FCX, §1A diff (2017 → 2018)

Item 1A. Risk Factors. This report contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of United States (U.S.) federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements are all statements other than statements of historical facts, such as projections or expectations relating to ore grades and milling rates; production and sales volumes; unit net cash costs; operating cash flows; capital expenditures; our expectations regarding our share of PT Freeport Indonesia’s (PT-FI) future cash flows through 2022; PT-FI’s development, financing, construction and completion of a new smelter in Indonesia; exploration efforts and results; development and production activities, rates and costs; liquidity; tax rates; supply of and demand for, and the impact of, copper, gold and molybdenum price changes; the impact of deferred intercompany profits on earnings; reserve estimates; future dividend payments; and share purchases and sales. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements. We caution readers that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated, expected, projected or assumed in the forward-looking statements. Important factors that can cause our actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements include the following: Financial risks Fluctuations in the market prices of copper, gold and molybdenum have caused and may continue to cause significant volatility in our financial performance and in the trading prices of our debt and common stock. Extended declines in the market prices of copper, gold and, to a lesser extent, molybdenum could adversely affect our earnings, cash flows and asset values and, if sustained, may adversely affect our ability to repay debt. Our financial results will vary with fluctuations in the market prices of the commodities we produce, primarily copper and gold, and to a lesser extent molybdenum. An extended decline in market prices of these commodities could have a material adverse effect on our financial results, the value of our assets and/or our ability to repay our debt and meet our other fixed obligations; and may depress the trading prices of our common stock and of our publicly traded debt securities. Additionally, if market prices for our primary commodities decline for a sustained period of time, we may have to revise our operating plans, including curtailing production, reducing operating costs and capital expenditures and discontinuing certain exploration and development programs. We may be unable to decrease our costs in an amount sufficient to offset reductions in revenues, in which case we may incur losses, and those losses may be material. Fluctuations in commodities prices are caused by varied and complex factors beyond our control, including global supply and demand balances and inventory levels; global economic and political conditions; international regulatory, trade and tax policies, including national tariffs; commodities investment activity and speculation; interest rates; the strength of the U.S. dollar compared to foreign currencies; the price and availability of substitute products; and changes in technology. Volatility in global economic growth, particularly in developing economies, has the potential to adversely affect future demand and prices for commodities. Geopolitical uncertainty and protectionism, including the United Kingdom’s plans to exit from the European Union (commonly referred to as Brexit), have the potential to inhibit international trade and negatively impact business confidence, which creates the risk of constraints on our ability to trade in certain markets and has the potential to increase price volatility. Copper prices may be affected by demand from China, which has become the largest consumer of refined copper in the world, and by changes in demand for industrial, commercial and residential products containing copper. Rising trade tensions between the U.S. and China and efforts by the Chinese government to reduce debt levels contributed to a recent slowdown in China’s growth. A continued slowing in China’s economic growth and demand and continued trade tensions between the U.S. and China could result in lower copper prices which could have a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations, including cash flow. The adoption and expansion of trade restrictions, changes in the state of China-U.S. relations, including the current trade war, or other governmental action related to tariffs or trade agreements or policies are difficult to predict and could adversely affect demand for our products, our costs, our customers, our suppliers, and the U.S. economy, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or financial condition. Copper prices have fluctuated historically, with London Metal Exchange (LME) copper settlement prices ranging from $1.96 per pound to $3.29 per pound during the three years ended December 31, 2018. LME copper settlement prices averaged $2.96 per pound in 2018, $2.80 per pound in 2017 and $2.21 per pound in 2016. The LME copper settlement price was $2.71 per pound on December 31, 2018, and $2.79 per pound on January 31, 2019. Factors affecting gold prices may include the relative strength of the U.S. dollar to other currencies, inflation and interest rate expectations, purchases and sales of gold by governments and central banks, demand from China and India, two of the world’s largest consumers of gold, and global demand for jewelry containing gold. The London PM gold price averaged $1,268 per ounce in 2018, $1,257 per ounce in 2017 and $1,250 per ounce in 2016. The London PM gold price was $1,279 per ounce on December 28, 2018 (there was no London PM gold price quote on December 31, 2018), and $1,323 per ounce on January 31, 2019. The Metals Week Molybdenum Dealer Oxide weekly average price averaged $11.93 per pound in 2018, $8.21 per pound in 2017 and $6.47 per pound in 2016. The Metals Week Molybdenum Dealer Oxide weekly average price was $11.88 per pound on December 31, 2018, and $10.95 per pound on January 31, 2019. Declines in prices of commodities we sell could result in metals inventory adjustments and impairment charges for our long-lived assets. Other events that could result in impairment of our long-lived assets include, but are not limited to, decreases in estimated proven and probable mineral reserves and any event that might have a material adverse effect on current and future expected mine production costs. Our debt and other financial commitments may limit our financial and operating flexibility. At December 31, 2018, our total consolidated debt was $11.1 billion (see Note 8) and our total consolidated cash was $4.2 billion. We also have various other financial commitments, including reclamation and environmental obligations, take-or-pay contracts and leases. For further information, refer to the risk factor below relating to mine closure and reclamation regulations and plugging and abandonment obligations related to our remaining oil and gas properties. Our level of indebtedness and other financial commitments could have important consequences to our business, including the following: • Limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in the industry in which we operate; • Increasing our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions; • Limiting our ability to fund future working capital, capital expenditures and/or material contingencies, to engage in future development activities, or to otherwise realize the value of our assets and opportunities fully because of the need to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flows from operations to payments on our debt; • Requiring us to sell assets to reduce debt; or • Placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less debt and/or fewer financial commitments. Any failure to comply with the financial and other covenants in our debt agreements may result in an event of default that would allow the creditors to accelerate maturities of the related debt, which in turn may trigger cross-acceleration or cross-default provisions in other debt agreements. Our available cash and liquidity may not be sufficient to fully repay borrowings under our debt instruments that are accelerated upon an event of default. From August 2015 through November 2016, we sold 326.5 million shares of our common stock under registered at-the-market equity programs, which generated $3.5 billion in gross proceeds (refer to Note 10). In addition, during 2016, we issued 48.1 million shares of our common stock in connection with the settlement of two drilling rig contracts (refer to Note 13) and 27.7 million shares of our common stock in exchange for $369 million of FCX senior notes (refer to Note 10). Any additional issuance of equity capital to fund operations, reduce debt, improve our financial position or for other purposes, may have a negative impact on our stock price. As of January 31, 2019, our senior unsecured debt was rated “BB“ with a stable outlook by Standard & Poor’s (S&P), “BB+” with a negative outlook by Fitch Ratings (Fitch), and “Ba2” with a stable outlook by Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s). There is no assurance that our credit ratings will not be downgraded in the future. Certain of our debt agreements, including our revolving credit facility, use the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) as a reference rate. In July 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, announced that it intends to phase out LIBOR by the end of 2021. If LIBOR is unavailable after 2021, our debt with interest rates that are indexed to LIBOR will be determined using various alternative methods to the extent provided for in our agreements, which could result in increases in interest rates on such debt. Further, we may need to renegotiate our debt agreements and the loans that utilize LIBOR to replace LIBOR with the new standard that is established by the U.S. Alternative Rate Reference Committee, which is currently expected to be the Secured Overnight Bank Financing Rate. Mine closure and reclamation regulations impose substantial costs on our operations and include requirements that we provide financial assurance supporting those obligations. We also have plugging and abandonment obligations related to our remaining oil and gas properties, and are required to provide bonds or other forms of financial assurance in connection with those properties. Changes in or the failure to comply with these requirements could have a material adverse effect on us. We are required by U.S. federal and state laws and regulations to provide financial assurance sufficient to allow a third party to implement approved closure and reclamation plans for our mining properties if we are unable to do so. