program.
23
Safety
U. S. Steel has a long-standing commitment to the safety and health of the men and women who work in our facilities. For our Company, safety is our primary core value. Every employee has the right to return home safely at the end of every day, and we are working to eliminate all injuries and incidents at all of our facilities. Ensuring a safe workplace also improves productivity, quality, reliability and financial performance. By making safety and health a personal responsibility, our employees are making a daily commitment to follow safe work practices, look out for the safety of co-workers and ensure safe working conditions for everyone. A “Safety First” mindset is as essential to our success as the tools and technologies we rely on to do business.
Our objective is to attain a sustainable zero harm culture supported by leadership and owned by an engaged and highly skilled workforce, empowered with the capabilities and resources needed to assess, reduce, and eliminate workplace risks and hazards. In support of these objectives, we have developed an enhanced Safety Management System, initiated new safety communication methods and enhanced contractor safety processes.
U. S. Steel finished 2017 with a Global Total OSHA Recordable Rate of 1.04, which is 60% better than the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Iron & Steel rate of 2.60 and 32% better than American Iron and Steel Institute rate of 1.54. U. S. Steel finished 2017 with a Days Away From Work Rate of 0.17, which is 76% better than the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Iron & Steel rate of 0.70 and 43% better than American Iron and Steel Institute rate of 0.30. Additionally, when comparing our most severe injuries - cases involving 31 or more days away from work - U. S. Steel performs at a level almost 7 times better than the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Iron and Steel.
In 2017 we experienced one domestic employee fatality and three contractor fatalities (one in the United States and two in Europe). These tragic events serve as a reminder that we must remain vigilant in our safety efforts to ensure every employee and contractor returns home safely every day.
Through 2017, the 13 year performance for our key safety measures: Total Recordable Incidence and Days Away From Work rates show improvement of 34% and 51% respectively, as shown on the following graphs.
24
25
26
Environmental Stewardship
U. S. Steel is committed to effective environmental stewardship. We have implemented and continue to develop business practices that are environmentally effective. We believe part of being a good corporate citizen requires a dedicated focus on how our industry affects the environment. U. S. Steel's environmental expenditures totaled $255 million in 2017, $232 million in 2016 and $354 million in 2015. For further information, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Environmental Matters.” We have taken the actions described below in furtherance of that goal.
U. S. Steel, largely through the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), World Steel Association and the European Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries (Eurofer), is involved in the promotion of cost effective environmental strategies through the development of appropriate air, water, waste and climate change laws and regulations at the local, state, national and international levels.
We are committed to reducing emissions as well as our carbon footprint. We have investigated, created and implemented innovative, best practice solutions throughout U. S. Steel to manage and reduce energy consumption. We are also committed to investing in technologies to further improve the environmental performance of our steelmaking process. In addition, we continue to focus on implementing energy reduction strategies, use of efficient energy sources, waste reduction management and the utilization of by-product fuels.
According to the AISI, relative to competing materials, steel has approximately one-fifth the carbon footprint of aluminum, one-twelfth the footprint of magnesium, and one-ninth the footprint of carbon fiber composites. Our advanced high strength steel (AHSS) used in today’s vehicles afford significant light-weighting opportunities that assist the automobile industry in meeting ever-increasing fuel economy standards while enhancing a vehicle's safety and engine performance. When comparing steel to aluminum, in terms of sustainability, steel has a smaller carbon footprint and costs less.
In 2017 alone, U. S. Steel recycled 2.9 million tons of purchased and produced steel scrap. Because of steel’s physical properties, our products can be recycled at the end of their useful life without loss of quality, contributing to steel’s high recycling rate and affordability. Comparatively, due to limitations in aluminum processing, very little recycled aluminum is included in aluminum sheet goods used for automotive or aircraft applications. This means that any increased use of aluminum sheet for high-end applications must come from Greenhouse Gas (GHG) intensive primary aluminum, which generates significantly more GHG emissions than steel.
U. S. Steel also completed a project to utilize biomass from Clairton Works biological wastewater treatment facility to “seed” other biological wastewater treatment facilities in Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Illinois in 2017. This helps these facilities recover from treatment facility upsets, thereby reducing the amount of pollutants released during the upsets.
In December 2017, U. S. Steel enhanced our website disclosures of GHG emission and energy efficiency projects.
Many of our major production facilities have Environmental Management Systems that are certified to the ISO 14001 Standard. This standard, published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), provides the framework for the measurement and improvement of environmental impacts of the certified facility.
Commercial Strategy
Our commercial strategy is focused on providing customer focused solutions with value-added steel products, including maintaining AHSS leadership with GEN3 steels and coated sheets for the automotive and appliance industries, electrical steel sheets for the manufacture of motors and electrical equipment, galvanized and Galvalume® sheets for construction, hot rolled skelp used in the production of energy transmitting line pipe, tin mill products for the packaging industry and pipe, connections, accessories and rig site services for use in drilling for oil and gas.
We are responsive to our customers' changing needs by developing new steel products and uses for steel that meet the evolving market and regulatory demands imposed on them. In connection with this commitment, we have research centers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Košice, Slovakia, an automotive center in Troy, Michigan and a Research and Development Laboratory and Test Facility for Tubular products in Houston, Texas. The focus of these centers is to develop new products and to collaborate with our customers to better provide innovative solutions to serve their needs. Examples of our customer focused product innovation include the development of the first commercially available coated AHSS and GEN3 steels and embedding application engineers at original equipment manufacturers to demonstrate how to best utilize the material in body design to meet automobile passenger safety requirements while significantly reducing weight to meet future vehicle fuel efficiency standards; and a line of premium and semi-premium
27
tubular connections designed for our customers operating in challenging drilling environments. These connections optimize performance and provide outstanding sealing capabilities for onshore and offshore oil and gas drilling. Engineered, designed, tested and commercialized in 2015, the USS-LIBERTY TC™ premium connection is used by our customers focused on horizontal drilling. Since its introduction, more than 1.5 million feet has been shipped to customers operating in every major shale play in North America. Another successful premium connection, USS-EAGLE SFH™ was introduced in 2017 for customers drilling deep, high-pressure horizontal onshore natural gas and oil wells in North America. Please refer to Item I. Business Strategy for further details of our commercial entities and related strategies.
Workforce
At U. S. Steel, we are committed to attracting, developing, and retaining a workforce of talented and diverse people — all working together to deliver superior results for our Company, stockholders, customers and communities. We regularly review our human capital needs and focus on the selection, development and retention of employees in order to sustain and enhance our competitive position in the markets we serve.
Capital Structure and Liquidity
Our primary financial goal is to enhance stockholder value by focusing on our capital structure, liquidity, and financial flexibility by deploying cash strategically as we earn the right to grow. Our cash deployment strategy is aligned to our strategic priorities, and includes; revitalizing our capital, both human and equipment; strengthening our balance sheet; maintaining a healthy pension plan; and delivering sustainable growth with a focus on safety, quality, delivery and cost.
Our liquidity supports our ability to satisfy short-term obligations, fund working capital requirements, and provides a foundation to execute key strategic initiatives such as our asset revitalization program.
We are focused on strengthening our balance sheet and credit ratings, and may proactively manage our company's debt maturity profile from time to time to protect our capital structure from unforeseen external events and re-financing risks.
In 2017, we undertook several steps to support these goals. The Company issued $750 million of 6.875% Senior Notes due August 15, 2025 and received net proceeds of approximately $737 million, which was used together with cash on hand to repay certain of the Company's outstanding debt obligations. U. S. Steel completed a redemption of all the aggregate principal amount of its $70 million Lorain County Port Authority Recovery Zone Facility Revenue Bonds, and an optional redemption of $161 million of its 7.00% Senior Notes due 2018, $200 million of its 6.875% Senior Notes due 2021, and $400 million of its 7.50% Senior Notes due 2022. Additionally, the Company completed an optional partial redemption of $200 million in aggregate principle amount of its 8.375% Senior Secured Notes due 2021.
In November 2017 we made a voluntary contribution of $75 million to U. S. Steel's main defined benefit pension plan as part of our long term pension liability management strategy.
During 2017, U. S. Steel reduced debt by $328 million and extended the maturities of long-term debt as a result of actions noted above. We ended 2017 with $1.533 billion of cash and cash equivalents on hand and total liquidity of approximately $3.350 billion.
Steel Industry Background and Competition
The global steel industry is cyclical, highly competitive and has historically been characterized by overcapacity.
U. S. Steel's competitive position may be affected by, among other things, differences among U. S. Steel's and its competitors' cost structure, labor costs, environmental remediation and compliance costs, global capacity and the existence and magnitude of government subsidies.
U. S. Steel competes with many North American and international steel producers. Competitors include integrated producers, which, like U. S. Steel, use iron ore and coke as the primary raw materials for steel production, as well as electric arc furnace (EAF) producers, which primarily use steel scrap and other iron-bearing feedstocks as raw materials. Global steel capacity has continued to increase, with some published sources estimating that steel capacity in China alone is over one billion metric tons per year. In addition, other materials, such as aluminum, plastics and composites, compete with steel in several applications.
28
EAF producers typically require lower capital expenditures for construction of facilities and may have lower total employment costs; however, these competitive advantages may be minimized or eliminated by the cost of scrap when scrap prices are high. During 2017, certain public scrap prices in certain publications averaged more than 50% higher than 2016. Some mini-mills utilize thin slab casting technology to produce flat-rolled products and are increasingly able to compete directly with integrated producers in many flat-rolled product applications previously produced only by integrated steelmakers.
U. S. Steel provides defined benefit pension and/or other post-employment benefits to approximately 95,000 current employees, retirees and their beneficiaries. Many of our competitors do not have comparable retiree obligations. Participation in U. S. Steel's main defined benefit pension plan was closed to new entrants on July 1, 2003 and benefit accruals for all non-represented participants were frozen effective December 31, 2015. With amendments effective June 30, 2014, retiree medical and life insurance benefits for non-represented employees were eliminated for those who retire after December 31,2017. The United Steelworkers (USW) ratified successor three year Collective Bargaining Agreements with U. S. Steel and its U. S. Steel Tubular Products, Inc. subsidiary (the 2015 Labor Agreements) on February 1, 2016, which were effective as of September 1, 2015 and expire on September 1, 2018. These 2015 Labor Agreements provided for the closure of other post-employment benefits (OPEB) plans to represented employees hired or rehired under certain conditions on or after January 1, 2016.
We believe that our major North American and many European integrated steel competitors are confronted with substantially similar environmental regulatory conditions and therefore do not believe that our relative position with regard to such competitors will be materially affected by the impact of environmental laws and regulations. However, if future regulations do not recognize the fact that the integrated steel process involves a series of chemical reactions involving carbon that create carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions without linking these emissions to steel scrap as well, our competitive position relative to mini-mills will be adversely impacted. Our competitive position compared to producers in developing nations such as China, Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Brazil and India, will be harmed unless such nations require commensurate reductions in CO2 emissions. Competing materials such as plastics may not be similarly impacted. The specific impact on each competitor will vary depending on a number of factors, including the age and location of its operating facilities and its production methods. U. S. Steel is also responsible for remediation costs related to former and present operating locations and disposal of environmentally sensitive materials. Many of our competitors, including North American producers, or their successors, that have been the subject of bankruptcy relief have no or substantially lower liabilities for such environmental remediation matters.
International Trade
U. S. Steel continues to face competition from foreign steel producers, many of which are heavily subsidized by their governments and dump steel into the United States (U.S.) market. Trade-distorting policies and practices, coupled with global steel overcapacity, impact pricing in the U.S. market and influence the Company's ability to compete on a level playing field. U. S. Steel continues to lead the industry in efforts to address dumped and subsidized steel imports that injure the Company, our workers, and our country’s national and economic security.
U. S. Steel continues to be actively engaged in relevant administrative reviews and five-year reviews (Sunset Review) of antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders before the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), including the following:
• | On January 30, 2018, the USITC voted to continue the AD order on seamless carbon and alloy steel standard, line, and pressure pipe (SSLPP) from Germany for another five years in the fourth Sunset Review of the 1995 AD order. U. S. Steel actively participated in that Sunset Review. As a result of the USITC’s determination, Mannesmannrohren-Werke AG will continue to be subject to 20.08% AD duties and all other companies will continue to be subject to 57.72% AD duties on SSLPP imports from Germany. |
• | On October 2, 2017, the DOC issued preliminary results in the second administrative review of the AD order on oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from Korea for the period September 2015 through August 2016. In its preliminary results, the DOC calculated the dumping margins of 46.37% for Nexteel Co., Ltd., 6.66% for SeAH Steel Corporation and 19.58% for non-examined companies. U. S. Steel is participating in the administrative review, which is currently in the briefing stage. The final results are due on April 11, 2018. |
• | On May 1, 2017, the DOC automatically initiated a Sunset Review of the AD order on tin mill products from Japan. The DOC concluded that revocation of the order would lead to margins of up to 95.29%. The USITC concurrently published its notice of institution of the Sunset Review which covers the same order and decided |
29
to conduct a full Sunset Review and vote on continuation of the order in April 2018. U. S. Steel is participating in the Sunset Review and, if successful, the order will remain in effect for another five years.
On December 5, 2017, in response to circumvention petitions filed by U.S. Steel and other domestic steel producers in September 2016, the DOC preliminarily found that imports of cold-rolled and galvanized steel made from Chinese substrate are covered by the AD/CVD orders on such imports from China. As a result of the preliminary determination, U.S. imports of cold-rolled steel from Vietnam made from Chinese hot-rolled steel are subject to 522.23% cash deposit requirements and U.S. imports of galvanized steel from Vietnam made from Chinese hot- or cold-rolled steel are subject to 238.48% cash deposit requirements, both retroactive to November 4, 2016. The DOC's final circumvention determinations are expected in the second quarter of 2018.
U. S. Steel is also actively involved in several appeals before the U.S. Court of International Trade and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concerning the AD/CVD orders imposed in 2016 on flat-rolled steel cases as well as several OCTG cases.
In April 2016, U. S. Steel launched a case under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against several Chinese producers and their distributors. All but seven of the producers did not respond and are considered to be in default. The complaint alleged three causes of action: 1) illegal conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export volumes; 2) the theft of trade secrets through industrial espionage; and 3) circumvention of duties by false labeling of the steel’s origin and transshipment (FDO). On May 26, 2016, the USITC instituted an investigation on all three causes of action. On February 15, 2017, U. S. Steel voluntarily withdrew the trade secrets claim preserving its right to resurrect the claim when additional information becomes available. On October 2, 2017, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) assigned to the case terminated the FDO claim. The Company has elected not to pursue an appeal leaving the price fixing claim as the remaining claim. That claim is pending before the USITC. The remedy sought by U. S. Steel in that claim is the barring of all Chinese carbon and alloy steel from the U.S. market.
On December 12, 2016, China filed a complaint at the World Trade Organization (WTO) against the U.S. and the European Union (EU) alleging that the U.S. and EU are violating their treaty obligations by continuing to use the non-market economy (NME) methodology for price comparisons in antidumping duty investigations and reviews. On April 3, 2017, the DOC issued a notice requesting comments and information on whether China should continue to be treated as a NME country under U.S. antidumping laws. U. S. Steel and other domestic producers submitted comments to the DOC on May 10, 2017. On October 26, 2017, the DOC issued a memorandum concluding that it will continue to use the NME methodology for antidumping proceedings involving imports from China because the state continues to fundamentally distort China’s economy. China then requested additional consultations with the U.S. regarding its WTO complaint. The outcome of these WTO disputes may impact U.S. dumping orders on Chinese goods, including many steel products.
On April 19, 2017, the DOC initiated an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to determine the effects of steel imports on U.S. national security. On May 24, 2017, U. S. Steel testified at the DOC public hearing and remains active in the investigation. On January 11, 2018, the DOC submitted its investigation report to the President, who under the statute has until April 11, 2018 to announce any action based on the DOC findings.
U. S. Steel continually assesses the impact of imports and global excess capacity on our business, and continues to execute a broad, global strategy to enhance the means and manner in which it competes in the U.S. market and internationally.
Facilities and Locations as of December 31, 2017
30
Flat-Rolled
During 2017, U. S. Steel continued to review and adjust its operating levels at several of its Flat-Rolled operations. Customer order rates will determine the size and duration of any adjustments that we make at our Flat-Rolled operations during 2018.
The operating results of all facilities within U. S. Steel’s integrated steel plants in the U.S. are included in Flat-Rolled. These facilities include Gary Works, Great Lakes Works, Mon Valley Works and Granite City Works. The operating results of U. S. Steel’s coke and iron ore pellet operations and many equity investees in North America are also included in Flat-Rolled.
Gary Works, located in Gary, Indiana, has annual raw steel production capability of 7.5 million tons. Gary Works has four blast furnaces, six steelmaking vessels, a vacuum degassing unit and four slab casters. Finishing facilities include a hot strip mill, two pickling lines, two cold reduction mills, three temper mills, a double cold reduction line, four annealing facilities and two tin coating lines. Principal products include hot-rolled, cold-rolled and coated sheets and tin mill products. Gary Works also produces strip mill plate in coil.
The Midwest Plant, located in Portage, Indiana, processes hot-rolled and cold-rolled bands and produces tin mill products, hot dip galvanized, cold-rolled and electrical lamination sheets. Midwest facilities include a currently idle pickling line, two cold reduction mills, two temper mills, a double cold reduction mill, two annealing facilities, two hot dip galvanizing lines, a tin coating line and a tin-free steel line.
