NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(UNAUDITED)

NOTE 1 – General

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc and their respective subsidiaries. Together with their consolidated subsidiaries, they are referred to collectively in these consolidated financial statements and elsewhere in this joint Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q as “Carnival Corporation & plc,” “our,” “us” and “we.”

The Consolidated Balance Sheet at August 31, 2014 , the Consolidated Statements of Income and the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the three and nine months ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 and the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 are unaudited and, in the opinion of our management, contain all adjustments, consisting of only normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation. Our interim consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in the Carnival Corporation & plc 2013 joint Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Form 10-K”) filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 29, 2014. Our operations are seasonal and results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results for the entire year. Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified in the Consolidated Balance Sheets to conform to the current period presentation.

Cruise passenger ticket revenues include fees, taxes and charges collected by us from our guests. The portion of these fees, taxes and charges included in passenger ticket revenues and commissions, transportation and other costs were $146 million and $140 million and $407 million and $395 million for the three and nine months ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 , respectively.

During the three and nine months ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 , repairs and maintenance expenses, including minor improvement costs and dry-dock expenses, were $180 million and $216 million and $695 million and $680 million , respectively, and are substantially all included in other ship operating expenses.

NOTE 2 – Unsecured Debt

At August 31, 2014 , our short-term borrowings consisted of euro-denominated commercial paper of $ 112 million and euro-denominated bank loans of $34 million with an aggregate weighted-average interest rate of 0.7% .

In December 2013, we entered into a five-year $ 150 million floating rate bank loan due in September 2019. We plan to draw under this loan by November 2014 and use the proceeds for general corporate purposes.

In January 2014, we repaid $ 200 million of a floating rate bank loan prior to its October 2014 maturity date.

In March 2014, we repaid $ 139 million of a floating rate euro-denominated bank loan prior to its September 2014 maturity date.

In April 2014, we repaid $109 million of an export credit facility prior to its April 2023 maturity date.

In May 2014, we repaid $300 million of an export credit facility prior to its May 2024 maturity date. In September 2014 , we repaid $ 181 million , which represented the remaining portion of this facility.

In May 2014, we borrowed $554 million under an export credit facility, the proceeds of which were used to pay for a portion of Regal Princess' purchase price. This floating rate facility is due in semi-annual installments through May 2026 .

In May 2014, we borrowed $275 million under a euro-denominated floating rate revolving bank loan facility, the proceeds of which were used for general corporate purposes. This facility has a perpetual term although we can terminate it at any time, and the bank can terminate the facility at any time upon nine months notice.

In June 2014, Carnival Corporation, Carnival plc and certain of Carnival plc's subsidiaries amended and replaced their existing five-year multi-currency revolving credit facility of $2.5 billion (comprised of $1.6 billion , €450 million and £150 million ) with a new five-year multi-currency revolving credit facility (the “Facility”). This Facility of $2.6 billion (comprised of $1.7 billion , €500 million and £150 million ) at August 31, 2014 expires in June 2019, and we have options to extend this Facility through June 2021 subject to the approval of each bank. The Facility currently bears interest at LIBOR/EURIBOR plus a margin of 40 basis points (“bps”) . The margin varies based on changes to Carnival Corporation's and Carnival plc's long-term senior unsecured credit ratings. We are required to pay a commitment fee of 35% of the margin per annum on any undrawn

portion. We will also incur an additional utilization fee of 10 bps, 20 bps or 40 bps if equal to or less than one-third, more than one-third or more than two-thirds of the Facility, respectively, is drawn on the total amount outstanding.

In June 2014, we entered into an export credit facility that will provide us with the ability to borrow up to an aggregate of $236 million . Proceeds from this facility will be used to pay for a portion of the purchase price of a Seabourn ship, which is expected to be delivered in November 2016. This borrowing will be due in semi-annual installments through November 2028 .

In August 2014, we restructured two floating rate bank loan facilities that had an aggregate outstanding loan balance of $ 250 million at August 31, 2014. The restructuring added another $ 150 million undrawn tranche and converted the terms into perpetual one-year maturities.

NOTE 3 – Contingencies

Litigation

As a result of the January 2012 ship incident, litigation claims, enforcement actions, regulatory actions and investigations, including, but not limited to, those arising from personal injury, loss of life, loss of or damage to personal property, business interruption losses or environmental damage to any affected coastal waters and the surrounding areas, have been and may be asserted or brought against various parties, including us. The existing assertions are ongoing and there are significant jurisdictional uncertainties. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time. However, we do not expect these matters to have a significant impact on our results of operations because we have insurance coverage for these types of third-party claims.

The UK Maritime & Coastguard Agency and the U.S. Department of Justice are investigating allegations that Caribbean Princess breached international pollution laws. We are cooperating with the investigations, including conducting our own internal investigation into the matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time. However, we do not expect it to have a significant impact on our results of operations.