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state agencies may also require financial assurance for investigation and remediation actions that are required under settlements of enforcement actions under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) or similar state laws. Refer to Note 12 for additional information regarding our financial assurance obligations. With respect to our mining operations, most of our financial assurance obligations are imposed by state laws that vary significantly by jurisdiction, depending on how each state regulates land use and groundwater quality. Although Section 108(b) of CERCLA has required EPA to identify classes of facilities that must establish evidence of financial responsibility since CERCLA was adopted in 1980, currently, there are no financial assurance requirements for active mining operations under CERCLA. In response to litigation initiated by several environmental organizations against EPA and a subsequent settlement, EPA proposed financial assurance regulations for the hard rock mining industry in January 2017, which were vigorously opposed by us and others in the mining industry. As proposed, the rules would have imposed financial responsibility obligations on U.S. hard rock mining operations that are unnecessary, duplicative of existing state and other federal requirements, and unreasonable. Our initial calculations suggested that the financial responsibility amounts would be difficult, if not impossible, for us and others to meet with corporate resources, and would be extremely expensive, if not impossible, to finance with third-party financial instruments such as letters of credit, bonds or insurance. In December 2017, EPA withdrew its proposed rules and in February 2018, EPA published its final decision that additional financial assurance regulations for the hard rock mining industry would not be needed given the existing state and federal regulatory programs that became effective in March 2018. In May 2018, environmental organizations filed a petition for review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. We and others in the mining industry intervened in the case. If the court remands the rule back to EPA for reconsideration, a re-proposal of rules similar in nature to EPA’s 2017 proposed rules would severely harm the international competitiveness of the U.S. hard rock mining industry and would materially and adversely affect our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. We are also subject to financial assurance requirements in connection with our remaining oil and gas properties under both state and federal laws, including financial responsibility required under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to cover containment and cleanup costs resulting from an oil spill. In 2016, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) issued revised requirements for lessees operating in federal waters to secure the cost of plugging, abandoning, decommissioning and/or removing wells, platforms and pipelines at the end of production. The revised requirements eliminate previously provided waivers from requirements to post security. In early 2017, the BOEM announced a delay in the implementation of certain aspects of the rules pending further review and in June 2017, BOEM further extended the start date for implementation indefinitely. This extension currently remains in effect. If implemented, the new requirements could require us to post security in the form of bonds or similar assurances. The cost for bonds or other forms of assurances can be substantial, and there is no assurance that they can be obtained in all cases. As of December 31, 2018, our financial assurance obligations totaled $1.2 billion for closure and reclamation/restoration costs of U.S. mining sites, and $0.5 billion for plugging and abandonment obligations of our remaining oil and gas properties. A substantial portion of our financial assurance obligations are satisfied by FCX and subsidiary guarantees and financial capability demonstrations. Our ability to continue to provide guarantees and financial capability demonstrations depends on state and other regulatory requirements, our financial performance and our financial condition. Other forms of assurance, such as letters of credit and surety bonds, are costly to provide and, depending on our financial condition and market conditions, may be difficult or impossible to obtain. Failure to provide the required financial assurance could result in the closure of the affected properties. Refer to Notes 1 and 12, for further discussion of our environmental and asset retirement obligations. Unanticipated litigation or negative developments in pending litigation or with respect to other contingencies could have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. We are involved in numerous legal proceedings and subject to other contingencies that have arisen or may arise in the ordinary course of our business or are associated with environmental issues, including those described in Note 12 and in Item 3. “Legal Proceedings” involving matters such as remediation, restoration and reclamation of environmental contamination, claims of personal injury or property damage arising from such contamination or from exposure to substances such as lead, arsenic, asbestos, talc and other allegedly toxic substances, disputes over water rights, and disputes with foreign governments or regulatory authorities over royalties, taxes, rights and obligations under concession or other agreements, or other matters. We are also involved periodically in other reviews, inquiries, investigations and other proceedings initiated by or involving government agencies, some of which may result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief. In addition, from time to time we are involved in disputes over the allocation of environmental remediation obligations at Superfund and other sites. The outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain and adverse developments or outcomes can result in significant monetary damages, penalties, other sanctions or injunctive relief against us, limitations on our property rights, or regulatory interpretations that increase our operating costs. Management does not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcome of any individual legal proceeding will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, although individual or cumulative outcomes could be material to our operating results for a particular period, depending on the nature and magnitude of the outcome and the operating results for the period. With respect to the asbestos and talc exposure cases described in Note 12, there has been a recent significant increase in the number of cases alleging the presence of asbestos contamination in talc-based personal care products and in cases alleging exposure to talc products that are not alleged to be contaminated with asbestos. In these cases, plaintiffs allege serious health risks and often fatal diseases, including mesothelioma and ovarian cancer, allegedly caused by long-term use of talc-based cosmetic and personal care products. Nationwide trial results in these cases have ranged from outright dismissals to very large jury awards of both compensatory and punitive damages. The primary targets have been the producers of those products, but defendants in many of these cases also include talc miners. Cyprus Amax Minerals Company (CAMC), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of FCX is one of those targets. One of CAMC’s wholly owned subsidiaries, Cyprus Mines Corporation, was involved in talc mining until 1992 when it exited that business. CAMC has contractual indemnification rights, subject to limited reservations, against the ultimate successor to the business, which has acknowledged those indemnification obligations and has taken responsibility for all cases tendered to it to date. However, on February 13, 2019, the indemnitor filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, and CAMC is in the very early stages of evaluating the potential implications of that filing. We may be adversely impacted by increased liabilities and costs related to our defined benefit pension plans. We sponsor two defined benefit pension plans for certain current and former employee in the U.S. and a few pension plans for non-U.S. locations which provide for specified payments after retirement. The major defined benefit pension plans are funded with trust assets invested in a diversified portfolio of securities and other investments. Changes in regulatory requirements or the market value of plan assets, investment returns, interest rates and mortality rates may affect the funded status of our defined benefit pension plans and cause volatility in the net periodic benefit cost, future funding requirements of the plans and the funded status as recorded on the balance sheet. A sustained period of low or insufficient returns could require us to fund our pension plans to a greater extent than anticipated. Refer to Note 9 for further discussion. International risks Our international operations are subject to political, economic, social and regional risks of doing business in countries outside the U.S. We are a U.S.-based mining company with substantial assets located outside of the U.S. We conduct international mining operations in Indonesia, Peru and Chile and exploration activities in various foreign jurisdictions. Accordingly, in addition to the usual risks associated with conducting business in countries outside the U.S., our business may be adversely affected by political, economic, social and regional uncertainties in each of these countries. Risks of conducting business in countries outside the U.S. include: • Delays in obtaining or renewing, or the inability to obtain, maintain or renew, or the renegotiation, cancellation, revocation or forced modification of existing contracts, leases, licenses, permits or other agreements and/or approvals; • Expropriation or nationalization of property, protectionism, restrictions on repatriation of earnings or capital, or other currency controls; • Changes in the host country’s laws, regulations and policies, including, but not limited to, those relating to labor, taxation, royalties, duties, tariffs, divestment, imports, exports (including restrictions on the export of copper concentrates, copper and/or gold), trade regulations, currency and environmental matters (including land use and water use), which because of rising “resource nationalism” in countries around the world, may impose increasingly onerous requirements on foreign operations and investment; • Political instability, bribery, extortion, corruption, civil unrest, acts of war, guerrilla activities, insurrection and terrorism; • Changes in the aspirations and expectations of local communities in which we operate with respect to our contributions to employee health and safety, infrastructure and community development and other factors that may affect our social license to operate, all of which lead to increased costs; • Risk of loss associated with trespass, local artisanal or illegal mining, theft and vandalism; • Changes in U.S. trade, tax, immigration or other policies that may harm relations with foreign countries or result in retaliatory policies, including the U.S.