East Chicago Tin is located in East Chicago, Indiana and produces tin mill products. Facilities include a pickling line, a cold reduction mill, two annealing facilities, a temper mill, a tin coating line and a tin-free steel line.
Great Lakes Works, located in Ecorse and River Rouge, Michigan, has annual raw steel production capability of 3.8 million tons. Great Lakes facilities include three blast furnaces, two steelmaking vessels, a vacuum degassing unit, two slab casters, a hot strip mill, a pickling line, a tandem cold reduction mill, three annealing facilities, a temper mill, a recoil and inspection line, two electrolytic galvanizing lines (one being the former Double Eagle Steel Coating Company's (DESCO) line) and a hot dip galvanizing line. Principal products include hot-rolled, cold-rolled and coated sheets.
Mon Valley Works consists of the Edgar Thomson Plant, located in Braddock, Pennsylvania; the Irvin Plant, located in West Mifflin, Pennsylvania; the Fairless Plant, located in Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania; and the Clairton Plant, located in Clairton, Pennsylvania. Mon Valley Works has annual raw steel production capability of 2.9 million tons. Facilities at the Edgar Thomson Plant include two blast furnaces, two steelmaking vessels, a vacuum degassing unit and a slab caster. Irvin Plant facilities include a hot strip mill, two pickling lines, a cold reduction mill, three annealing facilities, a temper mill and two hot dip galvanizing lines. The Fairless Plant operates a hot dip galvanizing line. Principal products from Mon Valley Works include hot-rolled, cold-rolled and coated sheets, as well as coke and coke by-products produced at the Clairton Plant.
The Clairton Plant is comprised of ten coke batteries with an annual coke production capacity of 4.3 million tons. Almost all of the coke we produce is consumed by U. S. Steel facilities, or swapped with other domestic steel producers. Coke by-products are sold to the chemicals and raw materials industries.
Granite City Works, located in Granite City, Illinois, has annual raw steel production capability of 2.8 million tons. Granite City’s facilities includes two blast furnaces, two steelmaking vessels, two slab casters, a hot strip mill, a pickling line, a tandem cold reduction mill, a hot dip galvanizing line and a hot dip galvanizing/Galvalume® line. Principal products include hot-rolled and coated sheets. Gateway Energy and Coke Company LLC (Gateway) constructed a coke plant, which began operating in October 2009 to supply Granite City Works under a 15-year agreement with Suncoke.
U. S. Steel owns and operates a cogeneration facility that utilizes by-products from the Gateway coke plant to generate heat and power. During December 2015, the Granite City Works steelmaking operations and hot strip mill were temporarily idled. In the first quarter 2017, the hot strip mill restarted operations.
Subsequent to the permanent shutdown of the steelmaking operations in August 2015, Fairfield Works, located in Fairfield, Alabama, consists of the #5 coating line.
U. S. Steel owns a Research and Technology Center located in Munhall, Pennsylvania (near Pittsburgh) where we carry out a wide range of applied research, development and technical support functions.
31
U. S. Steel also owns an automotive technical center in Troy, Michigan. This facility brings automotive sales, service, distribution and logistics services, product technology and applications research into one location. Much of U. S. Steel’s work in developing new grades of steel to meet the demands of automakers for high-strength, light-weight and formable materials is carried out at this location.
U. S. Steel has iron ore pellet operations located at Mt. Iron (Minntac) and Keewatin (Keetac), Minnesota with annual iron ore pellet production capability of 22.4 million tons. During 2017, 2016 and 2015, these operations produced 21.1 million, 15.0 million and 15.5 million tons of iron ore pellets, respectively.
Joint Ventures Within Flat-Rolled
U. S. Steel participates in a number of joint ventures that are included in Flat-Rolled, most of which are conducted through subsidiaries. All of these joint ventures are accounted for under the equity method. The significant joint ventures and other investments are described below. For information regarding joint ventures and other investments, see Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
U. S. Steel has a 14.7 percent ownership interest in Hibbing Taconite Company (Hibbing), which is based in Hibbing, Minnesota. Hibbing’s rated annual production capability is 9.1 million tons of iron ore pellets, of which our share is about 1.3 million tons.
U. S. Steel and POSCO of South Korea participate in a 50-50 joint venture, USS-POSCO Industries (UPI), located in Pittsburg, California. The joint venture markets sheet and tin mill products, principally in the western United States. UPI produces cold-rolled sheets, galvanized sheets, tin plate and tin-free steel from hot bands principally provided by POSCO and U. S. Steel. UPI’s annual production capability is approximately 1.5 million tons.
U. S. Steel and Kobe Steel, Ltd. of Japan participate in a 50-50 joint venture, PRO-TEC Coating Company
(PRO-TEC). PRO-TEC owns and operates two hot dip galvanizing lines and a continuous annealing line (CAL) in Leipsic, Ohio, which primarily serve the automotive industry. PRO-TEC’s annual production capability is approximately 1.5 million tons. U. S. Steel's domestic production facilities supply PRO-TEC with cold-rolled sheets and U. S. Steel markets all of PRO-TEC's products. The CAL produces high strength, lightweight steels that are an integral component in automotive manufacturing as vehicle emission and safety requirements become increasingly stringent. On September 25, 2017, U. S. Steel and Kobe Steel, Ltd. announced their agreement to begin construction of a new continuous galvanizing line (CGL) at PRO-TEC, in response to increased demand for advanced high-strength steels (AHSS). The new CGL, an investment of approximately $400 million financed by the joint venture, will have a yearly capacity of 500,000 tons. This line, which will utilize a proprietary process, will be capable of coating steel that will help automakers manufacture economically lightweight vehicles to meet increasing fuel efficiency requirements while maintaining exceptionally high safety standards. Construction began in the fourth quarter of 2017 and the line is expected to commence startup in 2019.
U. S. Steel and ArcelorMittal participate in the Double G Coatings Company, L.P. a 50-50 joint venture (Double G), which operates a hot dip galvanizing and Galvalume® facility located near Jackson, Mississippi and primarily serves the construction industry. Double G processes steel supplied by each partner and each partner markets the steel it has processed by Double G. Double G’s annual production capability is approximately 315,000 tons.
U. S. Steel and Worthington Industries, Inc. participate in Worthington Specialty Processing (Worthington), a joint venture with locations in Jackson, Canton, and Taylor, Michigan, in which U. S. Steel has a 49 percent interest. Worthington slits, cuts to length, and presses blanks from steel coils to desired specifications. Worthington’s annual production capability is approximately 890,000 tons.
Chrome Deposit Corporation (CDC), a 50-50 joint venture between U. S. Steel and Court Holdings, reconditions finishing work rolls, which require grinding, chrome plating and/or texturing. The rolls are used on rolling mills to provide superior finishes on steel sheets. CDC has seven locations across the United States, with all locations near major steel plants.
U. S. Steel holds a 49 percent interest in Feralloy Processing Company (FPC), a joint venture between U. S. Steel and Feralloy Corporation, which converts coiled hot strip mill plate into sheared and flattened plates. The plant, located in Portage, Indiana, has annual production capability of approximately 275,000 tons.
U. S. Steel and Feralloy Corporation, participate in a joint venture, Acero Prime, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Acero Prime). U. S. Steel has a 40 percent interest. Acero Prime has facilities in San Luis Potosi, Ramos Arizpe, Monterrey, and
32
Toluca, Mexico. Acero Prime provides slitting, warehousing and logistical services. Acero Prime’s annual slitting capability is approximately 486,000 tons.
USSE
USSE operates an integrated facility in Košice, Slovakia, which has annual raw steel production capability of 5.0 million tons. This facility has two coke batteries, four sintering strands, three blast furnaces, four steelmaking vessels, a vacuum degassing unit, two dual strand casters, a hot strip mill, two pickling lines, two cold reduction mills, four annealing facilities, a temper mill, a temper/double cold reduction mill, three hot dip galvanizing lines, two tin coating lines, three dynamo lines, a color coating line and two spiral welded pipe mills. USSE also has multiple slitting, cutting and other finishing lines for flat products. Principal products include hot-rolled, cold-rolled and coated sheets, tin mill products and spiral welded pipe. USSE also has facilities for manufacturing heating radiators, refractory ceramic materials and has a power plant for internal steam and electricity generation.
In addition, USSE has a research laboratory, which, in conjunction with our Research and Technology Center, supports efforts in coke making, electrical steels, design and instrumentation, and ecology.
Tubular
Tubular manufactures seamless and welded OCTG, standard pipe, line pipe and mechanical tubing.
Seamless products are produced at Fairfield Tubular Operations in Fairfield, Alabama and Lorain Tubular Operations located in Lorain, Ohio. The Fairfield Tubular Operations has annual production capability of 720,000 tons and has historically been supplied with steel rounds from Flat-Rolled’s former Fairfield Works. Subsequent to the shutdown of the hot end at the Fairfield Works in August 2015, the facility is currently purchasing rounds from third parties. At the appropriate time, with continued tubular market improvement, construction of the EAF should be completed and when it is it will be part of the Tubular segment and the Flat-rolled segment will not be supplying Fairfield Tubular Operations with rounds. The Fairfield Tubular Operations has the capability to produce outer diameter (O.D.) sizes from 4.5 to 9.875 inches and has quench and temper, hydrotester, threading and coupling and inspection capabilities. The slab and rounds casters of the former Fairfield Works remain capable of operation and are now part of the Fairfield Tubular Operations. The Lorain plant consists of the #3 facility and has historically consumed steel rounds supplied by Fairfield Works and external sources. Subsequent to the shutdown of the hot end at the Fairfield Works, the Company is sourcing rounds from third parties. Lorain #3 facility has the capability to produce 300,000 tons annually in O.D. sizes from 10.125 to 26 inches and has quench and temper, hydrotester, cutoff and inspection capabilities. In March 2017, U. S. Steel made a strategic decision to permanently shutdown the Lorain No. 6 Quench & Temper Mill and relocate the equipment.
Welded products are produced at Lone Star Tubular Operations #2 facility in Lone Star, Texas and it has the capability to produce O.D. sizes from 1.088 to 7.15 inches. It has quench and temper, hydrotester, threading and coupling and inspection capabilities. The Lone Star #2 facility was temporarily idled from April 2016 to April 2017 and has annual production capability of 300,000 tons.
Wheeling Machine Products manufactures couplings used to connect individual sections of oilfield casing and tubing. It produces sizes ranging from 2.375 to 20 inches at two locations: Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and Hughes Springs, Texas.
Tubular Processing, located in Houston, Texas, provides quench and temper and end-finishing services for oilfield production tubing. Offshore Operations, also located in Houston, Texas, provides threading, inspection, accessories and storage services to the OCTG market. Tubular Processing has been temporarily idled since 2015.
We have a Research and Development Laboratory and Test Facility in Houston, Texas where our engineers develop and test new steel products, including premium connections.
Joint Ventures Within Tubular
U. S. Steel and Butch Gilliam Enterprises LLC participate in a 50-50 joint venture, Patriot Premium Threading Services, LLC located in Midland, Texas, which provides oil country threading, accessory threading, repair services and rig site services to exploration and production companies located principally in the Permian Basin. For information regarding joint ventures and other investments, see Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
33
Other Businesses
U. S. Steel’s Other Businesses include railroad services and real estate operations.
U. S. Steel owns the Gary Railway Company in Indiana, Lake Terminal Railroad Company and Lorain Northern Company in Ohio, Union Railroad Company, LLC in Pennsylvania, Fairfield Southern Company, Inc. in Alabama, Delray Connecting Railroad Company in Michigan and Texas & Northern Railroad Company in Texas, these entities comprise U. S. Steel’s transportation business.
U. S. Steel owns, develops and manages various real estate assets, which include approximately 50,000 acres of surface rights primarily in Alabama and Michigan, with additional holdings in Pennsylvania and Illinois. In addition, U. S. Steel holds ownership interests in joint ventures that are developing real estate projects in Alabama.
Raw Materials and Energy
As an integrated producer, U. S. Steel’s primary raw materials are iron units in the form of iron ore pellets and sinter ore, carbon units in the form of coal and coke (which is produced from coking coal) and steel scrap. U. S. Steel’s raw materials supply strategy consists of acquiring and expanding captive sources of certain primary raw materials and entering into flexible supply contracts for certain other raw materials at competitive market prices which are subject to fluctuations based on market conditions at the time.
The amounts of such raw materials needed to produce a ton of steel will fluctuate based upon the specifications of the final steel products, the quality of raw materials and, to a lesser extent, differences among steel producing equipment. In broad terms, U. S. Steel consumes approximately 1.4 tons of coal to produce one ton of coke and then it consumes approximately 0.3 tons of coke, 0.3 tons of steel scrap (40 percent of which is internally generated) and 1.3 tons of iron ore pellets to produce one ton of raw steel. At normal operating levels, we also consume approximately 6 mmbtu’s of natural gas per ton produced. While we believe that these estimated consumption amounts are useful for planning purposes, and are presented to give a general sense of raw material and energy consumption related to steel production, substantial variations may occur.
Iron Ore
Iron Ore Production(a)
(a) Includes our share of production from Hibbing through December 31, 2017 and Tilden to September 29, 2017. U. S. Steel's ownership interest in Tilden was sold on September 29, 2017. The decrease in iron ore production from 2014 is primarily related to the idling of our Keetac facility. In 2017, the Keetac facility restarted production.
The iron ore facilities at Minntac and Keetac contain an estimated 860 million short tons of recoverable reserves and our share of recoverable reserves at the Hibbing joint ventures is 8 million short tons. Recoverable reserves are defined as the tons of product that can be used internally or delivered to a customer after considering mining and beneficiation or preparation losses. Minntac and Keetac’s annual capability and our share of annual capability for the Hibbing joint
34
venture total approximately 23 million tons. Through our wholly owned operations and our share of joint ventures, we have iron ore pellet production capability that exceeds our steelmaking capability in the U.S.
We sold iron ore pellets in 2017, 2016 and 2015 to third parties. The Company has agreements to supply iron ore pellets to third-party customers over the next several years.
Substantially all of USSE’s iron ore requirements are purchased from outside sources, primarily Russian and Ukrainian mining companies. However, in prior years, USSE also received iron ore from U. S. Steel’s iron ore facilities in North America. We believe that supplies of iron ore adequate to meet USSE’s needs are available at competitive market prices.
Coking Coal
All of U. S. Steel’s coal requirements for our cokemaking facilities are purchased from outside sources. Pricing for Flat-Rolled's coking coal contracts are typically negotiated on a yearly basis, and from time to time we have entered into multi-year agreements for a portion of our coking coal requirements.
Prices for European contracts are negotiated at defined intervals, usually quarterly.
We believe that supplies of coking coal adequate to meet our needs are available from outside sources at competitive market prices. The main source of coking coal for Flat-Rolled is the United States, and sources for USSE include Poland, the Czech Republic, Russia, Ukraine, Mozambique and the United States.
Coke
Coke Production(a)
(a) The decrease in 2016 coke production from 2015 was due to decreased internal steel production and depletion of existing coke inventory. The decrease in 2015 coke production from 2014 is due to the permanent shutdown of coke operations at Gary Works and Granite City Works. The decrease in 2014 coke production from 2013 is primarily due to the deconsolidation of USSC and the permanent shut down of two coke batteries at Gary Works.
In North America, the Flat-Rolled segment operates a cokemaking facility at the Clairton Plant of Mon Valley Works. At our Granite City Works, we also have a 15-year coke supply agreement with Gateway which began in 2009. Blast furnace injection of coal, and self-generated coke oven gas is also used to reduce coke usage.
With Flat-Rolled’s cokemaking facilities and the Gateway long-term supply agreement, it has the capability to be self-sufficient with respect to its annual coke requirements at normal operating levels. Coke is purchased from, sold to, or swapped with suppliers and other end-users to adjust for production needs and reduce transportation costs.
In Europe, the USSE segment operates cokemaking facilities at USSK. While USSE is self-sufficient for coke at normal operating levels, it periodically purchases coke from Polish and Czech coke producers to meet production needs. Volume and price are negotiated quarterly.
35
Steel Scrap and Other Materials
We believe that supplies of steel scrap, alloys and coating materials adequate to meet our needs to support Flat-Rolled and USSE are readily available from outside sources at competitive market prices. Generally, approximately 40 percent of our steel scrap requirements are internally generated through normal operations.
Limestone
All of Flat-Rolled’s and USSE's limestone requirements are purchased from outside sources. We believe that supplies of limestone adequate to meet our needs are readily available from outside sources at competitive market prices.
Zinc and Tin
We believe that supplies of zinc and tin required to fulfill the requirements for Flat-Rolled and USSE are available from outside sources at competitive market prices. The main sources of tin for Flat-Rolled include Bolivia and China. The main sources of zinc for Flat-Rolled include Canada and Mexico. During 2017, Flat-Rolled protected approximately 80% of its operation's zinc purchases with financial swap derivatives to manage our exposure to zinc price fluctuations. The main sources of tin for USSE include Indonesia, Peru and China. The main sources of zinc for USSE include Sweden, the Slovak Republic and Poland. During 2017, USSE executed approximately 40% of USSE's zinc purchases with forward physical contracts to partially manage our exposure to zinc price fluctuations.
Natural Gas
All of U. S. Steel’s natural gas requirements are purchased from outside sources.
