content_image/181252.jpg
the SFS to the National Remedy Review Board (NRRB). Th  e NRRB has endorsed the selection of this alternative, and the EPA has drafted a proposed plan recommending this remedy. As a result of this event, we adjusted our estimated liability for clean up at this site. Additionally, we continue to conduct work pursuant to CERCLA unilateral administrative orders to address the potential for air emissions from beneath the cap of several of the closed RCRA ponds. The amount of the reserve for this site was $71.0 million and $46.1 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. 

## Middleport 

At our facility in Middleport, New York, we have constructed an engineered cover, closed the RCRA regulated surface water impoundments and are collecting and treating both surface water runoff and ground water. A draft corrective measures study (CMS) has been prepared for two off-site areas and is under review by the EPA and New York State Departments of the Environment and Health (collectively referred to as the Agencies). This draft CMS was submitted in the second quarter of 2010. As a result of the CMS submission, we adjusted our estimated liability for clean up at this site. In the third quarter of 2010, we received comments on the draft CMS from the Agencies. We are in the process of reviewing the comments and are in discussions with the Agencies regarding revisions to the draft CMS. Additional costs may result, in the event additional remediation is required by the Agencies during the review and approval of the current CMS. The amount of the reserve for this site is $46.2 million and $27.9 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. 

## NOTE 11 Income Taxes 

## Other 

Although potential environmental remediation expenditures in excess of the reserves and estimated loss contingencies could be signifi cant, the impact on our future consolidated financial results is not subject to reasonable estimation due to numerous uncertainties concerning the nature and scope of possible contamination at many sites, identifi cation of remediation alternatives under constantly changing requirements, selection of new and diverse clean-up technologies to meet compliance standards, the timing of potential expenditures and the allocation of costs among PRPs as well as other third parties. 

The liabilities arising from potential environmental obligations that have not been reserved for at this time may be material to any one quarter or year’s results of operations in the future. However, we believe any such liability arising from potential environmental obligations is not likely to have a material adverse effect on our liquidity or fi nancial condition and may be satisfied over the next 20 years or longer. 

Regarding current operating sites, we spent $8.4 million, $11.6 million and $16.4 million for the years 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively, on capital projects relating to environmental control facilities. Additionally, in 2010, 2009 and 2008, we spent $25.9 million, $24.9 million and $26.4 million, respectively, for environmental compliance costs, which are operating costs not covered by established reserves. 

Domestic and foreign components of income from continuing operations before income taxes are shown below: 

<img src='content_image/181252.jpg'>