Additionally, in the normal course of our business, various claims and lawsuits have been filed or are pending against us. Most of these claims and lawsuits are covered by insurance and, accordingly, the maximum amount of our liability, net of any insurance recoverables, is typically limited to our self-insurance retention levels. Management believes the ultimate outcome of these claims and lawsuits will not have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Contingent Obligations – Lease Out and Lease Back Type (“LILO”) Transactions

At August 31, 2014 , Carnival Corporation had estimated contingent obligations totaling $394 million , excluding termination payments as discussed below, to participants in LILO transactions for two of its ships. At the inception of these leases, the aggregate of the net present value of these obligations was paid by Carnival Corporation to a group of major financial institutions, who agreed to act as payment undertakers and directly pay these obligations. As a result, these contingent obligations are considered extinguished and neither the funds nor the contingent obligations have been included in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

In the event that Carnival Corporation were to default on its contingent obligations and assuming performance by all other participants, we estimate that it would, as of August 31, 2014 , be responsible for a termination payment of $31 million . In 2017, Carnival Corporation has the right to exercise options that would terminate these LILO transactions at no cost to it.

In certain cases, if the credit ratings of the financial institutions who are directly paying the contingent obligations fall below AA-, then Carnival Corporation will be required to replace these financial institutions with other financial institutions whose credit ratings are at least AA or meet other specified credit requirements. In such circumstances, it would incur additional costs, although we estimate that they would not be material to our consolidated financial statements. For the two financial institution payment undertakers subject to this AA- credit rating threshold, one has a credit rating of AA and the other has a credit rating of AA- . If Carnival Corporation’s credit rating, which is BBB+ , falls below BBB, it will be required to provide a standby letter of credit for $35 million , or, alternatively, provide mortgages for this aggregate amount on these two ships.

Contingent Obligations – Indemnifications

Some of the debt contracts that we enter into include indemnification provisions that obligate us to make payments to the counterparty if certain events occur. These contingencies generally relate to changes in taxes and changes in laws that increase lender capital costs and other similar costs. The indemnification clauses are often standard contractual terms and were entered into in the normal course of business. There are no stated or notional amounts included in the indemnification clauses, and we are not able to estimate the maximum potential amount of future payments, if any, under these indemnification clauses. We have not been required to make any material payments under such indemnification clauses in the past and, under current circumstances, we do not believe a request for material future indemnification payments is probable.

NOTE 4 – Fair Value Measurements, Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

Fair Value Measurements

U.S. accounting standards establish a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). This hierarchy requires entities to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The three levels of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:

Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between independent and knowledgeable market participants at the measurement date. Therefore, even when market assumptions are not readily available, our own assumptions are set to reflect those that we believe market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date.

The fair value measurement of a financial asset or financial liability must reflect the nonperformance risk of the counterparty and us. Therefore, the impact of our counterparty’s creditworthiness was considered when in an asset position, and our creditworthiness was considered when in a liability position in the fair value measurement of our financial instruments.  Creditworthiness did not have a significant impact on the fair values of our financial instruments at August 31, 2014 and November 30, 2013 . Both the counterparties and we are expected to continue to perform under the contractual terms of the instruments. Considerable judgment may be required in interpreting market data used to develop the estimates of fair value. Accordingly, certain estimates of fair value presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that could be realized in a current or future market exchange.

Financial Instruments that are not Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

The estimated carrying and fair values and basis of valuation of our financial instrument assets and liabilities that are not measured at fair value on a recurring basis were as follows (in millions):

 

 

Financial Instruments that are Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

The estimated fair value and basis of valuation of our financial instrument assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis were as follows (in millions):

 

 

We measure our derivatives using valuations that are calibrated to the initial trade prices. Subsequent valuations are based on observable inputs and other variables included in the valuation models such as interest rate, yield and commodity price curves, forward currency exchange rates, credit spreads, maturity dates, volatilities and netting arrangements. We use the income approach to value derivatives for foreign currency options and forwards, interest rate swaps and fuel derivatives using observable market data for all significant inputs and standard valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present value amount, assuming that participants are motivated, but not compelled to transact. We also corroborate our fair value estimates using valuations provided by our counterparties.

Nonfinancial Instruments that are Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis

Impairments and Sale of Ships

Due to the expected absorption of Ibero Cruises’ (“Ibero”) operations into Costa Cruises (“Costa”) in late 2014 and certain Ibero ship-specific facts and circumstances, such as their size, age, condition, viable alternative itineraries and historical operating cash flows, we performed undiscounted future cash flow analyses of Ibero’s two ships, Grand Celebration and Grand Holiday as of May 31, 2014 (and also August 31, 2014 for Grand Holiday ) to determine if these ships were impaired. The principal assumptions used in our undiscounted cash flow analyses consisted of an estimated sales price for Grand Holiday , forecasted future operating results, including net revenue yields and net cruise costs including fuel prices, and estimated residual values, which are all considered Level 3 inputs, and the transfer of Grand Celebration into Costa in late 2014. Based on its undiscounted cash flow analyses, we determined that the net carrying value for Grand Celebration exceeded its estimated undiscounted future cash flows. Accordingly, we then estimated the May 31, 2014 fair value of this ship based on its discounted future cash flows and compared this estimated fair value to its net carrying value. As a result, we recognized a $22 million ship impairment charge in other ship operating expenses during the three months ended May 31, 2014.