We believe that adequate supplies to meet Flat-Rolled’s and Tubular's needs are available at competitive market prices. For 2017, approximately 70 percent of our natural gas purchases in Flat-Rolled were based on bids solicited on a monthly basis from various vendors; the remainder were made daily or with term agreements.
We believe that adequate natural gas supplies to meet USSE’s needs are available at competitive market prices. During 2017, we routinely executed fixed-price forward physical purchase contract for natural gas to partially manage our exposure to natural gas price increases. For 2017, approximately 56 percent of our natural gas purchases in USSK were made with fixed-price forward physical purchase contracts; the remainder were based on bids solicited on a quarterly, monthly or a daily basis from various vendors.
Both Flat-Rolled and USSE use self-generated coke oven and blast furnace gas to reduce consumption of natural gas. USSE also captures and consumes converter gas from its four steelmaking vessels.
Industrial Gases
U. S. Steel purchases industrial gas in the U.S. under long-term contracts with various suppliers. USSE owns and operates its own industrial gas facilities, but also may purchase industrial gases from time to time.
Commercial Sales of Product
U. S. Steel characterizes sales as contract sales if sold pursuant to an agreement with a defined volume and pricing and a duration of longer than three months, and as spot if sold without a defined volume and pricing agreement. In 2017, approximately 79 percent, 64 percent and 53 percent of sales by Flat-Rolled, USSE and Tubular, respectively, were contract sales. Some contract pricing agreements include fixed prices while others are adjusted periodically based upon published prices of steel products or cost components.
Environmental Matters
Some of U. S. Steel’s facilities were in operation before 1900. Although management believes that U. S. Steel’s environmental practices have either led the industry or at least been consistent with prevailing industry practices, hazardous materials may have been released at current or former operating sites or delivered to sites operated by third parties.
Our U.S. facilities are subject to environmental laws applicable in the U.S., including the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as well as state and local laws and regulations.
36
U. S. Steel has incurred and will continue to incur substantial capital, operating, and maintenance and remediation expenditures as a result of environmental laws and regulations, related to release of hazardous materials, which in recent years have been mainly for process changes to meet CAA obligations and similar obligations in Europe.
Midwest Plant Incident
On April 11, 2017, there was a process waste water release at our Midwest Plant (Midwest) in Portage, Indiana that impacted a water outfall that discharges to Burns Waterway near Lake Michigan. U. S. Steel identified the source of the release and made the necessary repairs. We determined that all repairs were safely working as intended and, on April 14, 2017, resumed operations in a controlled, phased and highly monitored approach with extensive input from participating government agencies. The Company has since implemented substantial operational, process and notification improvements at Midwest. The Company has been presented with cost reimbursements, loss of use and penalty requests from the involved governmental agencies and intends to amicably resolve the matter with those agencies. Separately, the Company was placed on notice of potential citizens’ enforcement suits regarding the April 2017 incident and other historical alleged Clean Water Act and Permit violations at Midwest. In January of 2018, The Surfrider Foundation and the City of Chicago initiated suits in the Northern District of Indiana alleging such violations. The Company intends to defend against those actions.
Slovak Operations
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed in March 2013 between U. S. Steel and the government of Slovakia. The MOU outlines areas in which the government and U. S. Steel will work together to help create a more competitive environment and conditions for USSK. Incentives the government of Slovakia agreed to provide include potential participation in a renewable energy program that provides the opportunity to reduce electricity costs, as well as the potential for government grants and other support concerning investments in environmental control technology. Although there are many conditions and uncertainties regarding the grants, including matters controlled by the European Union (EU), the value of these incentives as stated in the MOU could be as much as €75 million (approximately $90 million). U. S. Steel also agreed to pay the government of Slovakia specified declining amounts should U. S. Steel sell USSK within five years of the date of the MOU. We expect the total amount of EU funds will be as much as €85 million (approximately $102 million). The final grant value will depend on public procurement results. The MOU is set to expire in March 2018.
Slovakia adopted a new waste code in March 2015 that became effective January 1, 2016. This legislation implements the EU Waste Framework Directive that strictly regulates waste disposal and encourages recycling, among other provisions, by increasing fees for waste disposed of in landfills, including privately owned landfills. The impact of this legislation is estimated to be €2 million (approximately $2 million) annually due to waste stabilization requirements and increased fees for packaging materials recycling fees. Slovakia is considering legislation implementing an EU Directive, which is expected to increase existing fees upon USSK for use of its landfills. Because the legislation has not yet been adopted, the impact on operations at USSK facilities cannot be estimated at this time.
The EU’s Industry Emission Directive requires implementation of EU determined best available techniques (BAT) to reduce environmental impacts as well as compliance with BAT associated emission levels. This directive includes operational requirements for air emissions, wastewater discharges, solid waste disposal and energy conservation, dictates certain operating practices and imposes stricter emission limits. Producers were required to be in compliance with the iron and steel BAT by March 8, 2016, unless specific exceptions or extensions were granted by the Slovak environmental authority. USSK updated existing operating permits for different facilities involved in producing iron and steel in the plant in accordance with the new BAT requirements. Through this process for some facilities, USSK has obtained extensions from the 2016 compliance deadline in order to meet or exceed the BAT requirements. Compliance with stricter emission limits going beyond BAT requirements makes us eligible for EU funding support and prepares us for any further tightening of environmental protection standards. Our most recent broad estimate of likely capital expenditures for projects to comply with or go beyond the BAT requirements is €138 million (approximately $166 million) over the 2017 to 2020 time period.
The EU has various programs under which funds are allocated to member states to implement broad public policies which are then awarded by the member states to public and private entities on a competitive basis. The funding intensity under these programs currently ranges from 55 percent of defined eligible costs on a project under the standard state scheme to 90 percent on an approved ad hoc scheme to improve the air quality in the Košice region of Slovakia. Based on our list of projects that comprise the approximate €138 million (approximately $166 million) of spending
37
noted, we currently believe we will be eligible to receive up to €85 million (approximately $102 million) of incentive grants. This could potentially reduce our net cash expenditures to approximately €53 million (approximately $64 million). The actual amount of capital spending will be dependent upon, among other things, the actual amount of incentive grants received.
We also believe there will be increased operating costs associated with these projects, such as increased energy and maintenance costs. We are currently unable to reliably estimate what the increase in operating costs will be as many projects are still in the development stage.
On March 28, 2017, the Regional Court in Košice issued an ex parte judicial lien on USSK's real property to plaintiffs in an ongoing legal case. Following a decision of the Supreme Court, which reversed and remanded the lien petition to the Regional Court, the lien has been removed. The case is still ongoing. We do not expect this matter to have an impact on the eligibility of USSK to obtain EU funding support for BAT projects.
For further discussion of laws applicable in Slovakia and the EU and their impact on USSK, see Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, “Contingencies and Commitments - Environmental Matters, EU Environmental Requirements.”
New and Emerging Environmental Regulations
United States and European Greenhouse Gas Emissions Regulations
Future compliance with carbon dioxide (CO2) emission requirements may include substantial costs for emission allowances, restriction of production and higher prices for coking coal, natural gas and electricity generated by carbon based systems. Because we cannot predict what requirements ultimately will be imposed in the U.S. and Europe, it is difficult to estimate the likely impact on U. S. Steel, but it could be substantial. On March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783 instructing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review the Clean Power Plan. On October 16, 2017, the EPA proposed to repeal the Clean Power Plan after reviewing the plan pursuant to President Trump’s executive order. Any repeal and/or replacement of the Clean Power Plan is likely to be challenged by various proponents of the plan, such as environmental groups and certain states. Any impacts to our operations as a result of any future greenhouse gas regulations are not estimable at this time since the matter is unsettled. In any case, to the extent expenditures associated with any greenhouse gas regulation, as with all costs, are not ultimately reflected in the prices of U. S. Steel's products and services, operating results will be reduced. There were no material changes in U. S. Steel’s exposure to European Greenhouse Gas Emissions regulations since December 31, 2016.
United States - Air
The CAA imposes stringent limits on air emissions with a federally mandated operating permit program and civil and criminal enforcement sanctions. The CAA requires, among other things, the regulation of hazardous air pollutants through the development and promulgation of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) Standards. The EPA has developed various industry-specific MACT standards pursuant to this requirement. The CAA requires the EPA to promulgate regulations establishing emission standards for each category of Hazardous Air Pollutants. The EPA also must conduct risk assessments on each source category that is already subject to MACT standards and determine if additional standards are needed to reduce residual risks.
While our operations are subject to several different categories of NESHAP and MACT standards, the principal impact of these standards on U. S. Steel operations includes those that are specific to coke making, iron making, steel making and iron ore processing.
The EPA is currently in the process of completing a Residual Risk and Technology Review of the Integrated Iron and Steel regulations and Coke MACT regulations as required by the CAA. Because the EPA has not completed its review, any impacts related to the EPA’s review of these standards cannot be estimated at this time.
The CAA also requires the EPA to develop and implement National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants, which include, among others, particulate matter (PM) - consisting of PM10 and PM2.5, lead, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and ozone. Sulfur dioxide is the NAAQS criteria pollutant of most concern to the Company at this time.
38
In June 2010, the EPA significantly lowered the primary NAAQS for sulfur dioxide (SO2) from 140 parts per billion (ppb) on a 24-hour basis to an hourly standard of 75 ppb. Subsequently, the EPA designated the areas in which Great Lakes Works and Mon Valley Works facilities are located as nonattainment with the 2010 standard for the SO2 NAAQS. The non-attainment designation will require the facilities to implement operational and/or capital improvements to demonstrate attainment with the 2010 standard. In addition, the EPA is currently evaluating the attainment status for all other areas as required by a Consent Decree that the EPA entered with the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council in March 2015 pursuant to a lawsuit filed by the non-governmental organizations. U. S. Steel is working with the relevant regulatory agencies in completing the evaluation process as required by the Consent Decree. While U. S. Steel has determined that it will face increased capital, operating and compliance costs, the operational and financial impact of the SO2 NAAQS is not estimated to be material at this time.
In October 2015, the EPA lowered the NAAQS for ozone from 75 ppb to 70 ppb. The EPA has designated certain areas in which we operate as nonattainment with the 2008 ozone standard. In addition, some areas in which we operate have been recommended as nonattainment with the 2015 ozone standard by the respective states. The EPA has yet to act on the recommendations. In June 2017, the EPA had published a notice extending the deadline to promulgate initial designations by one year, extending the deadline from October 1, 2017 to October 1, 2018. However, in August 2017, the EPA withdrew the notice; and therefore, the designation deadline remained October 1, 2017. On November 16, 2017, the EPA published its initial designations for areas that the EPA is designating as attainment/unclassifiable. The rule lists most areas in which U. S. Steel operates as attainment/unclassifiable. The EPA has yet to publish a notice regarding areas that it is designating as nonattainment. Because nonattainment designations and any implementation plans to bring the ozone nonattainment areas into attainment have yet to be proposed or developed, the operational and financial impact of the ozone NAAQS cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.
On December 14, 2012, the EPA lowered the annual standard for PM2.5 from 15 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) to 12 ug/m3, and retained the PM2.5 24-hour and PM10 NAAQS rules. In December 2014, the EPA designated some areas in which U. S. Steel operates as nonattainment with the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard. Because it is early in the State Implementation Plan development stages, any impacts to U. S. Steel cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.
In 2010, the EPA retained the annual nitrogen dioxide NAAQS standard, but created a new 1-hour NAAQS and established new data reduction and monitoring requirements. While the EPA has classified all areas as being in attainment or unclassifiable, it is requiring implementation of a network of monitoring stations to assess air quality. Until the network is implemented and further designations are made, the impact on operations at U. S. Steel facilities cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.
United States - CERCLA 108(b) Financial Assurance
In December 2016, the EPA published a proposed rule focused on developing financial assurance for managing hazardous substances in the hard rock, mining industry, in accordance with CERCLA Section 108(b). The EPA had a court-mandated deadline for publication of the final rule by December 1, 2017. The draft form of the proposed rule was commented upon by the public and the regulated community. Based on information provided by the comments, EPA decided that a new financial assurance rule was not necessary for the hard rock mining industry. EPA’s decision may be challenged in court and a possible result of such a challenge may be a new proposed rule at some point in the future that could have a material impact on the Company’s liquidity.
Environmental Remediation
In the United States, U. S. Steel has been identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at seven sites under CERCLA as of December 31, 2017. Of these, there are two sites where information requests have been received or there are other indications that U. S. Steel may be a PRP under CERCLA, but where sufficient information is not presently available to confirm the existence of liability or to make a reasonable estimate with respect to any potential liabilities. There are also 19 additional sites where U. S. Steel may be liable for remediation costs in excess of $100,000 under other environmental statutes, both federal and state, or where private parties are seeking to impose liability on U. S. Steel for remediation costs through discussions or litigation. At many of these sites, U. S. Steel is one of a number of parties involved and the total cost of remediation, as well as U. S. Steel’s share, is frequently dependent upon the outcome of ongoing investigations and remedial studies. U. S. Steel accrues for environmental remediation activities when the responsibility to remediate is probable and the amount of associated costs is reasonably determinable. As environmental remediation matters proceed toward ultimate resolution or as remediation obligations arise, charges in excess of those previously accrued may be required.
39
For further discussion of relevant environmental matters, see "Item 3. Legal Proceedings - Environmental Proceedings."
Property, Plant and Equipment Additions
For property, plant and equipment additions, including capital leases, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Financial Condition, Cash Flows and Liquidity – Cash Flows” and Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Employees
As of December 31, 2017, U. S. Steel had approximately 17,200 employees in the U.S. and approximately 12,000 in Europe.
Most hourly employees of U. S. Steel’s flat-rolled, tubular, cokemaking and iron ore pellet facilities in the United States are covered by the 2015 Labor Agreements. Our U.S. collective bargaining agreements contain no-strike provisions which are applicable during the term of the respective agreements.
In Europe, excluding U.S. expatriates, most employees at USSK are represented by the OZ KOVO union and all employees are covered by an agreement that expires at the end of March 2020.
A small number of workers at some of our North American facilities and at our transportation operations are covered by agreements with the USW or other unions that have varying expiration dates.
Available Information
U. S. Steel’s Internet address is www.ussteel.com. We post our annual report on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, our proxy statement and our interactive data files to our website as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). We also post all press releases and earnings releases to our website.
All other filings with the SEC are available via a direct link on the U. S. Steel website to the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov.
Also available on the U. S. Steel website are U. S. Steel’s Corporate Governance Principles, Code of Ethical Business Conduct and the charters of the Audit Committee, the Compensation & Organization Committee and the Corporate Governance & Public Policy Committee of the Board of Directors. These documents and the Annual Report on Form 10-K and proxy statement are also available in print to any stockholder who requests them. Such requests should be sent to the Office of the Corporate Secretary, United States Steel Corporation, 600 Grant Street, Suite 1500, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219-2800 (telephone: 412-433-1121).
U. S. Steel does not incorporate into this document the contents of any website or the documents referred to in the immediately preceding paragraph.
Other Information
Information on net sales, depreciation, capital expenditures, earnings (loss) before interest and income taxes and assets by reportable segment and for Other Businesses and on net sales and assets by geographic area are set forth in Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
For significant operating data for U. S. Steel for each of the last five years, see “Five-Year Operating Summary (Unaudited)” on pages F-59 and F-60.
40
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
Operational Risk Factors
Our reduced operational footprint, unplanned equipment outages and other unforeseen disruptions may adversely impact our results of operations.
Over the past three years, U. S. Steel has adjusted its operating configuration in response to challenging market conditions as a result of global overcapacity and unfair trade practices by indefinitely, permanently and temporarily idling production at certain facilities. Due to our reduced operational footprint, the Company may not be able to respond in an efficient manner when restarting certain of our temporarily idled facilities to fully realize the benefits from changing market conditions that are favorable to integrated steel producers.
Our steel production depends on the operation of critical structures and pieces of equipment, such as blast furnaces, casters, hot strip mills and various structures and operations that support them. While we are implementing asset revitalization and a reliability centered maintenance initiative focusing on proactive maintenance of key machinery and equipment at our production facilities, we may experience prolonged periods of reduced production and increased maintenance and repair costs due to equipment failures at our facilities or those of our key suppliers.
It is also possible that operations may be disrupted due to other unforeseen circumstances such as power outages, explosions, fires, floods, accidents and severe weather conditions. We are also exposed to similar risks involving major customers and suppliers such as force majeure events of raw materials suppliers that have occurred and may occur in the future. Availability of raw materials and delivery of products to customers could be affected by logistical disruptions, such as shortages of barges, ocean vessels, rail cars or trucks, or unavailability of rail lines or of locks on the Great Lakes or other bodies of water. To the extent that lost production could not be compensated for at unaffected facilities and depending on the length of the outage, our sales and our unit production costs could be adversely affected.
U. S. Steel continues to incur certain costs when production capacity is idled, increased costs to resume production at idled facilities, or costs to idle facilities.
Our decisions concerning which facilities to operate and at what levels are made based upon our customers’ orders for products as well as the capabilities and cost performance of our locations. During periods of depressed market conditions, we may concentrate production operations at several plant locations and not operate others in response to customer demand, and as a result we will incur idle facility costs.
When we restart idled facilities, we incur certain costs to replenish raw material inventories, prepare the previously idled facilities for operation, perform the required repair and maintenance activities and prepare employees to return to work safely and resume production responsibilities. The amount of any such costs can be material, depending on a variety of factors, such as the period of time during which the facilities remained idle, necessary repairs and available employees, and is difficult to project.