-China trade war that began in 2018 which, if prolonged, could have a significant adverse effect on global trade and the global economy; • Increases in training and other costs and challenges relating to requirements by governmental entities to employ the nationals of the country in which a particular operation is located; • Foreign exchange controls, fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates and inflation; and • The risk of having to submit to the jurisdiction of an international court or arbitration panel or having to enforce the judgment of an international court or arbitration panel against a sovereign nation within its own territory. Our insurance does not cover most losses caused by the above described risks. Accordingly, our exploration, development and production activities outside of the U.S. may be substantially affected by many unpredictable factors beyond our control, some of which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. Our international operations must comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws of the other jurisdictions in which we operate. There has been a substantial increase in the global enforcement of these laws in recent years. We operate in certain jurisdictions that have experienced governmental and private sector corruption to some degree, and, in certain circumstances, compliance with anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws and heightened expectations of enforcement authorities may be in tension with certain local customs and practices. There can be no assurance that our internal control policies and procedures will always protect us from misinterpretation of or noncompliance with applicable laws and internal policies, recklessness, fraudulent behavior, dishonesty or other inappropriate acts committed by our affiliates, employees, agents or contractors. As such, our corporate policies and processes may not prevent or detect all potential breaches of law or other governance practices. Any violation of those laws could result in significant criminal or civil fines and penalties, litigation, and loss of operating licenses or permits, and may damage our reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. We are involved in several significant tax proceedings and other tax disputes with Indonesian and Peruvian tax authorities (refer to Note 12 for further discussion of these matters). Other risks specific to certain countries in which we operate are discussed in more detail below. Because our mining operation in Indonesia is a significant operating asset, our business may be adversely affected by political, economic and social uncertainties in Indonesia. Our Indonesia mining operations include the Grasberg minerals district, one of the world’s largest copper and gold deposits. These operations are conducted by our subsidiary PT-FI pursuant to a special mining license (IUPK) issued by the Indonesian government on December 21, 2018, which replaced PT-FI’s former Contract of Work (COW) entered into in December 1991. Under the terms of the IUPK, PT-FI has been granted an extension of mining rights through 2031, with rights to extend its mining rights through 2041, subject to, among other things, PT-FI completing the construction of a new smelter in Indonesia by December 21, 2023, and fulfilling its defined fiscal obligations to the Indonesian government. Refer to Note 13 for a summary of the IUPK’s key fiscal terms. PT-FI has applied for a one-year extension of its export license, which currently expires on February 16, 2019. Export licenses are valid for one year periods, subject to review and approval by the Indonesian government every six months, depending on smelter construction progress. Maintaining a good working relationship with the Indonesian government is important because of the significance of our Indonesia operations to our business, and because our mining operations there are among Indonesia’s most significant business enterprises. The Grasberg minerals district has been designated by the Indonesian government as one of Indonesia’s vital national assets. Partially because of its significance to Indonesia’s economy, the environmentally sensitive area where it is located, and the number of people employed, our Indonesia operations have been the subject of political debates and of criticism in the Indonesian press, and have been the target of protests and occasional violence. Improper management of our working relationship with the Indonesian government could lead to a disruption of operations and/or impact our reputation in Indonesia and in the region where we operation, which could adversely affect our business. In addition, PT Indonesia Asahan Aluminium (Persero) (PT Inalum), a shareholder in PT-FI, is an Indonesian state-owned enterprise. Disputes between us and PT Inalum may result in litigation or arbitration, which could increase our expenses and distract our officers and directors from focusing their time and effort on our business. The Indonesian mining industry is subject to extensive regulation within Indonesia, and there have been major developments in laws and regulations applicable to mining concession holders, some of which have conflicted with PT-FI’s contractual rights in the past. In particular, the enactment of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Coal and Mineral Mining on January 12, 2009 (the Mining Law) replaced the previous regulatory framework which allowed concession holders, including PT-FI, to conduct mining activities in Indonesia under a contract of work system. The Mining Law, which sets out the regulatory framework for the mining industry in Indonesia, only contains substantive principles and leaves many specific issues to be addressed in implementing regulations, some of which have conflicted with PT-FI’s contractual rights in the past, including, but not limited to, regulations that imposed a progressive export duty on copper concentrate, restricted exports of copper concentrate and anode slimes, increased royalty rates, and required payment of a smelter assurance bond to support a commitment to construct a new smelter in Indonesia (refer to Note 13 for further discussion of the smelter assurance bond). In January 2017, PT-FI suspended exports through April 2017 in response to these Mining Law regulations. The Mining Law stipulated that previously granted mining rights (through a contract of work) would continue to be valid until expiry, subject to certain adjustments. PT-FI’s former COW was concluded pursuant to the 1967 Foreign Capital Investment Law, which provided basic guarantees of remittance rights and protection against nationalization, a framework for economic incentives and basic rules regarding other rights and obligations of foreign investors. The initial term of PT-FI’s former COW was scheduled to expire in 2021 and explicitly provided that it could be extended for two 10-year periods subject to Indonesian government approval, which could not be withheld or delayed unreasonably. Prior to the issuance of the IUPK to PT-FI in December 2018, PT-FI had been engaged in discussions with the Indonesian government since 2012 regarding various provisions of its former COW, including extending its term. Notwithstanding provisions in PT-FI’s former COW prohibiting it from doing so, the Indonesian government sought to modify PT-FI’s former COW to address provisions contained in the Mining Law and implementing regulations adopted thereunder, some of which were not required under or conflicted with PT-FI’s former COW, including, but not limited to (i) restrictions on PT-FI’s basic right to export mining products; (ii) imposition of additional export duties; (iii) imposition of excess surface water taxes (refer to Note 12); (iv) imposition of new requirement to build additional smelter capacity in Indonesia; (v) unreasonable withholding and delay in granting approval of two successive ten-year extensions of the term of the former COW; and (vi) imposition of new divestment requirements. We cannot assure you that future regulatory changes affecting the mining industry in Indonesia will not be introduced or unexpectedly repealed, or that new interpretations of existing laws and regulations will not be issued, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In 2019, Indonesia will hold national legislative elections. The presidential election will be held in April 2019, with a run-off in August 2019, if required. Political considerations leading up to these elections could affect the country’s policies pertaining to foreign investment, which could adversely affect our Indonesia mining operations. We will not mine all of PT-FI’s ore reserves in the Grasberg minerals district before the initial term of PT-FI’s IUPK expires in 2031 and the IUPK may not be extended through 2041 if PT-FI fails to abide by the terms and conditions of the IUPK and applicable laws and regulations. As discussed in the above risk factor, “Because our mining operation in Indonesia is a significant operating asset, our business may be adversely affected by political, economic and social uncertainties in Indonesia”, on December 21, 2018, PT-FI was granted a new IUPK to replace its former COW, enabling PT-FI to conduct operations in the Grasberg minerals district through 2041. Under the terms of the IUPK, PT-FI has been granted mining rights through 2031, with rights to extend its mining rights through 2041, subject to, among other things, PT-FI completing the construction of a new smelter in Indonesia by December 21, 2023, and fulfilling its defined fiscal obligations to the Indonesian government. Refer to Note 13 for a summary of the IUPK’s key fiscal terms. The IUPK also requires PT-FI to pay duties on concentrate exports of 5 percent, declining to 2.5 percent when smelter development progress exceeds 30 percent, and eliminated when smelter development progress exceeds 50 percent. Smelter development progress will be determined by an independent verifier appointed by the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (MEMR) and subject to approval by the MEMR. PT-FI is initiating front-end engineering and design and intends to pursue financing, commercial and potential partner arrangements for this project, which has a preliminary estimated capital cost in the $3 billion range. The economics of the new smelter will be borne by PT-FI’s shareholders according to their respective long-term share ownership percentages. PT-FI’s ability to raise and service significant new sources of capital will be a function of macroeconomic conditions, future market prices as well as PT-FI’s operational performance, cash flow and debt position, among other factors. Financing may not be available when needed or, if available, the terms of such financing may not be favorable to PT-FI. Our proven and probable ore reserves in Indonesia reflect estimates of minerals that can be recovered through the end of 2041, and PT-FI’s current long-term mine plan and planned operations are based on the assumption that PT-FI will abide by the terms and conditions of the IUPK and will be granted the 10-year extension from 2031 through 2041. As a result, we will not mine all of these ore reserves during the initial term of the IUPK. Prior to the end of 2031, we expect to mine 53 percent of aggregate proven and probable recoverable ore at December 31, 2018, representing 57 percent of our net equity share of recoverable copper reserves and 64 percent of our net equity share of recoverable gold reserves. If PT-FI does not complete the construction of a new smelter in Indonesia by December 21, 2023, or fulfill its defined fiscal obligations to the Indonesian government as set forth in the IUPK, the IUPK will likely not be extended from 2031 to 2041, and we would be unable to mine all of PT-FI’s ore reserves in the Grasberg minerals district, which would adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial position. Operational risks Our mining operations are subject to operational risks that could adversely affect our business and our underground mining operations can be particularly dangerous. Our mines are very large in scale and, by their nature are subject to significant operational risks, some of which are outside of our control, and many of which are not covered fully, or in some cases even partially, by insurance. These operational risks, which could materially and adversely affect our business, operating results and cash flow, include earthquakes, rainstorms, floods, and other natural disasters; equipment failures; accidents; wall failures and rock slides in our open-pit mines, and structural collapses of our underground mines or tailings impoundments; and lower than expected ore grades or recovery rates. Since late January 2019, our El Abra operation in Chile has experienced heavy rainfall and electrical storms, resulting in a suspension of operations since February 4, 2019. We have been unable to assess damages because of poor road conditions and inaccessible areas and we do not currently know when normal operations will resume. We estimate the impact on 2019 production will approximate 8 million pounds of copper through mid-February 2019, and additional impacts of approximately 600 thousand pounds of copper per day are expected until normal operations resume. Underground mining operations can be particularly dangerous, and in May 2013, a tragic accident, which resulted in 28 fatalities and 10 injuries, occurred at PT-FI when the rock structure above the ceiling of an underground training facility collapsed. PT-FI temporarily suspended mining and processing activities at the Grasberg complex to conduct inspections and resumed open-pit mining and concentrating activities in June 2013, and underground operations in July 2013. No assurance can be given that similar events will not occur in the future. In addition to the usual risks encountered in the mining industry, our Indonesia mining operations involve additional risks given that such operations are located in steep mountainous terrain in a remote area of Indonesia. These conditions have required us to overcome special engineering difficulties and develop extensive infrastructure facilities. The area also receives considerable rainfall, which has led to periodic floods and mudslides. Further, the mine site is also in an active seismic area and has experienced earth tremors from time to time. Our insurance may not sufficiently cover an unexpected natural or operating disaster. The waste rock (including overburden) and tailings produced in our mining operations represent our largest volume of waste material. Managing the volume of waste rock and tailings presents significant environmental, safety and engineering challenges and risks primarily relating to structural stability, geochemistry, water quality and dust generation. Management of this waste is regulated in the jurisdictions where we operate and our programs are designed to be in compliance with applicable national, state and local laws, permits and approved environmental impact studies. We maintain large leach pads and tailings impoundments containing viscous material, which are effectively large dams that must be engineered, constructed and monitored to ensure structural stability and avoid leakages or structural collapse. Our tailings impoundments in arid areas must have effective programs to suppress fugitive dust emissions, and we must effectively monitor and treat acid rock drainage at all of our operations. In Indonesia, we use a river transport system for tailings management, which presents other risks, as discussed below. We currently operate 19 tailings storage facilities and manage 55 that are inactive or have been reclaimed (approximately two-thirds of these have been reclaimed). The failure of tailings and other impoundments at any of our mining operations could cause severe, and in some cases catastrophic, property and environmental damage and loss of life, and we apply significant financial resources and both internal and external technical resources to the safe management of all those facilities. The importance of careful design, management and monitoring of large impoundments has been emphasized in recent years, including as recently as January 2019, by large scale tailings dam failures at unaffiliated mines, which resulted in numerous fatalities and caused extensive property and environmental damage. Our tailings management and stewardship program, which involves qualified external Engineers of Record and periodic oversight by independent External Tailings Review Boards at numerous operations, complies with the tailings governance framework on preventing catastrophic failure of tailings storage facilities adopted in December 2016 by the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) and required to be implemented by ICMM members. We continue to enhance our existing practices and work with ICMM members on additional initiatives to strengthen critical controls for the design, operation and closure of tailings storage facilities in an effort to reduce the risk of severe or catastrophic failure of tailings storage facilities but no assurance can be given that these events will not occur in the future. Labor unrest, violence, activism and civil and religious strife could disrupt our operations and may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. As of December 31, 2018, approximately 37 percent of our global labor force was covered by collective bargaining agreements and approximately 21 percent of our global labor force was covered by agreements that have expired and are currently being negotiated or will expire during 2019. Labor agreements are negotiated on a periodic basis, and may not be renewed on reasonably satisfactory terms to us or at all. If we do not successfully negotiate new collective bargaining agreements with our union workers, we may incur prolonged strikes and other work stoppages at our mining operations, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, if we enter into a new labor agreement with any union that significantly increases our labor costs relative to our competitors, our ability to compete may be materially and adversely affected. Refer to Items 1. and 2., “Business and Properties,” for additional information regarding labor matters, and expiration dates of such agreements. We could also experience labor disruptions such as work stoppages, work slowdowns, union organizing campaigns, strikes, or lockouts that could adversely affect our operations. For example, during third-quarter 2016, PT-FI experienced labor productivity issues and a 10-day work stoppage that began in late September 2016. These labor productivity issues continued during fourth-quarter 2016 and the first half of 2017. Beginning in mid-April 2017, PT-FI experienced a high level of worker absenteeism, which unfavorably impacted mining and milling rates. A significant number of employees and contractors elected to participate in an illegal strike action beginning in May 2017, and were subsequently deemed to have voluntarily resigned under existing Indonesian laws and regulations resulting in increased costs associated with employee severance. We cannot predict whether additional labor disruptions will occur. Significant reductions in productivity or protracted work stoppages at one or more of our operations could significantly reduce our production and sales volumes or disrupt operations, which could adversely affect our cash flow, results of operations and financial condition. Indonesia has long faced separatist movements and civil and religious strife in a number of provinces. Several separatist groups have sought increased political independence for the province of Papua, where our Grasberg minerals district is located. In Papua, there have been sporadic attacks on civilians by separatists and sporadic but highly publicized conflicts between separatists and the Indonesian military and police. In addition, illegal miners have periodically clashed with police who have attempted for years to move them away from our facilities. Social, economic and political instability in Papua could materially and adversely affect us if it results in damage to our property or interruption of our Indonesia operations. In 2009, a series of shooting incidents occurred within the PT-FI project area, including along the road leading to our mining and milling operations. The shooting incidents continued on a sporadic basis through