U. S. Steel has been and continues to be adversely affected by worldwide overcapacity and high levels of imports, which may negatively affect steel prices and demand levels, reducing profitability.
An increase in global capacity and new or expanded production capacity in the United States, China and other countries in recent years has resulted in capacity significantly in excess of global demand, as well as in the Company's primary markets in North America and Europe.
Worldwide overcapacity continues to result in high levels of dumped and subsidized steel products in the markets we serve. Domestic and international trade laws provide mechanisms to address the injury caused by such imports to domestic industries. While in some cases, U. S. Steel is successful in obtaining relief under U.S. and international trade laws, in other circumstances, relief has been denied. When received, such relief is generally subject to annual automatic or discretionary review, which can result in rescission or reduction. There can be no assurance that any relief will be obtained or continued in the future or that such relief will adequately combat the surge in imports. There is also a risk that international bodies such as the World Trade Organization or other judicial bodies in the United States or the EU may change their interpretations of their respective trade laws in ways that are unfavorable to U. S. Steel.
Faced with overcapacity in various markets, we will continue to evaluate potential strategic and organizational opportunities, which may include exiting lines of business and the sale of certain assets, temporary shutdowns or closures of facilities.
41
The steel industry is highly cyclical, which may have an adverse effect on our results of operations.
Steel consumption is highly cyclical and generally follows economic and industrial conditions both worldwide and in regional markets. This volatility makes it difficult to balance the procurement of raw materials and energy with global steel prices, our steel production and customer product demand. U. S. Steel has implemented strategic initiatives to produce more stable and consistent results, even during periods of economic and market downturns, but this may not be enough to mitigate the effect that the volatility inherent in the steel industry has on our results of operations.
We face increased competition from alternative materials and risks concerning innovation, new technologies, products and increasing customer requirements.
As a result of increasingly stringent regulatory requirements, designers, engineers and industrial manufacturers, especially those in the automotive industry, are increasing their use of lighter weight and alternative materials, such as aluminum, composites, plastics, and carbon fiber. Use of such materials could reduce the demand for steel products, which may reduce our profitability and cash flow.
Additionally, technologies such as direct iron reduction, EAF production, oxygen-coal injection and experimental technologies such as molten oxide electrolysis and hydrogen flash smelting may be more cost effective than our current production methods. However, we may not have sufficient capital to invest in such technologies and may incur difficulties adapting and fully integrating these technologies into our existing operations. We may also encounter production restrictions, or not realize the cost benefit from such capital intensive technology adaptations to our current production processes. Customers, such as those in the automotive industry, are demanding stronger and lighter products. Tubular customers are increasingly requesting pipe producers to supply connections and other ancillary parts as well as inspection and other services. We may not be successful in meeting these technological challenges.
Limited availability of raw materials and energy may constrain operating levels and reduce profit margins.
U. S. Steel and other steel producers have periodically been faced with problems in obtaining sufficient raw materials and energy in a timely manner due to delays, defaults, severe weather conditions, or force majeure events by suppliers, shortages or transportation problems (such as shortages of barges, ore vessels, rail cars or trucks, or disruption of rail lines, waterways, or natural gas transmission lines), resulting in production curtailments. As a result, we may be exposed to risks concerning pricing and availability of raw materials from third parties. USSE purchases substantially all of its iron ore and coking coal requirements from outside sources. USSE is also dependent upon availability of natural gas produced in Russia and transported through Ukraine. Any curtailments or escalated costs may further reduce profit margins.
Changes in the global economic environment may lead to declines in the production levels of our customers.
We sell to the automotive, service center, converter, energy and appliance and construction-related industries. Some of these industries are cyclical and exhibit a great deal of sensitivity to general economic conditions. Low demand from customers in these key industries may adversely impact our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Our Flat-Rolled and Tubular segments may be particularly impacted by unfavorable market conditions in the oil and gas industries. Declines in oil prices, and the correlating reduction in drilling activity, as well as high levels of inventory in the supply chain, may reduce demand for tubular products and could have adverse impacts on our results of operations and cash flows.
We may be adversely impacted by volatility in prices for raw materials, energy, and steel.
U. S. Steel may be faced with having agreed to purchase raw materials and energy at prices that are above the then current market price or in greater volumes than required. Additionally, any future decreases in iron ore, scrap, natural gas and oil prices may place downward pressure on steel prices. If steel prices decline, our profit margins on market-based indexed contracts and spot business will be reduced.
42
Our operations expose us to uncertainties and risks in the countries in which we operate, which may negatively affect our results of operations, cash flows and liquidity.
Our U.S. operations are subject to economic conditions, including credit and capital market conditions, and political factors in the United States, which if changed could negatively affect our results of operations, cash flows and liquidity. Political factors include, but are not limited to, taxation, inflation, increased regulation, limitations on exports of energy and raw materials, and trade remedies. Actions taken by the U.S. government could affect our results of operations, cash flows and liquidity.
USSE is subject to economic conditions and political factors associated with the EU, Slovakia and neighboring countries, and the euro currency. Changes in any of these economic conditions or political factors could negatively affect our results of operations, cash flows and liquidity. Political factors include, but are not limited to, taxation, nationalization, inflation, government instability, civil unrest, increased regulation and quotas, tariffs and other protectionist measures.
Our collective bargaining agreements with the USW may limit certain business flexibility. These agreements expire on September 1, 2018, which creates a potential risk of labor disruption.
Our master collective bargaining agreements with the USW contain provisions that may limit us from pursuing some North American transactions involving steel or steel-related assets without the consent of the USW, grant the USW a right to bid on any sale of one or more facilities covered by the 2015 Labor Agreements, and require us to make a minimum level of capital expenditures (subject to approval of the Board of Directors) to maintain the competitive status of our domestic facilities. These agreements may also restrict our ability to operate our facilities at less than full capacity and replace the product which could have been produced in such facilities with foreign products (excluding the United States or Canada), and further require that the ratio of non-represented employees to USW represented employees at our domestic facilities not exceed one to four. These provisions may limit our ability to acquire or sell steel or steel related assets at favorable prices, increase our operating costs and reduce our margins and otherwise adversely affect our competitiveness in the marketplace. These master agreements expire on September 1, 2018 and to the extent that good faith negotiations for successor agreements would reach legal impasse after this date, there exists a potential risk of labor disruption at covered plants.
A failure of our information technology infrastructure and cybersecurity threats may adversely affect our business operations.
Increasingly sophisticated attacks against rapidly evolving computer technologies pose a risk to the security of our systems, networks and data. Despite efforts to protect confidential business information, personal data of employees and contractors, and the control systems of manufacturing plants, U. S. Steel systems and those of our third-party service providers may be subject to system breaches. System breaches can lead to disclosure, modification and destruction of proprietary business data, personally identifiable information (PII), other sensitive information, defective products, production downtime and damage to production assets with a resulting impact to our reputation, competitiveness and operations. Of special note is our risk when implementing new capabilities. As we implement new systems, many times both new and old systems run in parallel until all processes have successfully transferred to the new system and thorough testing has been performed.
Historically, U. S. Steel has experienced cybersecurity attacks, including a high profile breach of our information technology systems in which proprietary information was compromised. On May 19, 2014, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed an indictment against certain individuals in connection with cyber crimes committed against the Company and other entities. We cooperated with the U.S. government on this matter and have implemented enhancements and improvements to safeguard our information technology enterprise against future attacks. Some of these enhancements include planning for and taking initial steps to implement a risk management framework based on security standards written by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Other enhancements include implementing additional security monitoring of our systems by advanced technologies. However, there is no assurance the Company's remediation efforts will be successful in safeguarding information from future attacks, which likely will increase in frequency and sophistication. Based on information known to date, the Company is currently unable to determine the materiality, if any, of these events.
We depend on third parties for transportation services, and increases in costs or the availability of transportation may adversely affect our business and operations.
43
Our business depends on the transportation of a large number of products, both domestically and internationally. We rely primarily on third parties for transportation of the products we manufacture as well as delivery of our raw materials. Any increase in the cost of the transportation of our raw materials or products, as a result of increases in fuel or labor costs, higher demand for logistics services, consolidation in the transportation industry or otherwise, may adversely affect our results of operations as we may not be able to pass such cost increases on to our customers.
If any of these providers were to fail to deliver raw materials to us in a timely manner, we may be unable to manufacture and deliver our products in response to customer demand. In addition, if any of these third parties were to cease operations or cease doing business with us, we may be unable to replace them at a reasonable cost.
In addition, such failure of a third-party transportation provider could harm our reputation, negatively affect our customer relationships and have a material adverse effect on our financial position and results of operations.
Benefits from our stockholder value creation strategy and asset revitalization program may be limited or may not be fully realized.
U. S. Steel initiated a stockholder value creation strategy pursuant to which we focus on strengthening our balance sheet and cash flow generation. We continue to work on a series of initiatives that we believe will enable us to add value, right size the Company, and improve our performance across our core business processes, including commercial, supply chain, manufacturing, procurement, innovation, and operational and functional support. Additionally, in 2017 we implemented an asset revitalization program, which covers investments in our existing assets, and involves investments beyond routine capital and maintenance spending. These asset revitalization projects are expected to deliver both operational and commercial benefits, with most of the benefits coming from operational improvement. Business conditions, our ability to implement such initiatives, and factors beyond our control may limit the benefits associated with certain identified projects and limit the economic benefits of our stockholder value creation strategy or asset revitalization program.
We participate in joint ventures, which may not be successful.
We participate in a number of joint ventures and we may enter into additional joint ventures or other similar arrangements in the future. Our joint venture partners, as well as any future partners, may have interests that are different from ours which may result in conflicting views as to the conduct of the business of the joint venture. In the event that we have a disagreement with a joint venture partner as to the resolution of a particular issue, or as to the management or conduct of the business of the joint venture in general, we may not be able to resolve such disagreement in our favor. In addition, our joint venture partners may, as a result of financial or other difficulties or because of other reasons, be unable or unwilling to fulfill their obligations under the joint venture, such as contributing capital to expansion or maintenance projects or approving dividends or other distributions or payments to us. Any significant downturn or deterioration in the business, financial condition or results of operations of a joint venture could adversely affect our results of operations in a particular period. There can be no assurance that our joint ventures will be beneficial to us.
Financial Risk Factors
Our business requires substantial expenditures for debt service obligations, capital investments, operating leases and maintenance that we may be unable to fund.
While we have refinanced the near-term maturities of our long-term debt, we have approximately $1.2 billion of debt maturing in 2020 and 2021 (see Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may face substantial liquidity problems and may be forced to reduce or delay investments and capital expenditures or to dispose of material assets or operations, or issue additional debt or equity. We may not be able to take such actions, if necessary, on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Our inability to generate sufficient cash flows to satisfy our debt obligations, or to refinance our indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms or at all, would materially and adversely affect our financial position and results or operations.
Our ability to service or refinance our debt or fund investments and capital expenditures required to maintain or expand our business operations depends on our financial condition and operating performance, which are subject to prevailing economic and competitive conditions and to certain financial, business, legislative, regulatory and other factors beyond our control. We may not be able to maintain a level of cash flows from operating activities sufficient to permit us to satisfy our liquidity needs. In addition, the limitations under our Third Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, such
44
as insufficient collateral or not being able to meet the fixed charge coverage ratio, may limit our availability to draw upon this facility. See the Liquidity section in "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis" for further details.
We have significant retiree health care, retiree life insurance and pension plan costs, which may negatively affect our results of operations and cash flows.
We maintain retiree health care and life insurance and defined benefit pension plans covering many of our domestic employees and former employees upon their retirement. These benefit plans have significant liabilities that are not fully funded, which will require additional cash funding in future years. Minimum contributions to domestic qualified pension plans (other than contributions to the Steelworkers Pension Trust (SPT) described below) are regulated under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA).
The level of cash funding for our defined benefit pension plans in future years depends upon various factors, including voluntary contributions that we may make, future pension plan asset performance, actual interest rates under the law, and the impacts of business acquisitions or divestitures, union negotiated benefit changes and future government regulations, many of which are not within our control. In addition, assets held by the trusts for our pension plan and our trust for retiree health care and life insurance benefits are subject to the risks, uncertainties and variability of the financial markets. See "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis" and Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of assumptions and further information associated with these benefit plans.
U. S. Steel contributes to a domestic multiemployer defined benefit pension plan, the SPT, for USW-represented employees formerly employed by National Steel and represented employees hired after May 2003. We have legal requirements for future funding of this plan should the SPT become significantly underfunded or we decide to withdraw from the plan. Either of these scenarios may negatively impact our future cash flows. The 2015 Labor Agreements require a contribution rate of $2.65 per hour for most steelworker employees. Collectively bargained company contributions to the plan could increase as a result of future changes agreed to by the Company and the USW.
Product liability claims may have an adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Events such as well failures, line pipe leaks, blowouts, bursts, fires and product recalls could result in claims that our products or services were defective and caused death, personal injury, property damage or environmental pollution. The insurance we maintain may not be adequate, available to protect us in the event of a claim, or its coverage may be limited, canceled or otherwise terminated, or the amount of our insurance may be less than the related impact on our enterprise value after a loss.
Rating agencies may downgrade our credit ratings, which would make it more difficult for us to raise capital and would increase our financial costs.
Any downgrades in our credit ratings may make raising capital more difficult, may increase the cost and adversely affect the terms of future borrowings, may adversely affect the terms under which we purchase goods and services and may limit our ability to take advantage of potential business opportunities.
We are subject to foreign currency risks, which may negatively impact our profitability and cash flows.
The financial condition and results of operations of USSE are reported in euros and then translated into U.S. dollars at the applicable exchange rate for inclusion in our financial statements. The appreciation of the U.S. dollar against the euro negatively affects our Consolidated Results of Operations.
In addition, international cash requirements have been and in the future may be funded by intercompany loans, creating intercompany monetary assets and liabilities in currencies other than the functional currencies of the entities involved, which can have a non-cash impact on income when they are remeasured at the end of each period.
Financial regulatory frameworks introduced by U.S. and EU regulators may limit our financial flexibility or increase our costs.
The Commodity Future Trading Commission’s Dodd Frank and the EU’s EMIR regulatory frameworks can limit the Company’s ability to hedge interest rate, foreign exchange (FX), or commodity pricing exposures, which could expose us to increased economic risk. These frameworks may introduce additional compliance costs or liquidity requirements.
45
Some counterparties may cease hedging as a result of increased regulatory cost burdens, which in turn may reduce U. S. Steel’s ability to hedge its interest rate, FX, or commodity exposures.
We may be subject to legal proceedings or investigations, the resolution of which could negatively affect our profitability and cash flows in a particular period.
We may be involved at any given time in various litigation matters, including administrative and regulatory proceedings, governmental investigations, environmental matters, and commercial disputes. Our profitability and cash flows in a particular period could be negatively affected by an adverse ruling in any legal proceeding or investigation that may be pending against us or filed against us in the future. While we believe that we have taken appropriate actions to mitigate and reduce these risks, due to the nature of our operations, these risks will continue to exist and additional legal proceedings or investigations may arise from time to time.
Regulatory Risk Factors
Compliance with existing and new environmental regulations, environmental permitting and approval requirements may result in delays or other adverse impacts on planned projects, our results of operations and cash flows.
Steel producers in the United States, along with their customers and suppliers, are subject to numerous federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment. Steel producers in the EU are subject to similar laws. These laws continue to evolve and are becoming increasingly stringent. The ultimate impact of complying with such laws and regulations is not always clearly known or determinable because regulations under some of these laws have not yet been promulgated or are undergoing revision. Compliance with environmental laws and regulations, such as the Clean Air Act, governing GHG and sulfur dioxide emissions, could result in substantially increased capital requirements and operating costs. In addition, the integrated steel process involves a series of chemical reactions that create carbon dioxide. Accordingly, we are subject to regulations adopted by the EPA, the EU and various state agencies regulating GHG emissions. Compliance with current or future regulations could entail substantial costs for emission based systems, and could have a negative impact on our results of operations and cash flows.
Construction and operation of new production facilities and modifications to existing facilities may require environmental permits and approvals from the appropriate regulatory agencies. There can be no assurance that future approvals, licenses and permits will be granted or that we will be able to maintain and renew the approvals, licenses and permits we currently hold. Failure to do so could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. Furthermore, compliance with the environmental permitting and approval requirements may be costly and time consuming and could result in delays or other adverse impacts on planned projects, our results of operations and cash flows.
We have significant environmental remediation costs that may negatively affect our results of operations and cash flows.
Some of U. S. Steel's current and former facilities were in operation before 1900. Hazardous materials associated with those facilities may have been released at current or former operating sites or delivered to sites operated by third parties.
U. S. Steel is involved in numerous remediation projects at currently operating facilities, facilities that have been closed or sold to unrelated parties and other sites where material generated by U. S. Steel was deposited. In addition, there are numerous other former operating or disposal sites that could become the subject of remediation, which may negatively affect our results of operations and cash flows.
Our operations are subject to complex regulatory and compliance frameworks.
Complex foreign and U.S. laws and regulations that apply to our international operations, including but not limited to U.S. laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, regulations related to import-export controls, the Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctions program, antiboycott provisions, and changes in transportation and logistics regulations may increase our cost of doing business in international jurisdictions and expose the Company and its employees to elevated risk. The Company's subsidiaries and joint ventures face similar risks. Although we have implemented policies and processes designed to comply with these laws and regulations, failure by our employees, contractors, or agents to
46
comply with these laws and regulations can result in possible administrative, civil, or criminal liability, as well as reputational harm to the Company and its employees.