January 2015. During this time, there were 20 fatalities and more than 50 injuries to our employees, contractor employees, government security personnel and civilians. The next shooting incident occurred in August 2017, and a series of shooting incidents continued on a sporadic basis within the PT-FI project area and in nearby areas through August 2018, resulting in two fatalities and 25 injuries. In December 2018, a mass shooting incident targeting a highway construction crew occurred in a remote mountain area approximately 100 miles east of the PT-FI project area, resulting in at least 19 fatalities and several reported as missing. PT-FI continues to monitor the situation in the region. The safety of our workforce is a critical concern, and PT-FI continues to work with the Indonesian government to address security issues within the PT-FI project area and in nearby areas. We continue to limit the use of the road leading to our mining and milling operations to secured convoys, including transport of personnel by armored vehicles in designated areas. We cannot predict whether additional incidents will occur that could disrupt or suspend our operations. If other disruptive incidents occur, they could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition in ways that we cannot predict at this time. Our mining operations depend on the availability of significant quantities of secure water supplies. Our mining operations require physical availability and secure legal rights to significant quantities of water for mining and ore processing activities, and related support facilities. Most of our North America and South America mining operations are in areas where competition for water supplies is significant. Continuous production at our mines is dependent on many factors, including our ability to maintain our water rights and claims, and the continuing physical availability of the water supplies. As discussed in Item 3 “Legal Proceedings”, in Arizona, where our operations use both surface and groundwater, we are a participant in an active general stream adjudication in which Arizona courts have been attempting, for over 40 years, to quantify and prioritize surface water claims for the Gila River, one of the state’s largest river systems. This stream adjudication primarily affects our Morenci, Safford and Sierrita mines. The adjudication is addressing the state law claims of thousands of competing users, including us, as well as significant federal water claims that are potentially adverse to the state law claims of both surface water and groundwater users. Groundwater is treated differently from surface water under Arizona law, which historically allowed landowners to pump subsurface water, subject only to the requirement of putting it to “reasonable use.” However, court decisions in the adjudication have concluded that some underground water constitutes “subflow” that is to be treated legally as surface water and is therefore subject to the Arizona doctrine of prior appropriation and subject to the adjudication and potentially unavailable to groundwater pumpers in the absence of valid surface water claims. Any re-characterization of groundwater as surface water could affect the ability of consumers, farmers, ranchers, municipalities, and industrial users like us to continue to access water supplies that have been relied on for decades. Because we are a user of both groundwater and surface water in Arizona, we are an active participant in the adjudication proceedings. Given the legal and technical complexity of these adjudications, their long history, and their long-term legal, economic and political implications, it is difficult to predict the timing or the outcome of these proceedings. If we are not able to satisfactorily resolve the issues being addressed in the adjudications, our ability to pump groundwater could be diminished or curtailed, and our operations at Morenci, Safford and Sierrita could be adversely affected unless we are able to acquire alternative resources. Water for our Cerro Verde operation in Peru comes from renewable sources through a series of storage reservoirs on the Rio Chili watershed that collects water primarily from seasonal precipitation. As a result of occasional drought conditions, temporary supply shortages are possible that could affect our Cerro Verde operations. Water for our El Abra mining operation in Chile comes from the continued pumping of groundwater from the Salar de Ascotán aquifer. In 2010, El Abra obtained regulatory approval for the continued pumping of groundwater from the Salar de Ascotán aquifer for its sulfide processing plant, which began operations in 2011. The agreement to pump from this aquifer is subject to continued monitoring of the aquifer level to ensure that environmentally sensitive areas are not impacted by our pumping. If impact occurs, we would have to reduce pumping to restore water levels, which could have an adverse effect on production from El Abra. Although we typically have sufficient water for our Indonesian operations (the area receives considerable rainfall that has led to periodic floods and mudslides), lower rainfall could affect our water supply availability from time to time. Although each of our mining operations currently has access to sufficient water supplies to support current operational demands, as discussed above some supplies are subject to adjudication proceedings, the outcome of which we cannot predict, and the availability of additional supplies that may be required for potential future expansions is uncertain. While we are taking actions to acquire additional back-up water supplies, such supplies may not be available at acceptable cost, or at all, so that the loss of a water right or currently available water supply could force us to curtail operations or force premature closures, thereby increasing and/or accelerating costs or foregoing profitable operations. Development projects are inherently risky and may require more capital than anticipated, which could adversely affect our business. The development of our underground mines and operations are also subject to other unique risks. Mine development projects typically require a number of years and significant expenditures during the development phase before production is possible. Currently, our major mining projects include underground development activities in the Grasberg minerals district, which currently constitutes approximately 30 percent of our estimated consolidated recoverable proven and probable copper reserves, and development of the Lone Star oxide project in Arizona. There are many risks and uncertainties inherent in all development projects including, but not limited to, unexpected or difficult geological formations or conditions, potential delays, cost overruns, lower levels of production during ramp-up periods, shortages of material or labor, construction defects, breakdowns and injuries to persons and property. The development of our underground mines and operations are also subject to other unique risks including, but not limited to, underground fires or floods, ventilating harmful gases, fall-of-ground accidents, and seismic activity resulting from unexpected or difficult geological formations or conditions. While we anticipate taking all measures that we deem reasonable and prudent in connection with the development of our underground mines to safely manage production, there is no assurance that these risks will not cause schedule delays, revised mine plans, injuries to persons and property, or increased capital costs, any of which may have a material adverse impact on our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, although we devote significant time and resources to our project planning, approval and review processes, many of our development projects are highly complex and rely on factors that are outside of our control, which may cause us to underestimate the time and capital required to complete a development project. For example, in September 2015, we initiated pre-commercial production at the Deep Mill Level Zone (DMLZ) underground mine in the Grasberg minerals district. During second-quarter 2018, PT-FI revised its mine plans to incorporate a slower ramp-up of the DMLZ underground mine following the continuing occurrence of mining induced seismic activity experienced in 2017 and 2018. PT-FI commenced hydraulic fracturing activities during third-quarter 2018 to manage rock stresses and pre-condition the DMLZ underground mine for large-scale production. Although results to date have been effective in managing rock stresses, we cannot predict whether additional occurrences of seismic activity or other unexpected geological activity will occur that could cause schedule delays or additional revisions to PT-FI’s mine plans, which could adversely affect our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. PT-FI currently expects the DMLZ to reach full production rates of 80,000 metric tons per day in 2022; however, estimates of timing of future production continue to be reviewed and may be modified as additional information becomes available. Our decision to develop a project is typically based on the results of feasibility studies, which estimate the anticipated economic returns of a project. In addition, the economic feasibility of development projects is based on many factors, including the accuracy of estimated reserves, estimated capital and operating costs, and estimated future prices of the relevant commodity. Consolidated capital expenditures are expected to approximate $2.4 billion for the year 2019, including $1.5 billion for major mining projects primarily associated with underground development activities in the Grasberg minerals district and development of the Lone Star oxide project. New development projects have no operating history upon which to base estimates of future cash flow. The actual costs, production rates and economic returns of our development projects may differ materially from our estimates, which may have a material adverse impact on our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. We must continually replace reserves depleted by production but exploration is highly speculative and our exploration activities may not result in additional discoveries. Our existing mineral reserves will be depleted over time by production from our operations. Because our profits are primarily derived from our mining operations, our ability to replenish our mineral reserves is essential to our long-term success. Depleted reserves can be replaced in several ways, including expanding known ore bodies, by locating new deposits or acquiring interests in reserves from third parties. Exploration is highly speculative in nature, involves many risks and uncertainties, requires substantial capital expenditures, and is frequently unsuccessful in discovering significant mineralization. Accordingly, our current or future exploration programs may not result in the discovery of additional deposits that can be produced profitably. Even if significant mineralization is discovered, it will likely take many years from the initial phases of exploration until commencement of production, during which time the economic feasibility of production may change. We may not be able to discover, enhance, develop or acquire reserves in sufficient quantities to maintain or grow our current reserve levels, which could negatively affect our cash flow, results of operations and financial condition. Estimates of proven and probable reserves and mineralized material are uncertain and the volume and grade of ore actually recovered may vary from our estimates. Estimates of recoverable proven and probable reserves have been calculated in accordance with Industry Guide 7 as required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating mineral reserves. Such estimates are, to a large extent, based on the average prices for the commodities we produce, primarily copper, gold and molybdenum, and interpretations of geologic data obtained from drill holes and other exploration techniques, which data may not necessarily be indicative of future results. Our mineral reserve estimates are based on the latest available geological and geotechnical studies. We conduct ongoing studies of our ore bodies to optimize economic values and to manage risk. We revise our mine plans and estimates of recoverable proven and probable mineral reserves as required in accordance with the latest available studies. Geological assumptions about our mineralization that are valid at the time of estimation may change significantly when new information becomes available. Estimates of proven and probable reserves that will be recovered, or the cost at which we anticipate reserves will be recovered, are based on uncertain assumptions. The uncertain global financial outlook may affect economic assumptions related to reserve recovery and may require reserve revisions. Changes to reserve estimates could affect our asset carrying values and may also negatively impact our future financial condition and results. In addition, if the market prices for the commodities we produce decline from recent levels, if production costs increase or recovery rates decrease, or if applicable laws and regulations are adversely changed, we can offer no assurance that the indicated level of recovery will be realized or that mineral reserves can be mined or processed profitably. If we determine that certain of our estimated proven and probable reserves have become uneconomic, this may ultimately lead to a reduction in our aggregate reported reserves which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, the term “mineralized material” does not indicate proven and probable reserves as defined by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Mineralized material is a mineralized body that has been delineated by appropriately spaced drilling and/or underground sampling to support the reported tonnage and average metal grades. Such a deposit cannot qualify as recoverable proven and probable reserves until legal and economic feasibility are confirmed based upon a comprehensive evaluation of development costs, unit costs, grades, recoveries and other material factors and are, therefore, subject to considerable uncertainty. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the estimated mineralized material not included in reserves will become proven and probable reserves. Our operations are subject to extensive laws and regulations, some of which require permits and other approvals. These regulations increase our costs and in some circumstances may delay or suspend our operations. Our operations are subject to extensive and complex laws and regulations that are subject to change and to changing interpretation by governmental agencies and other bodies vested with broad supervisory authority. As a mining company, compliance with environmental legal requirements is an integral and costly part of our business. For additional information, see “Environmental risks” below. We are also subject to extensive regulation of worker health and safety, including the requirements of the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Act and similar laws of other jurisdictions. In the U.S., the operation of our mines is subject to regulation by the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act). MSHA inspects our mines on a regular basis and issues citations and orders when it believes a violation has occurred under the Mine Act. Additionally in the U.S. various state agencies have concurrent jurisdiction arising under state law that regulate worker health and safety in both our industrial facilities and mines. If regulatory inspections result in an alleged violation, we may be subject to fines and penalties and, in instances of alleged significant violations, our mining operations or industrial facilities could be subject to temporary or extended closures. Refer to Exhibit 95 to this annual report on Form 10-K for additional information regarding certain orders and citations issued by MSHA for our operations during the year ended December 31, 2018. Many other governmental bodies regulate other aspects of our operations, and our failure to comply with these legal requirements can result in substantial penalties. In addition, new laws and regulations or changes to existing laws and regulations and new interpretations of existing laws and regulations by courts or regulatory authorities occur regularly, but are difficult to predict. Any such variations could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow, results of operations and financial condition. Our business is dependent upon information technology systems, which may be adversely affected by disruptions, damage, failure and risks associated with implementation and integration. Our strategy of operating large, long-lived, geographically diverse assets has been increasingly dependent on our ability to become fully integrated and highly automated. Many of our business and operational processes are heavily dependent on traditional and emerging technology systems to conduct day-to-day operations, improve safety and efficiency, and lower costs. As our dependence on information systems, including those of our third party service providers and vendors, grows, we become more vulnerable to an increasing threat of continually evolving cybersecurity risks. Cybersecurity incidents are increasing in frequency and magnitude. These incidents may include, but are not limited to, installation of malicious software, phishing, credential attacks, unauthorized access to data and other advanced and sophisticated cybersecurity breaches and threats, including threats that increasingly target critical operational technologies and process control networks. If any of these threats materialize, we could be subject to manipulation or improper use of our systems and networks, production downtimes, communication interruption or other disruptions and delays to our operations or to the transportation of products or infrastructure utilized by our operations, unauthorized release of proprietary, commercially sensitive, confidential or otherwise protected information, the corruption of data, significant health and safety consequences, environmental damage, loss of intellectual property, fines and litigation, damage to our reputation or financial losses from remedial actions, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow, results of operations and financial condition. We have experienced targeted and non-targeted cybersecurity incidents in the past and may experience them in the future. While these cybersecurity incidents did not result in any material loss to us or interrupt our day-to-day operations, there can be no assurance that we will not experience any such losses in the future. We believe we have implemented appropriate measures to mitigate potential risks. However, given the unpredictability of the timing and the evolving nature and scope of information technology disruptions, the various procedures and controls we use to monitor and protect against these threats and to mitigate our potential risks to such threats may not be sufficient in preventing cybersecurity incidents from materializing. Further, as cybersecurity threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities to cybersecurity threats. We could also be adversely affected by system or network disruptions if new or upgraded information technology systems are defective, not installed properly or not properly integrated into our operations. Various measures have been implemented to manage our risks related to the system implementation and modification, but system modification failures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations and could, if not successfully implemented, adversely impact the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. Environmental risks Our operations are subject to complex, evolving and increasingly stringent environmental laws and regulations. Compliance with environmental regulatory requirements involves significant costs and may constrain existing operations or expansion opportunities. Our operations, both in the U.S. and internationally, are subject to extensive environmental laws and regulations governing the generation, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of hazardous substances; solid waste disposal; air emissions; wastewater discharges; remediation, restoration and reclamation of environmental contamination, including mine closures and reclamation; well plug and abandonment requirements; protection of endangered and protected species and designation of critical habitats; and other related matters. In addition, we must obtain regulatory permits and approvals to start, continue and expand operations. Our Miami, Arizona, smelter processes approximately half of the aggregate copper concentrate produced by our North America copper mines. EPA regulations required us to invest approximately $230 million in new pollution control equipment to reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) to meet both regional haze requirements and to allow the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to demonstrate compliance with EPA’s SO2 ambient air quality standards. The new