The IRS may disallow all or part of a worthless stock loss and bad debt deduction taken in 2013.
U. S. Steel made an election effective December 31, 2013 to liquidate for U.S. income tax purposes a foreign subsidiary that holds most of the Company’s international operations. The tax liquidation allowed the Company to claim a worthless stock loss and bad debt deduction in its 2013 U.S. income tax return, resulting in a net income tax benefit in 2013 of $419 million. The worthless stock loss and bad debt deduction are subject to audit and possible adjustment by the IRS, which could result in the reversal of all or part of the income tax benefit. In 2015, the IRS began its audit of the worthless stock loss and bad debt deduction taken in 2013. We expect resolution in a future period. While we believe we have adequate legal and factual support for the tax position taken, the IRS could reject or reduce the amount of the income tax benefit related to the worthless stock loss and bad debt deduction. If this occurs, U. S. Steel would incur additional current tax expense, which could result in additional income tax payments.
Changes to global data privacy laws and cross-border transfer requirements could adversely affect our business and operations.
Our business depends on the transfer of data between our affiliated entities, to and from our business partners, and with third-party service providers, which may be subject to global data privacy laws and cross-border transfer restrictions. While U. S. Steel takes steps to comply with these legal requirements, the volatility and changes to the applicability of those laws, as well as evolving standards and judicial and regulatory interpretations of such laws, may impact U. S. Steel’s ability to effectively transfer data across borders in support of our business operations and lead to possible administrative, civil, or criminal liability, as well as reputational harm to the Company and its employees. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which comes into effect in May 2018, creates a range of new compliance obligations for subject companies and increases financial penalties for non-compliance. The costs of compliance with the GDPR and the potential for fines and penalties in the event of a breach of the GDPR may have an adverse effect on our business and operations.
Item 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
47
Item 2. PROPERTIES
The following tables list U. S. Steel’s main properties, their locations and their products and services:
North American Operations | ||||
Property | Location | Products and Services | ||
Gary Works | Gary, Indiana | Slabs; Sheets; Tin mill; Strip mill plate | ||
Midwest Plant | Portage, Indiana | Sheets; Tin mill | ||
East Chicago Tin | East Chicago, Indiana | Sheets; Tin mill | ||
Great Lakes Works | Ecorse and River Rouge, Michigan | Slabs; Sheets | ||
Great Lakes Works EGL at Dearborn | Dearborn, Michigan | Galvanized sheets | ||
Mon Valley Works | ||||
Irvin Plant | West Mifflin, Pennsylvania | Sheets | ||
Edgar Thomson Plant | Braddock, Pennsylvania | Slabs | ||
Fairless Plant | Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania | Galvanized sheets | ||
Clairton Plant | Clairton, Pennsylvania | Coke | ||
Granite City Works(a) | Granite City, Illinois | Slabs; Sheets | ||
Southern Coatings | ||||
Fairfield Sheet | Fairfield, Alabama | Galvanized Sheets | ||
Double G Coatings Company, L.P.(b) | Jackson, Mississippi | Galvanized and Galvalume® sheets | ||
USS-POSCO Industries(b) | Pittsburg, California | Sheets; Tin mill | ||
PRO-TEC Coating Company(b) | Leipsic, Ohio | Galvanized and high strength annealed sheets | ||
Fairfield Tubular Operations | Fairfield, Alabama | Seamless Tubular Pipe | ||
Worthington Specialty Processing(b) | Jackson, Canton and Taylor, Michigan | Steel processing | ||
Feralloy Processing Company(b) | Portage, Indiana | Steel processing | ||
Chrome Deposit Corporation(b) | Various | Roll processing | ||
Acero Prime, S.R.L. de C.V.(b) | Monterrey, Ramos Arizpe, San Luis Potosi, and Toluca, Mexico | Steel processing; warehousing; logistical services | ||
Lorain Tubular Operations | Lorain, Ohio | Seamless Tubular Pipe | ||
Lone Star Tubular | Lone Star, Texas | Welded Tubular Pipe | ||
Wheeling Machine Products | Pine Bluff, Arkansas and Hughes Springs, Texas | Tubular couplings | ||
Tubular Processing(c) | Houston, Texas | Tubular processing | ||
Offshore Operations | Houston, Texas | Tubular threading, inspection, accessories and storage services | ||
Patriot Premium Threading Services(b) | Midland, Texas | Tubular threading, accessories and premium connections | ||
Minntac Iron Ore Operations | Mt. Iron, Minnesota | Iron ore pellets | ||
Keetac Iron Ore Operations(d) | Keewatin, Minnesota | Iron ore pellets | ||
(a) | Hot end temporarily idled |
(b) | Equity investee |
(c) Temporarily Idled
(d) Idled in 2015, restarted in the 1st quarter of 2017
48
North American Operations (Continued) | ||||
Property | Location | Products and Services | ||
Hibbing Taconite Company(b) | Hibbing, Minnesota | Iron ore pellets | ||
Transtar, LLC | Alabama, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas | Railroad operations | ||
(b) Equity Investee
Other Operations | ||||
Property | Location | Products and Services | ||
U. S. Steel Košice | Košice, Slovakia | Slabs; Sheets; Tin mill; Strip mill plate; Tubular; Coke; Radiators; Refractories | ||
U. S. Steel and its predecessors (including Lone Star) have owned their properties for many years with no material adverse title claims asserted. In the case of Great Lakes Works, Granite City Works, the Midwest Plant and Keetac iron ore operations, U. S. Steel or its subsidiaries are the beneficiaries of bankruptcy laws and orders providing that properties are held free and clear of past liens and liabilities. In addition, U. S. Steel or its predecessors obtained title insurance, local counsel opinions or similar protections when significant properties were initially acquired or since acquisition.
At the Midwest Plant in Indiana, U. S. Steel has a supply agreement for various utility services with a company that owns a cogeneration facility located on U. S. Steel property. The Midwest Plant agreement expires in 2028.
U. S. Steel leases its headquarters office space in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
For property, plant and equipment additions, including capital leases, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Financial Condition, Cash Flows and Liquidity – Cash Flows” and Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
49
Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
U. S. Steel is the subject of, or a party to, a number of threatened or pending legal actions, contingencies and commitments involving a variety of matters, including laws and regulations relating to the environment, certain of which are discussed in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The ultimate resolution of these contingencies could, individually or in the aggregate, be material to the U. S. Steel financial statements. However, management believes that U. S. Steel will remain a viable and competitive enterprise even though it is possible that these contingencies could be resolved unfavorably to U. S. Steel.
General Litigation
On April 26, 2016, the Company filed a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) to initiate an investigation under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against Chinese steel producers and their distributors. All but seven of the producers did not respond and are considered to be in default. The complaint alleges three causes of action: 1) illegal conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export volumes; 2) the theft of trade secrets through industrial espionage; and 3) circumvention of duties by false designation of origin (FDO). In February 2017, U. S. Steel voluntarily withdrew its trade secrets claim, but preserved the right to refile the claim when additional information becomes available. On October 2, 2017, the Administrative Law judge (ALJ) assigned to the case terminated the FDO claim. The Company has elected not to pursue an appeal of that claim leaving the price fixing claim as the remaining claim. That claim is pending before the USITC. The remedy sought by U. S. Steel in that claim is the barring of all Chinese carbon alloy steel from the U.S. market.
U. S. Steel v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Commissioner John Linc Stine: On February 21, 2017, U. S. Steel filed a Verified Complaint and Writ of Mandamus against the MPCA for failure to act on U. S. Steel’s request for revisions to water quality standards which will affect the draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (water) permit at Minntac. MPCA filed an Answer and Counterclaim and U. S. Steel responded to the Counterclaim. Three citizen groups, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Save Lake Superior Association and Save Our Sky Blue Waters (collectively MCEA), then intervened in the lawsuit. All parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment, which remained outstanding pending a court-ordered mediation. The parties have now settled all claims and counterclaims and the case has been dismissed. U. S. Steel will now proceed through the Administrative regulatory process to address the outstanding water quality standards issues.
On August 9, 2017, the MPCA issued rulemaking proposals to replace the current sulfate standard with an equation-based standard. As part of the rulemaking process, an ALJ was appointed to preside over public hearings and comments. The Company and others challenged the standards and presented evidence that the standards were unsupported by science and that the MPCA failed to consider associated costs as part of the rulemaking process. On January 9, 2018, the ALJ rejected the MPCA’s proposals, concluding that the MPCA failed to comply with state law requirements for drafting and adopting a new standard, that portions of the rule were unsupported by the MPCA’s evidence and that the MPCA proposal was unconstitutional due to vagueness.
On October 2, 2017, an Amended Shareholder Class Action Complaint was filed in Federal Court in the Western District of Pennsylvania consolidating previously-filed actions. Separately, four related shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed in Pennsylvania and Federal courts in Pittsburgh. The underlying consolidated class action lawsuit alleges that U. S. Steel, certain current and former officers, an upper level manager of the Company and the financial Underwriters who participated in the August 2016 secondary public offering violated federal securities laws in making false statements and/or failing to discover and disclose material information regarding the financial condition of the Company. The lawsuit claims that this conduct caused a prospective class of plaintiffs to sustain damages during the period of January 27, 2016 and April 25, 2017 as a result of the prospective class purchasing the Company's common stock at artificially inflated prices and/or suffering losses when the price of the common stock dropped. The derivative lawsuits generally make the same allegations against the same officers and also allege that certain members of the Board of Directors failed to exercise appropriate control and oversight over the Company and were unjustly compensated. They seek to recover losses that were allegedly sustained. The Company is vigorously defending these matters.
On April 11, 2017, there was a process waste water release at our Midwest Plant (Midwest) in Portage, Indiana that impacted a water outfall that discharges to Burns Waterway near Lake Michigan. U. S. Steel identified the source of the release and made the necessary repairs. We determined that all repairs were safely working as intended and, on April 14, 2017, resumed operations in a controlled, phased and highly monitored approach with extensive input from participating government agencies. The Company has since implemented substantial operational, process and
50
notification improvements at Midwest. The Company has been presented with cost reimbursements, loss of use and penalty requests from the involved governmental agencies and intends to amicably resolve the matter with those agencies. Separately, the Company was placed on notice of potential citizens’ enforcement suits regarding the April 2017 incident and other historical alleged Clean Water Act and Permit violations at Midwest. In January of 2018, The Surfrider Foundation and the City of Chicago initiated suits in the Northern District of Indiana alleging such violations. The Company intends to defend against those actions.
Asbestos Litigation
As of December 31, 2017, U. S. Steel was a defendant in approximately 820 active cases involving approximately 3,315 plaintiffs. The vast majority of these cases involve multiple defendants. As of December 31, 2016, U. S. Steel was a defendant in approximately 845 cases involving approximately 3,340 plaintiffs. About 2,500, or approximately 75 percent, of these plaintiff claims are currently pending in jurisdictions which permit filings with massive numbers of plaintiffs. Based upon U. S. Steel’s experience in such cases, it believes that the actual number of plaintiffs who ultimately assert claims against U. S. Steel will likely be a small fraction of the total number of plaintiffs.
The following table shows the activity with respect to asbestos litigation:
Period ended | Opening Number of Claims | Claims Dismissed, Settled and Resolved | New Claims | Closing Number of Claims | ||||
December 31, 2015 | 3,455 | 415 | 275 | 3,315 | ||||
December 31, 2016 | 3,315 | 225 | 250 | 3,340 | ||||
December 31, 2017 | 3,340 | 275 | 250 | 3,315 | ||||
Historically, asbestos-related claims against U. S. Steel fall into three groups: (1) claims made by persons who allegedly were exposed to asbestos on the premises of U. S. Steel facilities; (2) claims made by persons allegedly exposed to products manufactured by U. S. Steel; and (3) claims made under certain federal and maritime laws by employees of former operations of U. S. Steel.
The amount U. S. Steel accrues for pending asbestos claims is not material to U. S. Steel’s financial condition. However, U. S. Steel is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of asbestos-related claims due to a number of uncertainties, including: (1) the rates at which new claims are filed, (2) the number of and effect of bankruptcies of other companies traditionally defending asbestos claims, (3) uncertainties associated with the variations in the litigation process from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, (4) uncertainties regarding the facts, circumstances and disease process with each claim, and (5) any new legislation enacted to address asbestos-related claims. Despite these uncertainties, management believes that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on U. S. Steel’s financial condition, although the resolution of such matters could significantly impact results of operations for a particular quarter.
Environmental Proceedings
The following is a summary of the proceedings of U. S. Steel that were pending or contemplated as of December 31, 2017, under federal and state environmental laws. Information about specific sites where U. S. Steel is or has been engaged in significant clean up or remediation activities is also summarized below. Except as described herein, it is not possible to accurately predict the ultimate outcome of these matters.
CERCLA Remediation Sites
Claims under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) have been raised with respect to the cleanup of various waste disposal and other sites. Under CERCLA, potentially responsible parties (PRPs) for a site include current owners and operators, past owners and operators at the time of disposal, persons who arranged for disposal of a hazardous substance at a site, and persons who transported a hazardous substance to a site. CERCLA imposes strict and joint and several liabilities. Because of various factors, including the ambiguity of the regulations, the difficulty of identifying the responsible parties for any particular site, the complexity
51
of determining the relative liability among them, the uncertainty as to the most desirable remediation techniques, and the amount of damages and cleanup costs and the time period during which such costs may be incurred, we are unable to reasonably estimate U. S. Steel’s ultimate liabilities under CERCLA.
As of December 31, 2017, U. S. Steel has received information requests or been identified as a PRP at a total of seven CERCLA sites, two of which have liabilities that have not been resolved. Based on currently available information, which is in many cases preliminary and incomplete, management believes that U. S. Steel’s liability for CERCLA cleanup and remediation costs at the other five sites will be between $100,000 and $1 million for four of the sites, and over $5 million for one site as described below.
Duluth Works
The former U. S. Steel Duluth Works site was placed on the National Priorities List under CERCLA in 1983 and on the State of Minnesota’s Superfund list in 1984. Liability for environmental remediation at the site is governed by a Response Order by Consent executed with the MPCA in 1985 and a Record of Decision signed by MPCA in 1989. U. S. Steel has submitted a feasibility study that includes remedial measures to address contaminated sediments in the St. Louis River Estuary and several other Operable Units that could impact the Estuary if not addressed.
While work continues on completion of the remedial design and educating the public and key stakeholders on the details of the plan, there has been no material change in the status of the project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. Additional study, investigation, design, oversight costs, and implementation of U. S. Steel's preferred remedial alternatives on the upland property and Estuary are currently estimated as of December 31, 2017 at approximately $47 million.
RCRA and Other Remediation Sites
U. S. Steel may be liable for remediation costs under other environmental statutes, both federal and state, or where private parties are seeking to impose liability on U. S. Steel for remediation costs through discussions or litigation. There are 19 such sites where remediation is being sought involving amounts in excess of $100,000. Based on currently available information, which is in many cases preliminary and incomplete, management believes that liability for cleanup and remediation costs in connection with 9 sites have potential costs between $100,000 and $1 million per site, 5 sites may involve remediation costs between $1 million and $5 million per site and 5 sites are estimated to or could have, costs for remediation, investigation, restoration or compensation in excess of $5 million per site.
For more information on the status of remediation activities at U. S. Steel’s significant sites, see the discussions related to each site below.
Gary Works
On October 23, 1998, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final Administrative Order on Consent (Order) addressing Corrective Action for Solid Waste Management Units (SWMU) throughout Gary Works. This Order requires U. S. Steel to perform a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation (RFI), a Corrective Measures Study (CMS) and Corrective Measure Implementation. While work continues on several items, there has been no material change in the status of the project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. Until the remaining Phase I work and Phase II field investigations are completed, it is not possible to assess what additional expenditures will be necessary for Corrective Action projects at Gary Works. In total, the accrued liability for Corrective Action projects is approximately $25 million as of December 31, 2017, based on our current estimate of known remaining costs.
Geneva Works
At U. S. Steel’s former Geneva Works, liability for environmental remediation, including the closure of three hazardous waste impoundments and facility-wide corrective action, has been allocated between U. S. Steel and the current property owner pursuant to an agreement and a permit issued by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ). Having completed the investigation on a majority of the remaining areas identified in the permit, U. S. Steel has determined the most effective means to address the remaining impacted material is to manage those materials in a previously approved on-site Corrective Action Management Unit (CAMU). While preliminary approval of the conceptual CAMU design has been granted by the UDEQ, there has been no material change in the status of the
52
project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. U. S. Steel has an accrued liability of approximately $63 million as of December 31, 2017, for our estimated share of the remaining costs of remediation.
USS-POSCO Industries (UPI)
A joint venture in Pittsburg, California between subsidiaries of U. S. Steel and POSCO, UPI's facilities were previously owned and operated solely by U. S. Steel which retains primary responsibility for the existing environmental conditions. During 2016, U. S. Steel implemented its preferred remedial plan to address groundwater impacts from trichloroethylene at Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 4. Evaluations continue for the three SWMUs known as the Northern Boundary Group and it is likely that corrective measures will be required, but it is not possible at this time to define a scope or estimate costs for what may be required by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. As such, there has been no material change in the status of the project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. As of December 31, 2017, approximately $1 million has been accrued for ongoing environmental studies, investigations and remedy monitoring. Significant additional costs associated with this site are possible and are referenced in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements “Contingencies and Commitments - Environmental Matters - Remediation Projects - Projects with Ongoing Study and Scope Development.”
Fairfield Works
A consent decree was signed by U. S. Steel, the EPA and the U.S. Department of Justice and filed with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (United States of America v. USX Corporation) in December 1997. In accordance with the consent decree, U. S. Steel initiated a RCRA corrective action program at the Fairfield Works facility. The Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), with the approval of the EPA, assumed primary responsibility for regulation and oversight of the RCRA corrective action program at Fairfield Works. While work continues on different aspects of the program, there has been no material change in the status of the project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. In total, the accrued liability for remaining work under the Corrective Action Program, was approximately $325,000 at December 31, 2017. Significant additional costs associated with this site are possible and are referenced in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements “Contingencies and Commitments - Environmental Matters - Remediation Projects - Projects with Ongoing Study and Scope Development.”
Fairless Plant
In April 1993, U. S. Steel entered into a consent order with the EPA pursuant to RCRA, under which U. S. Steel would perform Interim Measures (IM), an RFI and CMS at our Fairless Plant. A Phase I RFI Final Report was submitted in September of 1997. With EPA’s agreement, in lieu of conducting subsequent phases of the RFI and the CMS, U. S. Steel has been working through the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Act 2 Program to characterize and remediate facility parcels for redevelopment. While work continues on these items, there has been no material change in the status of the project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. As of December 31, 2017, the accrued liability to maintain the interim measures, and clear properties through the Act 2 process is approximately $49,000. Significant additional costs associated with this site are possible and are referenced in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements “Contingencies and Commitments - Environmental Matters - Remediation Projects - Projects with Ongoing Study and Scope Development.”
Lorain Tubular Operations
In September 2006, U. S. Steel and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) commenced discussions about RCRA Corrective Action at Lorain Tubular Operations. A Phase I RFI on the identified SWMUs and Areas of Contamination was submitted in March 2012. While discussions continue with OEPA on the Phase II RFI report that addresses additional investigations of soil, site wide groundwater and the pipe mill lagoon, there has been no material change in the status of the project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. As of December 31, 2017, costs to complete additional projects are estimated to be approximately $108,000. Significant additional costs associated with this site are possible and are referenced in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements “Contingencies and Commitments - Environmental Matters - Remediation Projects - Projects with Ongoing Study and Scope Development.”
Joliet Works
The 50-acre parcel at the former Joliet Works is enrolled in the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s (IEPA) voluntary Site Remediation Program (the Program). The Program requires investigation and establishment of cleanup
53
objectives followed by submission/approval of a Remedial Action Plan to meet those objectives. The 50-acre parcel was divided into four (4) subareas with remedial activities completed in 2015 for three (3) of the subareas. While work continues to define the requirements for further investigation of the remaining subarea, there has been no material change in the status of the project during the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. U. S. Steel has an accrued liability of $294,000 as of December 31, 2017. Significant additional costs associated with this site are possible and are referenced in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements “Contingencies and Commitments - Environmental Matters - Remediation Projects - Projects with Ongoing Study and Scope Development.”
Cherryvale (KS) Zinc
In April 2003, U. S. Steel and Salomon Smith Barney Holdings, Inc. (SSB) entered into a Consent Order with the Kansas Department of Health & Environment (KDHE) concerning a former zinc smelting operation in Cherryvale, Kansas. Remediation of the site proper was essentially completed in 2007. The Consent Order was amended on May 3, 2013, to require investigation (but not remediation) of potential contamination beyond the boundary of the former zinc smelting operation. On November 22, 2016, KDHE approved a State Cooperative Final Agency Decision Statement that identified the remedy selected to address potential contamination beyond the boundary of the former zinc smelting site. Work continues on finalizing the Removal Action Design Plan. As of December 31, 2017, an accrual of approximately $351,000 remains available for addressing these outstanding issues. Significant additional costs associated with this site are possible and are referenced in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements “Contingencies and Commitments - Environmental Matters - Remediation Projects - Projects with Ongoing Study and Scope Development.”
South Works
On August 29, 2017, U. S. Steel was notified by the U.S. Coast Guard of a sheen on the water in the North Vessel Slip at our former South Works in Chicago, Illinois. U. S. Steel has been working with the IEPA under their voluntary Site Remediation Program since 1993 to evaluate the condition of the property including the North Vessel Slip. The result of this cooperative effort has been the issuance of a series of “No Further Remediation” (NFR) notices to U. S. Steel including one specific to the North Vessel Slip. U. S. Steel has notified the IEPA of the potential changed condition and is working closely with the IEPA and the U. S. Coast Guard to determine the source of the sheen and options to address the issue. U. S. Steel has an accrued liability of $82,000 as of December 31, 2017.
Air Related Matters
Great Lakes Works
In June 2010, the EPA significantly lowered the primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (SO2) from 140 parts per billion (ppb) on a 24-hour basis to an hourly standard of 75 ppb. Based upon the 2009-2011 ambient air monitoring data, the EPA designated the area in which Great Lakes Works is located as nonattainment with the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
As result, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) must submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to the EPA that demonstrates that the entire nonattainment area (and not just the monitor) will be in attainment by October 2018 by using conservative air dispersion modeling. U. S. Steel met with MDEQ on multiple occasions and had offered reduction plans to MDEQ but the parties could not agree to a plan. MDEQ, instead promulgated Rule 430 which was solely directed at U. S. Steel. The Company challenged Rule 430 before the Michigan Court of Claims who by Order dated October 4, 2017, granted the Company’s motion for summary disposition voiding Rule 430 finding that it violated rule-making provisions of the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act and Michigan Constitution. Since Rule 430 has been invalidated, EPA has indicated that it would promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). Because development of the FIP is in the early stages, the impacts of the nonattainment designation to the Company are not estimable at this time.
On May 27, 2015, Great Lakes Works received a Violation Notice in which MDEQ alleged that U. S. Steel did not obtain a required permit to install a BOP vessel replacement that occurred in November 2014. U. S. Steel responded to MDEQ on June 17, 2015. While the resolution of the matter is uncertain at this time, it is not anticipated that the resolution will be material to U. S. Steel.
54
Granite City Works
In October 2015, Granite City Works received a Violation Notice from IEPA in which the IEPA alleges that U. S. Steel violated the emission limits for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds from the Basic Oxygen Furnace Electrostatic Precipitator Stack. In addition, the IEPA alleges that U. S. Steel exceeded its natural gas usage limit at its CoGeneration Boiler. U. S. Steel responded to the notice and is currently discussing resolution of the matter with IEPA.
On December 18, 2017, Granite City Works received a Violation Notice from IEPA in which the IEPA alleges that U. S. Steel violated certain air operating, maintenance and recordkeeping requirements related to a coke conveyance system, pickle line scrubbers and hydrochloric acid storage tanks. U. S. Steel is currently discussing resolution of the matter with IEPA.
Although discussions with IEPA regarding the foregoing alleged violations are ongoing and the resolution of these matters is uncertain at this time, it is not anticipated that the result of those discussions will be material to U. S. Steel.
Minnesota Ore Operations
On February 6, 2013, the EPA published a FIP that applies to taconite facilities in Minnesota. The FIP establishes and requires emission limits and the use of low NOx reduction technology on indurating furnaces as Best Available Retrofit Technology. While U. S. Steel installed low NOx burners on three furnaces at Minntac and is currently obligated to install low NOx burners on the two other furnaces at Minntac pursuant to existing agreements and permits, the rule would require the installation of a low NOx burner on the one furnace at Keetac for which U. S. Steel did not have an otherwise existing obligation. U. S. Steel estimates expenditures associated with the installation of low NOx burners of as much as $25 to $30 million. In 2013, U. S. Steel filed a petition for administrative reconsideration to the EPA and a petition for judicial review of the 2013 FIP and denial of the Minnesota State Implementation Plan (SIP) to the Eighth Circuit of the 2013 FIP. In April 2016, the EPA promulgated a revised FIP with the same substantive requirements for U. S. Steel. In June 2016, U. S. Steel filed a petition for administrative reconsideration of the 2016 FIP to the EPA and a petition for judicial review of the 2016 FIP before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. While the proceedings regarding the petition for judicial review of the 2013 FIP remained stayed, oral arguments regarding the petition for judicial review of the 2016 FIP were heard by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on November 15, 2017. Thus, both petitions for judicial review remain with the Eighth Circuit. On December 4, 2017, EPA published a notification in the Federal Register in which the EPA denied U. S. Steel’s administrative petitions for reconsideration and stay of the 2013 FIP and 2016 FIP. On February 1, 2018, U. S. Steel filed a petition for judicial review of EPA’s denial of the administrative petitions for reconsideration to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. U. S. Steel continues to defend its petitions while pursuing a resolution that would include an equitable revision to the FIP.
Mon Valley Works
On November 9, 2017, EPA Region III and Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) jointly issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) regarding the Company’s Edgar Thomson facility in Braddock, PA. In addition, on November 20, 2017, ACHD issued a separate, but related NOV to the Company regarding the Edgar Thomson facility. In the NOVs, based upon their inspections and review of documents collected throughout the last two years, the agencies allege that the Company has violated the Clean Air Act by exceeding the allowable visible emission standards from certain operations during isolated events. In addition, the agencies allege that the Company has violated certain maintenance, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements. U. S. Steel met with EPA Region III and ACHD on December 18, 2017, and continues to negotiate a potential resolution of the matter.
Item 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE
The information concerning mine safety violations and other regulatory matters required by Section 150 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Item 104 of Regulation S-K is included in Exhibit 95 to this Form 10-K.
55
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
The executive officers of U. S. Steel and their ages as of February 1, 2018, are as follows:
Name | Age | Title | Executive Officer Since | |||
Kevin P. Bradley | 55 | Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer | July 27, 2017 | |||
Christine S. Breves | 61 | Senior Vice President, Manufacturing Support & Chief Supply Chain Officer | April 27, 2017 | |||
James E. Bruno | 52 | Senior Vice President - Automotive Solutions (a) | December 1, 2014 | |||
Scott D. Buckiso | 50 | Senior Vice President - European Solutions and President - USSK (b) | May 31, 2015 | |||
David B. Burritt | 62 | President & Chief Executive Officer | September 1, 2013 | |||
Colleen M. Darragh | 48 | Vice President & Controller | July 17, 2014 | |||
Richard L. Fruehauf | 50 | Deputy General Counsel - Corporate; Interim General Counsel | November 7, 2017 | |||
Sara A. Greenstein | 43 | Senior Vice President - Consumer Solutions (a) | December 1, 2014 | |||
Douglas R. Matthews | 52 | Senior Vice President - Industrial, Service Center and Mining Solutions (a) | July 2, 2012 | |||
David J. Rintoul | 60 | Senior Vice President - Tubular Business (c) | May 1, 2014 | |||
Pipasu Soni | 45 | Vice President - Finance | February 1, 2017 | |||
(a) Automotive Solutions, Consumer Solutions, and Industrial, Service Center and Mining Solutions commercial entities are contained within the Flat-Rolled segment.
(b) European Solutions commercial entity is contained within the USSE segment.
(c) Tubular Business commercial entity is contained within the Tubular segment. David J. Rintoul has elected to retire on February 28, 2018. Douglas R. Matthews will assume responsibilities for the Company's Tubular Segment on an interim basis.
All of the executive officers mentioned above have held responsible management or professional positions with U. S. Steel or our subsidiaries for more than the past five years, with the exception of Mr. Bradley, Ms. Breves, Mr. Bruno, Mr. Burritt, Ms. Greenstein, Mr. Soni and Mr. Fruehauf. Prior to joining U. S. Steel, Mr. Bruno was with TRW Automotive, a global leader in automotive safety and one of the world's largest automotive suppliers, for 20 years, most recently serving as vice president – North American braking operations and global slip control portfolio. Prior to joining U. S. Steel, Mr. Bradley served as senior vice president and chief financial officer at Terex Corporation, a U.S.-based global manufacturer of lifting and material processing products such as cranes, aerial work platforms, and mobile crushing and screening equipment used in industries ranging from construction and mining to utilities. Prior to joining U. S. Steel, Ms. Breves served as chief procurement officer at Alcoa Inc., where she served since 2004 with responsibility for strategic materials, indirect materials and services, non-smelter energy, transportation and capital. Ms. Greenstein joined U. S. Steel from Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL) where she was employed for 12 years and most recently held the position of president, UL Supply Chain and Sustainability. Mr. Soni joined U. S. Steel in 2016. Previously he was with Pentair for six years, most recently serving as Vice President, Business Analysis and Planning from 2012 - 2015. Mr. Soni also held various roles in international and business unit finance, corporate development and controllership at Honeywell. Mr. Fruehauf joined the Company in 2014 as Assistant General Counsel, and was subsequently promoted to Associate General Counsel and Deputy General Counsel. He was named Interim General Counsel in November 2017. Prior to joining U. S. Steel, Mr. Fruehauf served as Senior Counsel and then Assistant General Counsel during his six years at Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. Throughout his career, he has also worked as an attorney at several law firms and other manufacturing companies, and as a national security analyst for several U.S. government agencies.
56
PART II
Item 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Common Stock Information
The principal market on which United States Steel Corporation (U. S. Steel) common stock is traded is the New York Stock Exchange. U. S. Steel common stock is also traded on the Chicago Stock Exchange. Information concerning the high and low sales price for the common stock as reported in the consolidated transaction reporting system and the frequency and amount of dividends paid during the last two years is set forth in “Selected Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)” on page F-57.
As of February 15, 2018, there were 13,632 registered holders of U. S. Steel common stock.
The Board of Directors currently intends to declare and pay dividends on shares of U. S. Steel common stock based on the financial condition and results of operations of U. S. Steel out of legally available funds and in accordance with the requirements set forth by applicable law. Quarterly dividends were declared by U. S. Steel in 2017 and 2016 in the amount of $0.05 per share.
Shareholder Return Performance
The graph below compares the yearly change in cumulative total shareholder return of our common stock with the cumulative total return of the Standard & Poor’s (S&P’s) 500 Stock Index and the S&P 600 Steel Index.
Comparison of Cumulative Total Return
on $100 Invested in U.S. Steel Stock on December 31, 2012
vs
S&P 500 and S&P 600 Steel Index
(a) U. S. Steel was removed from the S&P 500 Index effective July 1, 2014. Consequently, U. S. Steel is now part of the S&P 600 Steel Index instead of the S&P 500 Steel Index, which is a subset of the S&P 500. Therefore, current year results may not be comparable to prior years.
57
For information on securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans, see "Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters."
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
U. S. Steel had no sales of unregistered securities during the period covered by this report.
58
Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Dollars in millions (except per share data)(a) | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||
Statement of Operations Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net sales | $ | 12,250 | $ | 10,261 | $ | 11,574 | $ | 17,507 | $ | 17,424 | ||||||||||
Earnings (loss) before interest and income taxes | 608 | (165 | ) | (1,202 | ) | 413 | (1,900 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net earnings (loss) attributable to United States Steel Corporation | 387 | (440 | ) | (1,642 | ) | 102 | (1,645 | ) | ||||||||||||
Per Common Share Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net earnings (loss) attributable to United States Steel Corporation(b) | ||||||||||||||||||||
– basic | 2.21 | (2.81 | ) | $ | (11.24 | ) | $ | 0.71 | $ | (11.37 | ) | |||||||||
– diluted | 2.19 | (2.81 | ) | (11.24 | ) | 0.69 | (11.37 | ) | ||||||||||||
Dividends per share declared and paid | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | |||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet Data – December 31: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total assets (c) (d) | $ | 9,862 | $ | 9,160 | $ | 9,167 | $ | 11,975 | $ | 12,679 | ||||||||||
Capitalization: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Debt (d) | $ | 2,703 | $ | 3,031 | $ | 3,138 | $ | 3,460 | $ | 3,892 | ||||||||||
United States Steel Corporation stockholders’ equity | 3,320 | 2,274 | 2,436 | 3,799 | 3,375 | |||||||||||||||
Total capitalization | $ | 6,023 | $ | 5,305 | $ | 5,574 | $ | 7,259 | $ | 7,267 | ||||||||||
(a) | For discussion of changes between the years, see Item 7. "Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations." |
(b) | See Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the basis of calculating earnings per share. |
(c) | 2014 and 2013 amounts have been adjusted to retroactively adopt Accounting Standards Update 2015-17, Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes, which requires that all deferred tax assets and liabilities, along with any related valuation allowance, be classified as noncurrent on the balance sheet. |
(d) | 2015, 2014 and 2013 amounts have been adjusted to retroactively adopt Accounting Standards Update 2015-03, Interest-Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30) - Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs, which requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the debt liability. |
59
Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes that appear elsewhere in this document.
Overview
According to World Steel Association’s latest published statistics, U. S. Steel was the twenty-fourth largest steel producer in the world in 2016. Also in 2016 according to World Steel Association’s latest published statistics, U. S. Steel was the third largest steel producer in the United States. U. S. Steel has a broad and diverse mix of products and customers. We use iron ore, coal, coke, steel scrap, zinc, tin, and other metallic additions to produce a wide range of flat-rolled and tubular steel products, concentrating on value-added steel products for customers with demanding technical applications in the automotive, appliance, container, industrial machinery, construction and oil, gas, and petrochemical industries. In addition to our facilities in the United States, U. S. Steel has significant operations in Eastern Europe through U. S. Steel Košice (USSK), located in Slovakia.