SO2 pollution control equipment was operational as of the January 1, 2018, deadline imposed by EPA and the Miami smelter has been in compliance with both the regional haze requirements and the ADEQ rules. ADEQ also has two SO2 monitors in the Miami area that continually read ambient SO2 levels, and during 2018, there were several instances in which ADEQ’s monitors read SO2 levels that exceeded the specified level. We are engaged in discussions with ADEQ and conducting an ongoing investigation of the cause of the ambient levels. We cannot guarantee that we will not be required to modify our system or install additional equipment to address findings or reflect new requirements or for other reasons, which could result in significant costs, including increased capital expenditures and operating costs, and could adversely impact our business. Laws such as CERCLA and similar state laws may expose us to joint and several liability for environmental damages caused by our operations, or by previous owners or operators of properties we acquired or are currently operating or at sites where we sent materials for processing, recycling or disposal. As discussed in more detail in the next risk factor, we have substantial obligations for environmental remediation on mining properties previously owned or operated by Freeport Minerals Corporation (FMC) and certain of its affiliates. Noncompliance with these laws and regulations could result in material penalties or other liabilities. In addition, compliance with these laws may from time to time result in delays in or changes to our development or expansion plans. Compliance with these laws and regulations imposes substantial costs, which we expect will continue to increase over time because of increased regulatory oversight, adoption of increasingly stringent environmental standards, as well as other factors. New or revised environmental regulatory requirements are frequently proposed, many of which result in substantially increased costs for our business, including those regarding financial assurance in the financial risk factor above. In 2015, EPA adopted rules that added remote “tributaries” into the regulatory definition of “waters of the United States” that are protected by the Clean Water Act, thereby imposing significant additional restrictions on land uses in remote areas with only tenuous connections to active waterways. These rules were challenged by multiple states and industry parties and litigation is ongoing. EPA has moved forward to rescind these rules and reconsider the definition of “waters of the United States” to clarify the scope of waters federally regulated under the Clean Water Act. A pre-publication version of a proposed revised definition of “waters of the United States” was issued by EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in December 2018. If adopted in final form as proposed, federal permitting requirements under the Clean Water Act could be less stringent which would limit or eliminate our need to obtain federal permits for future expansions at our operations in Arizona and New Mexico. However, there can be no assurance that the proposed revised definition will be adopted as proposed or that it will not be challenged by environmental groups. Regulations have been considered at various governmental levels to increase federal financial responsibility requirements both for mine closure and reclamation and for oil and gas decommissioning. In January 2019, legislative bills were introduced in both Colorado and New Mexico that would eliminate self-bonding and parent company guarantees for financial assurance for mine closure and reclamation activities. We are working to retain flexibility in financial assurance forms at our operations, but if enacted as proposed, we would be precluded from using parent company guarantees for any financial assurance obligations associated with our Colorado and New Mexico operations, which would result in increased costs. The legislative bill introduced in Colorado would also require proof of an end date for water treatment as a condition of permit issuance authorizing mining operations. Also in January 2019, legislation was proposed in New Mexico that would require water quality standards to be applied at the point of discharge to groundwater. Adoption of these or similar new environmental regulations or more stringent application of existing regulations may materially increase our costs, threaten certain operating activities and constrain our expansion opportunities. Our mining operations are subject to regulations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that are intended to protect species listed by the Department of Interior’s Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) as endangered or threatened, along with critical habitat designated by FWS for these listed species. The regulations limit the ability of landowners, including us, to obtain federal permits or authorizations needed for expansion of our operations, and may also affect our ability to obtain, retain or deliver water to some operations. These regulations were revised in 2016 to expand the ability of FWS to designate critical habitat in areas that are not occupied by a listed species. As part of its plan to modernize the implementation of the ESA, the FWS issued proposed rules in July 2018 that, if finalized, could mitigate, but not eliminate, potential regulatory constraints on mining operations under the ESA, and change some aspects of the revised regulations adopted in 2016. FWS is also evaluating whether certain species should still be listed under the ESA, and reconsidering critical habitat that was proposed but never finalized. Environmental groups have aggressively challenged FWS’s regulatory reforms. No assurances can be made that restrictions relating to conservation will not have an adverse impact on expansion of our operations or not result in delays in project development, constraints on exploration and constraints on operations in impacted areas. We incurred environmental capital expenditures and other environmental costs (including our joint venture partners’ shares) to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations that affect our operations totaling $0.4 billion in 2018, $0.5 billion in 2017 and $0.4 billion in 2016. For 2019, we expect to incur approximately $0.5 billion of aggregate environmental capital expenditures and other environmental costs. The timing and amounts of estimated payments could change as a result of changes in regulatory requirements, changes in scope and costs of reclamation and plug and abandonment activities, the settlement of environmental matters and the rate at which actual spending occurs on continuing matters. We incur significant costs for remediating environmental conditions on properties that have not been operated in many years. FMC and its subsidiaries, and many of their affiliates and predecessor companies, have been involved in exploration, mining, milling, smelting and manufacturing in the U.S. for more than a century. Activities that occurred in the late 19th century and the 20th century prior to the advent of modern environmental laws were not subject to environmental regulation and were conducted before American industrial companies fully understood the long-term effects of their operations on the surrounding environment. With the passage of CERCLA in 1980, companies like FMC became legally responsible for remediating hazardous substances released into the environment from properties owned or operated by them as well as properties where they arranged for disposal of such substances, irrespective of when the release to the environment occurred or who caused it. That liability is often asserted on a joint and several basis with other prior and subsequent owners, operators and arrangers, meaning that each owner or operator of the property is, and each arranger may be, held fully responsible for the remediation, although in many cases some or all of the other responsible parties no longer exist, do not have the financial ability to respond or cannot be found. As a result, because of our acquisition of FMC in 2007, many of the subsidiary companies we now own are potentially responsible for a wide variety of environmental remediation projects throughout the U.S., and we expect to spend substantial sums annually for many years to address those remediation issues. We are also subject to claims where the release of hazardous substances is alleged to have damaged natural resources. At December 31, 2018, we had more than 100 active remediation projects in 26 U.S. states. In addition, FMC and certain affiliates and predecessor companies were parties to agreements relating to the transfer of businesses or properties that contained indemnification provisions relating to environmental matters, and from time to time these provisions become the source of claims against us. At December 31, 2018, we had $1.5 billion recorded in our consolidated balance sheet for environmental obligations attributable to CERCLA or analogous state programs and for estimated future costs associated with environmental matters at closed facilities or closed portions of operating facilities. Our environmental obligation estimates are primarily based upon: • Our knowledge and beliefs about complex scientific and historical facts and circumstances that in many cases occurred many decades ago; • Our beliefs and assumptions regarding the nature, extent and duration of remediation activities that we will be required to undertake and the estimated costs of those remediation activities, which are subject to varying interpretations; and • Our beliefs regarding the requirements that are imposed on us by existing laws and regulations and, in some cases, the clarification of uncertain regulatory requirements that could materially affect our environmental obligation estimates. Significant adjustments to these estimates are likely to occur in the future as additional information becomes available. The actual environmental costs may exceed our current and future accruals for these costs, and any such changes could be material. In addition, remediation standards imposed by EPA and state environmental agencies have generally become more stringent over time and may become even more stringent in the future. Imposition of more stringent remediation standards, particularly for arsenic and lead in soils, poses a risk that additional remediation work could be required at our active remediation sites and at sites that we have already remediated to the satisfaction of the responsible governmental agencies, and may increase the risk of toxic tort litigation. EPA is considering how to reduce lead exposure in the environment under multiple environmental programs. Certain federal and state health agencies also support lower lead cleanup levels. The timing for these EPA activities is unclear, but any reduction in lead cleanup levels could result in material increases to our environmental reserves for ongoing residential property cleanup projects near former smelter sites. Refer to Note 12 for further discussion of our environmental obligations. Our Indonesia mining operations create difficult and costly environmental challenges, and future changes in environmental laws, or unanticipated environmental impacts from those operations, could require us to incur increased costs. Mining operations on the scale of our Indonesia operations involve significant environmental risks and challenges. Our primary challenge is to dispose of the large amount of crushed and ground rock material, called tailings, that results from the process by which we physically separate the copper-, gold- and silver-bearing materials from the ore that we mine. Our tailings management plan, which has been approved by the Indonesian government, uses the unnavigable river system in the highlands near our mine to transport the tailings to an engineered area in the lowlands where the tailings and natural sediments are managed in a deposition area. Lateral levees have been constructed to help contain the footprint of the tailings and to limit their impact in the lowlands. Another major environmental challenge is managing overburden, which is the rock that must be moved aside in the mining process to reach the ore. In the presence of air, water and naturally occurring bacteria, some overburden can generate acid rock drainage, or acidic water containing dissolved metals that, if not properly managed, can adversely affect the environment. In addition, certain overburden stockpiles are subject to erosion caused by the large amounts of rainfall, with the eroded stockpile material eventually being deposited in the lowlands tailings management area; this additional material influences the deposition of finer sediment material in the estuary, as well as presents the potential for increased environmental impacts. The Grasberg overburden stockpiles have experienced significant erosion, exacerbated by unanticipated work stoppages that adversely affected our ability to manage certain overburden stockpiles. The current tailings deposition management plan as well as environmental monitoring programs take into account the presence of this overburden in the lowlands tailings management area. In the past, certain Indonesian government officials have raised questions with respect to our tailings and overburden management plans, including a suggestion that we implement a pipeline system rather than the river transport system for tailings management and disposition. Because our Indonesia mining operations are remotely located in steep mountainous terrain and in an active seismic area, a pipeline system would be costly, difficult to construct and maintain, and more prone to catastrophic failure, and could therefore involve significant potentially adverse environmental issues. Based on our own studies and others conducted by third parties we do not believe that a pipeline system is necessary or practical. In October 2017, Indonesia’s Ministry of Environment and Forestry (the MOEF) notified PT-FI of administrative sanctions related to certain activities that it indicated are not reflected in PT-FI’s environmental permit. The MOEF also notified PT-FI that certain operational activities were inconsistent with factors set forth in PT-FI’s environmental permitting studies and that additional monitoring and improvements need to be undertaken related to air quality, water drainage, treatment and handling of certain wastes, and tailings management. In April 2018, the MOEF issued decrees imposing unattainable environmental standards related to PT-FI’s controlled riverine tailings management system. The decrees included a six-month transition period and conflicted with PT-FI’s approved environmental management programs and existing environmental permits. In December 2018, the MOEF issued a revised environmental permit to PT-FI to address many of the operational activities that it alleged were inconsistent with earlier studies. The remaining administrative sanctions are being resolved through adoption of revised practices and, in a few situations, PT-FI has agreed with the MOEF on an appropriate multi-year work plan, including the closure of an overburden stockpile. PT-FI and the MOEF also established a new framework for continuous improvement in environmental practices in PT-FI’s operations, including initiatives that PT-FI will pursue to increase tailings retention and to evaluate large-scale beneficial uses of tailings within Indonesia. The MOEF issued a new decree that incorporates various initiatives and studies to be completed by PT-FI during 2019 targeting continuous improvement in a manner that would not impose new technical risks or significant long-term costs to PT-FI’s operations. The new framework enables PT-FI to maintain compliance with site-specific standards and provides for ongoing monitoring by the MOEF. Refer to Note 12 for further discussion. We cannot assure you that future environmental changes affecting the mining industry in Indonesia will not be introduced or unexpectedly altered or repealed, or that new interpretations of existing environmental laws and regulations will not be issued, which might have a significant impact on PT-FI. Our copper mining operations require significant energy and regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change issues may increase our costs and adversely affect our operations. Our copper mining operations require significant energy, principally diesel, electricity, coal and natural gas, most of which is obtained from third parties under long-term contracts. Energy represented approximately 20 percent of our copper mine site operating costs in 2018, and are expected to approximate 20 percent of our copper mine site operating costs in 2019. Carbon-based energy is a significant input in our operations, although haul truck diesel use and the amount of purchased power that is derived from fossil fuel or renewable sources varies significantly depending on site production and country-specific circumstances. The potential physical impacts of climate change on our operations are highly uncertain, and would vary by operation based on particular geographic circumstances. As a result of the Paris Agreement reached during the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2015, a number of governments have pledged “Nationally Determined Contributions” to control and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In the U.S., several states, including Colorado and New Mexico, have advanced goals reducing or eliminating fossil-fuel based energy production. Transitions to renewable and other energy sources could, among other things, increase our operating and energy costs depending on the scope and magnitude of increased regulation of fossil-fuel based energy production, including greenhouse gas emissions. Other risks Our holding company structure may impact our ability to service debt and our stockholders’ ability to receive dividends. We are a holding company with no material assets other than the capital stock and intercompany receivables of our subsidiaries. As a result, our ability to repay our indebtedness and pay dividends is dependent on the generation of cash flow by our subsidiaries and their ability to make such cash available to us, by dividend, loan, debt repayment or otherwise. Our subsidiaries do not have any obligation to make funds available to us to repay our indebtedness or pay dividends. Dividends from subsidiaries that are not wholly owned are shared with other equity owners. Cash at our international operations is also typically subject to foreign withholding taxes upon repatriation into the U.S. In addition, our subsidiaries may not be able to, or be permitted to, make distributions to us or repay loans to us, to enable us to repay our indebtedness or pay dividends. Each of our subsidiaries is a distinct legal entity and, under certain circumstances, legal restrictions, as well as the financial condition and operating requirements of our subsidiaries, may limit our ability to obtain cash from our subsidiaries. Certain of our subsidiaries are parties to credit agreements that restrict their ability to make distributions or loan repayments to us if such subsidiary is in default under such agreements, or to transfer substantially all of the assets of such subsidiary without the consent of the lenders. Our rights to participate in any distribution of our subsidiaries’ assets upon their liquidation, reorganization or insolvency would generally be subject to the prior claims of the subsidiaries’ creditors, including any trade creditors. Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law may make an acquisition of us more difficult. Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law may make an acquisition of us more difficult. These provisions: • Authorize the Board to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval and to designate the rights, preferences and privileges of each class; if issued, such preferred stock would increase the number of outstanding shares of our capital stock and could include terms that may deter an acquisition of us; • Establish advance notice requirements for nominations to the Board or for proposals that can be presented at stockholder meetings; • Limit who may call stockholder meetings; and • Require the approval of the holders of two thirds of our outstanding common stock to enter into certain business combination transactions, subject to certain exceptions, including if the consideration to be received by our common stockholders in the transaction is deemed to be a fair price. These provisions may discourage potential takeover attempts, discourage bids for our common stock at a premium over market price or adversely affect the market price of, and the voting and other rights of the holders of, our common stock. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for stockholders to elect directors other than the candidates nominated by the Board. In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which may prohibit large stockholders from consummating a merger with, or acquisition of, us. These provisions may deter an acquisition of us that might otherwise be attractive to our stockholders. Item 1B.