We are proud to report the following highlights and accomplishments achieved in 2017:
• | Implemented comprehensive safety program enhancements for employees and contractors, to help achieve our goal of a safe return home every day |
• | Outperformed the Bureau of Labor Statistics and AISI industry safety benchmarks in both OSHA Recordable Days and Days Away From Work |
• | Reported net earnings of $387 million in 2017 |
• | Finished 2017 with adjusted EBITDA of $1.087 billion and positive operating cash flow of $802 million |
• | Strong year-end liquidity of approximately $3.350 billion, including $1.553 billion of cash, which supports our goal of maintaining a healthy balance sheet |
• | Reduced total debt by $328 million in 2017 as compared to 2016 |
• | Successfully completed a $750 million debt offering, providing for future financial flexibility |
• | Improved our cash conversion cycle by 13 days |
• | Made a $75 million voluntary contribution to our defined benefit pension plan, further improving the funded status |
• | Launched a new proprietary tubular connection - USS-EAGLE SFHTM and sold our first order of USS-LIBERTY LDTM |
• | Began construction of a new continuous galvanizing line at our PRO-TEC joint venture to efficiently produce advanced high strength steels |
• | Initiated a multi-year asset revitalization program that includes $1.5 billion of capital investments in our Flat-Rolled assets |
• | Continue to lead the U.S. steel industry's efforts to strengthen and enforce trade laws against unfairly traded imports |
Our management team took several critical actions in recent years, including: idling facilities; right-sizing the organization; and exiting parts of the business where it is not possible to earn an economic profit. These were tough decisions and, despite the challenging economic circumstances, U. S. Steel ended 2017 as a more streamlined organization focused on generating economic profit across all business cycles.
We continue to take steps to improve our position for the long-term. The focus on improving the balance sheet and strategically accessing the capital markets enables the Company to move forward and open avenues to future growth and investment.
60
We have taken these actions as part of our strategy to return to profitable growth and deliver sustainable value creation for our stockholders as market conditions improve.
Critical Accounting Estimates
Management’s discussion and analysis of U. S. Steel’s financial condition and results of operations is based upon U. S. Steel’s financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting standards generally accepted in the United States (U.S. GAAP). The preparation of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at year-end and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the year. Management regularly evaluates these estimates, including those related to employee benefits liabilities and assets held in trust relating to such liabilities; the carrying value of property, plant and equipment; intangible assets; valuation allowances for receivables, inventories and deferred income tax assets; liabilities for deferred income taxes, potential tax deficiencies, environmental obligations and potential litigation claims and settlements. Management’s estimates are based on historical experience, current business and market conditions, and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ materially from current expectations under different assumptions or conditions.
Management believes that the following are the more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of the financial statements.
Identifiable intangible assets - Intangible assets with indefinite lives are subject to at least annual impairment testing, which compares the fair value of the intangible assets with their carrying amounts. U. S. Steel has determined that certain of its acquired intangible assets have indefinite useful lives. These assets are reviewed for impairment annually in the third quarter and whenever events or circumstances indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable. U. S. Steel performed a quantitative impairment evaluation of its indefinite-lived intangible assets, which consist of its water rights, during the third quarter of 2017. Based on the results of the evaluation, U. S. Steel's indefinite-lived intangible assets were not impaired. Based on the results of the quantitative impairment evaluation performed during 2016, the water rights were not impaired. Prior to the fourth quarter of 2016, U. S. Steel had in process research and development patents that had indefinite useful lives. Based on the results of the impairment evaluation, the estimated fair value of the patents had decreased below their carrying value. As a result, an impairment charge of approximately $14 million was recorded in the third quarter of 2016. The research and development activities of the Company's acquired indefinite lived in-process research and development patents was completed during the fourth quarter of 2016 and the carrying amount of the patents is being amortized over the useful lives of the patents (approximately 10 years).
Identifiable intangible assets with finite lives are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives and are reviewed for impairment whenever events or circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. During 2016, the permanent shutdown of certain Lorain, Lone Star and Bellville tubular assets was considered a triggering event for our welded and seamless tubular asset groups. U. S. Steel completed a review of certain of its identifiable intangible asset with finite lives, primarily customer relationships with a carrying value of $73 million at December 31, 2016, and determined the assets were not impaired. There were no triggering events that indicated the carrying value of the customer relationships may not be recoverable in 2017.
Inventories – Inventories are carried at the lower of cost or market for last-in, first-out (LIFO) inventories and lower of cost and net realizable value for first-in, first-out (FIFO) method inventories. LIFO is the predominant method of inventory costing for inventories in the United States and FIFO is the predominant method used in Europe. The LIFO method of inventory costing was used on 75 percent of consolidated inventories at both December 31, 2017 and 2016. Since the LIFO inventory valuation methodology is an annual calculation, interim estimates of the annual LIFO valuation are required. We recognize the effects of the LIFO inventory valuation method on an interim basis by estimating the year end inventory amounts. The projections of annual LIFO inventory amounts are updated quarterly. Changes in U.S. GAAP rules or tax law, such as the elimination of the LIFO method of accounting for inventories, could negatively affect our profitability and cash flow.
Equity method investments – Investments in entities over which U. S. Steel has significant influence are accounted for using the equity method of accounting and are carried at U. S. Steel’s share of net assets plus loans, advances and our share of earnings less distributions. Differences in the basis of the investment and the underlying net asset value of the investee, if any, are amortized into earnings over the remaining useful life of the associated assets.
61
Income from investees includes U. S. Steel’s share of income from equity method investments, which is generally recorded a month in arrears, except for significant and unusual items which are recorded in the period of occurrence. Gains or losses from changes in ownership of unconsolidated investees are recognized in the period of change. Intercompany profits and losses on transactions with equity investees have been eliminated in consolidation subject to lower of cost or market inventory adjustments.
U. S. Steel evaluates impairment of its equity method investments whenever circumstances indicate that a decline in value below carrying value is other than temporary. Under these circumstances, we would adjust the investment down to its estimated fair value, which then becomes its new carrying value. During the fourth quarter of 2016, the Company completed a review of its equity method investments and determined there was an other than temporary impairment of its Apolo equity investment due to the intent to sell its ownership interest at an amount less than the carrying value of the investment. Accordingly, U. S. Steel recorded an impairment charge of $12 million, which reduced the carrying value of the investment to $18 million at December 31, 2016. U. S. Steel sold its ownership interest in this equity investment in 2017. During the fourth quarter of 2015, U. S. Steel completed a review of its equity method investments and determined there was an other than temporary impairment of an equity investee within a non-core operating segment of U. S. Steel. The other than temporary impairment resulted from a decision to cease the funding of the long-term development plans of the equity investment, due to our intent to sell the particular investment, thereby inhibiting sufficient recovery of the market value. Accordingly, U. S. Steel recorded an impairment charge of $18 million, which reduced the carrying amount of the equity investment to $3 million, in the fourth quarter of 2015. U. S. Steel's ownership interest in this investment was sold in 2017.
Pensions and other benefits – The recording of net periodic benefit costs for defined benefit pensions and other benefits is based on, among other things, assumptions of the expected annual return on plan assets, discount rate, mortality, escalation or other changes in retiree health care costs and plan participation levels. Changes in the assumptions or differences between actual and expected changes in the present value of liabilities or assets of U. S. Steel’s plans could cause net periodic benefit costs to increase or decrease materially from year to year as discussed below.
U. S. Steel’s investment strategy for its U.S. pension plan assets provides for a diversified mix of public equities, high quality bonds and selected smaller investments in private equities, investment trusts and partnerships, timber and mineral interests. For its U.S. pension plan, U. S. Steel has a target allocation for plan assets of 55 percent in equities (inclusive of private equity and investment trusts). The balance is primarily invested in corporate bonds, Treasury bonds and government-backed mortgages. U. S. Steel believes that returns on equities over the long term will be higher than returns from fixed-income securities as actual historical returns from U. S. Steel’s trusts have shown. Returns on bonds tend to offset some of the short-term volatility of stocks. Both equity and fixed-income investments are made across a broad range of industries and companies to provide protection against the impact of volatility in any single industry as well as company specific developments. U. S. Steel will use a 6.85 percent assumed rate of return on assets for the development of net periodic cost for the main defined benefit pension plan in 2018. The 2018 assumed rate of return is lower than the rate of return used for 2017 domestic expense and was determined by taking into account the intended asset mix and some moderation of the historical premiums that fixed-income and equity investments have yielded above government bonds. Actual returns since the inception of the plans have exceeded this 6.85 percent rate and while recent annual returns have been volatile, it is U. S. Steel’s expectation that rates will achieve this level in future periods.
For its other benefits plan assets, U. S. Steel employs a liability driven investment strategy. The plan assets are allocated to match the plan cash flows with maturing investments. To achieve this strategy, U. S. Steel has a target allocation for plan assets of 90 percent in high quality domestic bonds with the balance primarily invested in equity securities. U. S. Steel will use a 4.25 percent assumed rate of return on assets for the development of net periodic cost for its other benefits plans. The 2018 assumed rate of return has been conservatively set, taking into account the intended asset mix.
The expected long-term rate of return on plan assets is applied to the market value of assets as of the beginning of the period less expected benefit payments and considering any planned contributions.
To determine the discount rate used to measure our pension and other benefit obligations in 2016 and prior years, the discount rate for our U.S. plans was determined by utilizing several AAA and AA corporate bond indices as an indication of interest rate movements and levels. In 2017, we refined our discount rate determination process for our U.S. plans by using a bond matching approach to select specific bonds that would satisfy our projected benefit payments. At December 31, 2017, the discount rate used for our pension and other benefit obligations was determined to be 4.00 percent and 4.03 percent, respectively, compared to the discount rate used of 4.00 percent and 4.00 percent, respectively,
62
at December 31, 2016. The discount rate reflects the current rate at which we estimate the pension and other benefits liabilities could be effectively settled at the measurement date.
At December 31, 2017, due to recent experience study on plan retirees, the Company updated the mortality assumptions used to calculate its main U.S. defined benefit pension and other post-employment benefit liabilities. As a result of this change in mortality assumptions, our projected benefit obligations have increased by $194 million and $42 million for pension and other benefits, respectively. However, this increase was more than offset by strong asset returns and a voluntary contribution of $75 million to our main domestic pension plan in 2017. As a result, the funded status of our pension and other benefit plans improved by $357 million and $111 million, respectively.
U. S. Steel reviews its actual historical rate experience and expectations of future health care cost trends to determine the escalation of per capita health care costs under U. S. Steel’s benefit plans. Approximately three quarters of our costs for the domestic United Steelworkers (USW) participants’ retiree health benefits in the Company’s main domestic benefit plan are limited to a per capita dollar maximum calculation based on 2006 base year actual costs incurred under the main U. S. Steel benefit plan for USW participants (cost cap). The full effect of the cost cap is expected to be realized around 2024. After 2024, the Company’s costs for a majority of USW retirees and their dependents are expected to remain fixed and as a result, the cost impact of health care escalation for the Company is projected to be limited for this group (See Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). For measurement of its domestic retiree medical plans where health care cost escalation is applicable, U. S. Steel has assumed an initial escalation rate of 7.0 percent for 2018. This rate is assumed to decrease gradually to an ultimate rate of 5.0 percent in 2022 and remain at that level thereafter.
Net periodic pension cost, including multiemployer plans, is expected to total approximately $135 million in 2018 compared to $109 million in 2017. Excluding the settlement, termination and curtailment losses totaling $7 million in 2017, the increase in expected expense in 2018 is primarily due to lower expected return on assets and updates to the mortality assumption, partially offset by the impact of above expected asset returns for 2017. Total other benefits costs in 2018 are expected to be approximately $60 million, compared to $78 million in 2017. The decrease in expense in 2018 is primarily a result of the higher expected return on assets assumption.
A sensitivity analysis of the projected incremental effect of a hypothetical one percentage point change in the significant assumptions used in the pension and other benefits calculations is provided in the following table:
Hypothetical Rate Increase (Decrease) | ||||||||
(In millions) | 1% | (1)% | ||||||
Expected return on plan assets | ||||||||
Incremental (decrease) increase in: | ||||||||
Net periodic pension costs for 2018 | $ | (72 | ) | $ | 72 | |||
Discount rate | ||||||||
Incremental (decrease) increase in: | ||||||||
Net periodic pension & other benefits costs for 2018 | $ | (8 | ) | $ | 6 | |||
Pension & other benefits obligations at December 31, 2017 | $ | (743 | ) | $ | 885 | |||
Health care cost escalation trend rates | ||||||||
Incremental increase (decrease) in: | ||||||||
Other post-employment benefit obligations | $ | 99 | $ | (85 | ) | |||
Service and interest costs components for 2018 | $ | 5 | $ | (4 | ) | |||
Changes in the assumptions for expected annual return on plan assets and the discount rate used for accounting purposes do not impact the funding calculations used to derive minimum funding requirements for the pension plan. However, the discount rate required for minimum funding purposes is also based on corporate bond related indices and as such, the same general sensitivity concepts as above can be applied to increases or decreases to the funding obligations of the plans assuming the same hypothetical rate changes. (See Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion regarding legislation enacted in November of 2015 that impacts the discount rate used for funding purposes.) For further cash flow discussion see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Financial Condition, Cash Flows and Liquidity – Liquidity.”
63
Long-lived assets – U. S. Steel evaluates long-lived assets, primarily property, plant and equipment for impairment whenever changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of those productive assets exceed their recoverable amount as determined by the asset group's projected undiscounted cash flows. We evaluate the impairment of long-lived assets at the asset group level. Our primary asset groups are Flat-Rolled, welded tubular, seamless tubular and U. S. Steel Europe (USSE). During 2017, there were no triggering events that required long-lived assets to be evaluated for impairment. During 2016, the permanent shutdown of certain Lorain, Lone Star and Bellville tubular assets was considered a triggering event for our welded and seamless tubular asset groups. U. S. Steel completed a quantitative analysis of its long-lived assets for these asset groups within the Tubular segment, and determined that the remaining assets were not impaired. The welded tubular asset group had a carrying value of $410 million at December 31, 2016 and the recoverable amount exceeded this carrying value by approximately $93 million, or 23 percent. The seamless tubular asset group had a carrying value of $210 million at December 31, 2016 and the recoverable amount exceeded this carrying value by $220 million, or 106 percent. The key assumption used to estimate the recoverable amounts for both the welded and seamless tubular asset groups was the forecasted price of oil over the 11-year average remaining useful lives of the assets within the asset groups. Management will continue to monitor market and economic conditions for triggering events that may warrant further review of long-lived assets.
Taxes – U. S. Steel records a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to 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 that some portion, or all, of a deferred tax asset will not be realized. Each quarter U. S. Steel analyzes the likelihood that our deferred tax assets will be realized.
At December 31, 2015, it was determined that a valuation allowance against our entire net domestic deferred tax asset was required. As a result, U. S. Steel recorded a non-cash charge to tax expense. This determination, which is evaluated each quarter, was based upon the following forms of negative evidence concerning U. S. Steel's ability to use some or all of its domestic deferred tax assets:
• | U. S. Steel's domestic operations had generated significant losses in recent years and there was uncertainty regarding the Company's ability to generate domestic income in the near term, |
• | some of our domestic deferred tax assets were carryforwards, which have expiration dates, and |
• | the global steel industry was experiencing global overcapacity, which was driving adverse economic conditions, |
including depressed selling prices for steel products and increased foreign steel imports into the U.S.
Most positive evidence can be categorized into one of the four sources of taxable income sequentially. These are (from least to most subjective):
• | taxable income in prior carryback years, if carryback is permitted |
• | future reversal of existing taxable temporary differences |
• | tax planning strategies, and |
• | future taxable income exclusive of reversing temporary differences and carryforwards |
U. S. Steel utilized all available carrybacks, and therefore, our analysis at December 31, 2015 focused on the other sources of taxable income. Our projection of the reversal of our existing temporary differences generated significant taxable income. This source of taxable income, however, was not sufficient to project full utilization of U. S. Steel’s domestic deferred tax assets. To assess the realizability of the remaining domestic deferred tax assets, U. S. Steel analyzed its prudent and feasible tax planning strategies.
At December 31, 2015, after weighing all the positive and negative evidence, U. S. Steel determined that it was more likely than not that the net domestic deferred tax asset (excluding a deferred tax liability with an indefinite life) may not be realized. As a result, U. S. Steel recorded a valuation allowance of $804 million.
At December 31, 2016, the valuation allowance was increased by $305 million due to an increase in the net domestic deferred tax asset.
At December 31, 2017, after weighing all the positive and negative evidence, U. S. Steel determined that it was still more likely than not that the net domestic deferred tax asset (excluding a deferred tax asset related to refundable alternative minimum tax (AMT) credits and a deferred tax liability related to an asset with an indefinite life) may not be realized. The valuation allowance was decreased by $505 million due to the reduction in the corporate income tax rate pursuant to the Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017 (the 2017 Act) and current year activity. U. S. Steel will continue to monitor the realizability of its deferred tax assets on a quarterly basis. In the future, if we determine that realization is
64
more likely than not for deferred tax assets with a valuation allowance, the related valuation allowance will be reduced and we will record a non-cash benefit to earnings.
At the end of both 2017 and 2016, U. S. Steel did not have any undistributed foreign earnings and profits for which U.S. deferred taxes have not been provided.
U. S. Steel records liabilities for uncertain tax positions. These liabilities are based on management’s judgment of the risk of loss for items that have been or may be challenged by taxing authorities. If U. S. Steel determines that tax-related items would not be considered uncertain tax positions or that items previously not considered to be potential uncertain tax positions could be considered potential uncertain tax positions (as a result of an audit, court case, tax ruling or other authoritative tax position), an adjustment to the liability would be recorded through income in the period such determination was made.
Environmental remediation – U. S. Steel has been identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at seven sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) as of December 31, 2017. Of these, there are two sites where information requests have been received or there are other indications that U. S. Steel may be a PRP under CERCLA, but where sufficient information is not presently available to confirm the existence of liability or to make a reasonable estimate with respect to any potential liabilities. There are also 19 additional sites where U. S. Steel may be liable for remediation costs in excess of $100,000 under other environmental statutes, both federal and state, or where private parties are seeking to impose liability on U. S. Steel for remediation costs through discussions or litigation. At many of these sites, U. S. Steel is one of a number of parties involved and the total cost of remediation, as well as U. S. Steel’s share, is frequently dependent upon the outcome of ongoing investigations and remedial studies. U. S. Steel accrues for environmental remediation activities when the responsibility to remediate is probable and the amount of associated costs is reasonably determinable. As environmental remediation matters proceed toward ultimate resolution or as remediation obligations arise, charges in excess of those previously accrued may be required.
Consistent with the prior year, U. S. Steel's accrual for environmental liabilities for U.S. and international facilities as of December 31, 2017 was $179 million. These amounts exclude liabilities related to asset retirement obligations, disclosed in Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
U. S. Steel is the subject of, or a 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. The ultimate resolution of these contingencies could, individually or in the aggregate, be material to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
For discussion of relevant environmental items, see “Part I. Item 3. Legal Proceedings—Environmental Proceedings.”
Segments
U. S. Steel has three reportable segments: Flat-Rolled Products (Flat-Rolled), USSE and Tubular Products (Tubular). The results of our railroad and real estate businesses that do not constitute reportable segments are combined and disclosed in the Other Businesses category.
The Flat-Rolled segment includes the operating results of U. S. Steel’s integrated steel plants and equity investees in North America involved in the production of slabs, strip mill plates, sheets and tin mill products, as well as all iron ore and coke production facilities in the United States. These operations primarily serve North American customers in the service center, conversion, transportation (including automotive), construction, container, and appliance and electrical markets. Additionally, the Flat-Rolled segment consists of the following three commercial entities to specifically address our customers and service their needs: (1) automotive solutions, (2) consumer solutions, and (3) industrial, service center and mining solutions.
Flat-Rolled has historically supplied steel rounds and hot-rolled bands to Tubular. In the third quarter of 2015, the blast furnace and associated steelmaking operations, along with most of the flat-rolled finishing operations at Fairfield Works were shutdown. Therefore, Flat-Rolled is currently not supplying rounds to Tubular, and will not in the future.
The USSE segment includes the operating results of U. S. Steel Košice (USSK), U. S. Steel’s integrated steel plant and coke production facilities in Slovakia, and its subsidiaries. USSE primarily serves customers in the Eastern European construction, service center, conversion, container, transportation (including automotive), appliance and electrical, and oil, gas and petrochemical markets. USSE produces and sells slabs, sheet, strip mill plate, tin mill products and spiral welded pipe, as well as heating radiators and refractory ceramic materials.
65
The Tubular segment includes the operating results of U. S. Steel’s tubular production facilities, in the United States, and equity investees in the United States and Brazil. Our ownership interest in the equity investment in Brazil was sold in December of 2017. These operations produce and sell seamless and electric resistance welded (ERW) steel casing and tubing (commonly known as oil country tubular goods or OCTG), standard and line pipe and mechanical tubing and primarily serve customers in the oil, gas and petrochemical markets. In March 2017, U. S. Steel made the strategic decision to permanently shutdown the Lorain No. 6 Quench & Temper Mill and relocate the equipment. During the fourth quarter of 2016, certain of our tubular assets within the Tubular segment were permanently shut down, including Pipe Mill #1 at our Lone Star facility, Pipe Mill #4 at our Lorain facility and our Bellville facility, as a result of the challenging market conditions for tubular products. Additionally, we sold the assets at our McKeesport tubular operations in 2016.
For further information, see Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Net Sales
Net Sales by Segment
(Dollars in millions, excluding intersegment sales) | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Flat-Rolled | $ | 8,297 | $ | 7,507 | $ | 8,293 | ||||||
USSE | 2,949 | 2,243 | 2,323 | |||||||||
Tubular | 944 | 449 | 898 | |||||||||
Total sales from reportable segments | 12,190 | 10,199 | 11,514 | |||||||||
Other Businesses | 60 | 62 | 60 | |||||||||
Net sales | $ | 12,250 | $ | 10,261 | $ | 11,574 | ||||||
66
Management’s analysis of the percentage change in net sales for U. S. Steel’s reportable business segments is set forth in the following tables:
Year Ended December 31, 2017 versus Year December 31, 2016
Steel Products(a) | ||||||||||||||||||
Volume | Price | Mix | FX(b) | Coke, Pellets & Other(c) | Net Change | |||||||||||||
Flat-Rolled | (3 | )% | 26 | % | (16 | )% | — | % | 4 | % | 11 | % | ||||||
USSE | 2 | % | 26 | % | — | % | 2 | % | 1 | % | 31 | % | ||||||
Tubular | 74 | % | 13 | % | 17 | % | — | % | 6 | % | 110 | % | ||||||
(a) | Excludes intersegment sales |
(b) | Foreign currency translation effects |
(c) | Includes sales of scrap inventory |
The increase in sales for the Flat-Rolled segment primarily reflected higher average realized prices (increase of $60 per net ton) as a result of improved market conditions, notably for hot-rolled products, that resulted in spot price increases in 2017 as well as price increases for both market-based and firm priced contracts from 2016 to 2017, and sales also increased due to a favorable impact from higher third-party pellet sales. These increases were partially offset by a lower value product mix and decreased shipments (decrease of 207 thousand net tons).
The increase in sales for the USSE segment was primarily due to higher average realized euro-based prices (increase of €115 per net ton) as a result of lower imports and increased shipments (increase of 89 thousand net tons).
The increase in sales from 2016 to 2017 for the Tubular segment primarily reflected increased shipments (increase of 288 thousand net tons), a favorable impact on product mix as a result of increased shipments of seamless tubular products, and higher average realized prices (increase of $182 per net ton) as a result of improved market conditions.
Year Ended December 31, 2016 versus Year Ended December 31, 2015
Steel Products(a) | ||||||||||||||||||
Volume | Price | Mix | FX(b) | Coke, Pellets & Other(c) | Net Change | |||||||||||||
Flat-Rolled | (4 | )% | (3 | )% | — | % | — | % | (2 | )% | (9 | )% | ||||||
USSE | 3 | % | (5 | )% | (1 | )% | — | % | — | % | (3 | )% | ||||||
Tubular | (27 | )% | (24 | )% | 2 | % | — | % | (1 | )% | (50 | )% | ||||||
(a) | Excludes intersegment sales |
(b) | Foreign currency translation effects |
(c) | Includes sales of scrap inventory |
The decrease in sales for the Flat-Rolled segment primarily reflected lower shipments (decrease of 501 thousand net tons, which includes the reduction in shipments due to the permanent shutdown of Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations, as well as operational issues across our Flat-Rolled facilities) and lower average realized prices (decrease of $29 per net ton) as a result of market conditions, including high import levels, which have served to reduce shipment volumes and depress both spot and contract prices. In the second half of 2016 we experienced unplanned outages at several of our steelmaking and finishing facilities and our operating configuration in 2016 extended the time it took to recover volumes from unplanned outages.
The decrease in sales for the USSE segment was primarily due to lower average realized euro-based prices (decrease of €28 per net ton), partially offset by an increase in shipments (increase of 139 thousand net tons).
The decrease in sales from 2015 to 2016 for the Tubular segment primarily reflected lower shipments (decrease of 193 thousand net tons) and lower average realized prices (decrease of $393 per net ton) as a result of reduced drilling activity caused by low crude oil prices and continued high import levels.
Operating Expenses
67
Union profit-sharing costs
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Allocated to segment results | $ | 35 | $ | 3 | $ | — | ||||||
Effective January 1, 2016, profit-based amounts per the 2015 Labor Agreements are calculated and paid on a quarterly basis as a percentage of consolidated earnings (loss) before interest and income taxes based on 7.5 percent of profit between $10 and $50 per ton and 15 percent of profit above $50 per ton (10 percent of profit above $50 per ton in prior periods).
The amounts above represent profit-sharing amounts paid to active USW-represented employees and are included in cost of sales on the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
Pension and other benefits costs
Defined benefit and multiemployer pension plan costs totaled $109 million in 2017, $106 million in 2016 and $291 million during 2015. Plan costs in 2017, 2016 and 2015 included $7 million, $13 million and $35 million of settlement and curtailment costs, respectively. Excluding these costs, the $9 million increase from 2016 to 2017 is primarily due to lower expected return on assets, updates to the mortality assumption and unfavorable retirement experience. U. S. Steel calculates its market-related value of assets such that investment gains or losses as compared to expected returns are recognized over a three-year period. To the extent that deferred gains and losses on plan assets are not yet reflected in this calculated value, the amounts do not impact expected asset returns or the net actuarial gains or losses subject to amortization within the net periodic pension expense calculation. (See Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.)
In November 2015, pension stabilization legislation further extended a revised interest rate formula to be used to measure defined benefit pension obligations for calculating minimum annual contributions. The new interest rate formula results in higher interest rates for minimum funding calculations as compared to prior law over the next few years, which will improve the funded status of our main defined benefit pension plan and reduce minimum required contributions. In 2017, the Company made a voluntary contribution of $75 million to the U. S. Steel Retirement Plan Trust, which is the funding vehicle for the Company's main defined benefit pension plan. Historically, U. S. Steel has made voluntary contributions to our main U.S. defined benefit plan, including a voluntary stock contribution of $100 million in 2016. U. S. Steel will monitor the status of the plan to determine when voluntary contributions may be prudent to mitigate potentially larger mandatory contributions in later years.
Costs related to defined contribution plans totaled $42 million during 2017, 2016 and 2015.
Other benefits (income), which are included in earnings (loss) before interest and income taxes, totaled $78 million in 2017, $(5) million in 2016 and $(40) million in 2015. The $83 million increase in expense from 2016 to 2017 is primarily due to lower return on assets assumptions as a result of actions taken in 2016 to de-risk the OPEB plan. For additional information on pensions and other benefits, see Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Selling, general and administrative expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses were $375 million in 2017, $255 million in 2016 and $415 million in 2015. The increase from 2016 to 2017 is primarily related to higher pension and other benefit costs, as discussed above. The decrease from 2015 to 2016 is primarily related to lower pension costs, primarily due to the freezing of benefit accruals for non-represented participants effective December 31, 2015 and the natural maturation of our pension plans, offset by better asset performance, as well as impacts from Company-wide headcount reductions.
Operating configuration adjustments
Over the past three years, the Company has adjusted its operating configuration in response to challenging market conditions as a result of global overcapacity and unfair trade practices by indefinitely and temporarily idling production at certain of its facilities.
As of December 31, 2017, the following facilities are temporarily idled:
Temporarily Idled:
68
Tubular Processing (idled in April 2015)
Granite City Works - Steelmaking Operations (idled in December 2015)
The carrying value of the long-lived assets associated with the temporarily idled facilities listed above total approximately $160 million.
Other Strategic Decisions
In March 2017, U. S. Steel made the strategic decision to permanently shutdown the Lorain No. 6 Quench & Temper Mill and relocate the equipment.
In December 2016, U. S. Steel made the strategic decision to permanently shutdown the Lorain #4 and Lone Star #1 pipe mills and the Bellville Tubular Operations after considering a number of factors, including challenging market conditions for tubular products, reduced rig counts, and high levels of unfairly traded imports.
U. S. Steel will continue to evaluate potential strategic and organizational opportunities, which may include the acquisition, divestiture or consolidation of assets. Given recent market conditions, the cyclicality of our industry, and the continued challenges faced by the Company, we are focused on strategically maintaining and spending cash (including capital investments under our asset revitalization program), in order to invest in areas consistent with our long-term strategy, and are considering various possibilities, including exiting lines of business and the sale of certain assets, that we believe would ultimately result in a stronger balance sheet and greater stockholder value. The Company will pursue opportunities based on its long-term strategy, and what the Board of Directors determines to be in the best interests of the Company's stockholders at the time.
Better operating performance in our Flat-Rolled segment, coupled with relatively stable market conditions during 2017, have resulted in improved segment results in recent quarters. As we continue with the implementation of our asset revitalization program, described below, and increase investment in our facilities, we expect the sustainable improvements in safety, quality, delivery and costs we are targeting to position us to succeed over the long term, and support future growth initiatives.
Asset Revitalization
As part of our long-term strategy, the Board of Directors has approved a $2 billion multi-year asset revitalization program focused on our Flat-Rolled segment. The program is structured over four years, and involves capital investments totaling approximately $1.5 billion. Management evaluated performance in the key industries we serve, and developed projects across multiple Flat-Rolled segment assets with a focus on continuous improvement in safety, quality, delivery and cost. The Company views this program as essential to improving predictability and our ability to compete effectively in the industry. As we revitalize our assets, we expect to increase profitability, productivity, and operational stability, and reduce volatility.
The asset revitalization program includes projects to address short-term operational and maintenance enhancements as well as larger initiatives. The projects vary in scope and cost. The investments specifically address issues that are critical to delivering quality products to our customers in a timely manner.
The identified projects and schedule may change to address our customers’ needs, current and future economic operating conditions, and risks identified in the production cycle. Through the multi-year asset revitalization program, we expect to make total capital investments of $1.5 billion, which consist of capital investments in our iron making facilities, steel making facilities, hot rolling facilities, and finishing facilities. The Company plans to fund the program through cash generated from operations and cash on hand.
Our total capital expenditures for 2017 were $505 million, which includes $249 million for the Company’s asset revitalization program.
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
Depreciation, depletion and amortization expenses were $501 million in 2017, $507 million in 2016 and $547 million in 2015. Depreciation expense in 2017 was consistent with 2016 depreciation expense. The decrease from 2015 to 2016 is primarily related to the write-off of assets as a result of the permanent shutdown of the Fairfield Flat-Rolled Operations in 2015.
69
Earnings from investees
Earnings from investees was $44 million in 2017, $98 million in 2016 and $38 million in 2015. The decrease from 2016 to 2017 is primarily due to decreased earnings from our joint venture finishing and mining affiliates. The increase from 2015 to 2016 is primarily due to increased earnings from our joint venture mining affiliates, partially offset by a $12 million impairment charge for an equity investee.
Restructuring and Other Charges
During 2017, U. S. Steel recorded net restructuring charges of approximately $31 million, which consists of charges of $37 million primarily related to the permanent shutdown and relocation of the No. 6 Quench & Temper Mill at Lorain Tubular Operations and a favorable adjustment of $6 million primarily associated with a change in estimate for previously recorded costs for environmental obligations and Company-wide headcount reductions. Cash payments were made related to severance and exit costs of $32 million.
During 2016, U. S. Steel recorded net restructuring charges of approximately $122 million, which consists of: (1) charges of $124 million related to the permanent shutdown of the Lorain #4, Lone Star #1 and Bellville pipe mills within our Tubular segment; (2) charges of $24 million for Company-wide headcount reductions, including within our Flat-Rolled, Tubular and USSE segments; and (3) a favorable adjustment of $26 million primarily associated with a change in estimate for previously recorded costs for Company-wide headcount reductions. Cash payments were made related to severance and exit costs of $79 million.
Charges for restructuring and ongoing cost reduction initiatives are recorded in the period U. S. Steel commits to a restructuring or cost reduction plan, or executes specific actions contemplated by the plan and all criteria for liability recognition have been met. Charges related to the restructuring and cost reductions are reported in restructuring and other charges in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Company has realized actual cash savings of approximately $300 million related to restructuring efforts through December 31, 2017.
Gain and loss associated with U. S. Steel Canada Inc.
USSC, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of U. S. Steel, applied for relief from its creditors pursuant to CCAA in September of 2014. Subsequent to the CCAA filing, U. S. Steel's management continued to assess the recoverability of the Company's retained interest in USSC. During 2015, management's estimate of the recoverable retained interest was updated as a result of economic conditions impacting the steel industry in North America such as lower prices, elevated levels of imports, the strength of the U.S. dollar and depressed steel company valuations as well as the uncertainty of the ultimate outcome of USSC’s CCAA filing. As a result, a pre-tax charge was recognized during the fourth quarter of 2015, bringing the total charge to $392 million for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.
On June 30, 2017, U. S. Steel completed the restructuring and disposition of USSC through a sale and transfer of all of the issued and outstanding shares in USSC to an affiliate of Bedrock. In accordance with the Second Amended and Restated Plan of Compromise, Arrangement and Reorganization, approved by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on June 9, 2017, U. S. Steel received approximately $127 million in satisfaction of its secured claims, including interest, which resulted in a gain of $72 million on the Company's retained interest in USSC. U. S. Steel also agreed to the discharge and cancellation of its unsecured claims for nominal consideration. The terms of the settlement also included mutual releases among key stakeholders, including a release of all claims against the Company regarding environmental, pension and other liabilities.
70
Earnings (loss) before interest and income taxes by Segment (a)