In July 2013, we recognized a $73 million impairment charge related to Costa Voyager, and in November 2013, it was taken out of service. In March 2014, we sold this ship and recognized a $37 million gain as a reduction in other ship operating expenses during the three months ended May 31, 2014.

Valuation of Goodwill and Other Intangibles

The reconciliation of the changes in the carrying amounts of our goodwill, which goodwill has been allocated to our North America and Europe, Australia & Asia (“EAA”) cruise brands, was as follows (in millions):

 

 

At July 31, 2014, all of our cruise brands carried goodwill, except for Ibero and Seabourn. As of that date, we performed our annual goodwill impairment reviews, which included performing a qualitative assessment for all cruise brands that carried goodwill, except for Carnival Cruise Lines, Cunard and P&O Cruises (UK). Qualitative factors such as industry and market conditions, macroeconomic conditions, changes to the weighted-average cost of capital (“WACC”), overall financial performance, changes in fuel prices and capital expenditures were considered in the qualitative assessment to determine how changes in these factors would affect each of these cruise brands’ estimated fair values. Based on our qualitative assessments, we determined it was more-likely-than-not that each of these cruise brands’ estimated fair values exceeded their carrying values and, therefore, we did not proceed to the two-step quantitative goodwill impairment reviews.

As of July 31, 2014, we also performed our annual goodwill impairment reviews of Carnival Cruise Lines’, Cunard’s and P&O Cruises (UK)’s goodwill. We did not perform a qualitative assessment but instead proceeded directly to step one of the two-step quantitative goodwill impairment review and compared each of Carnival Cruise Lines’, Cunard’s and P&O Cruises (UK)’s estimated fair value to the carrying value of their allocated net assets. Their estimated cruise brand fair value was based on a discounted future cash flow analysis. The principal assumptions used in our cash flow analyses consisted of forecasted future operating results, including net revenue yields and net cruise costs including fuel prices; capacity changes, including the expected rotation of vessels into, or out of, Carnival Cruise Lines, Cunard and P&O Cruises (UK); capital expenditures; WACC of market participants, adjusted for the risk attributable to the geographic regions in which Carnival Cruise Lines, Cunard and P&O Cruises (UK) operate and terminal values, which are all considered Level 3 inputs. Based on the discounted cash flow analyses, we determined that each of Carnival Cruise Lines’, Cunard’s and P&O Cruises (UK)’s estimated fair value significantly exceeded their carrying value and, therefore, we did not proceed to step two of the impairment reviews.

At August 31, 2014 , accumulated goodwill impairment charges were $153 million and were all related to Ibero.

The reconciliation of the changes in the carrying amounts of our intangible assets not subject to amortization, which represent trademarks that have been allocated to our North America and EAA cruise brands, was as follows (in millions):

 

 

At July 31, 2014, our cruise brands that have significant trademarks recorded include AIDA Cruises (“AIDA”), P&O Cruises (Australia), P&O Cruises (UK) and Princess Cruises (“Princess”). As of that date, we performed our annual trademark impairment reviews for these cruise brands, which included performing a qualitative assessment for AIDA, P&O Cruises (Australia) and Princess. Qualitative factors such as industry and market conditions, macroeconomic conditions, changes to the WACC, changes in royalty rates and overall financial performance were considered in the qualitative assessment to determine how changes in these factors would affect the estimated fair values for each of these cruise brands’ recorded trademarks. Based on our qualitative assessments, we determined it was more likely-than-not that the estimated fair value for AIDA’s, P&O Cruises (Australia)’s and Princess’ recorded trademarks exceeded their carrying value and, therefore, none of these trademarks were impaired.

As of July 31, 2014, we also performed our annual trademark impairment review of P&O Cruises (UK). We did not perform a qualitative assessment but instead proceeded directly to the quantitative trademark impairment review. Our quantitative assessment included estimating P&O Cruises (UK)’s trademarks fair value based upon a discounted future cash flow analysis, which estimated the amount of royalties that we are relieved from having to pay for use of the associated trademarks, based upon forecasted cruise revenues and a market participant’s royalty rate. The royalty rate was estimated primarily using comparable royalty agreements for similar industries. Based on our quantitative assessment, we determined that the estimated fair value for P&O Cruises (UK)’s trademarks significantly exceeded their carrying values and, therefore, none of these trademarks were impaired.

At August 31, 2014 and November 30, 2013 , our intangible assets subject to amortization are not significant to our consolidated financial statements.

The determination of our cruise brand, cruise ship and trademark fair values includes numerous assumptions that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. We believe that we have made reasonable estimates and judgments in determining whether our goodwill, cruise ships and trademarks have been impaired. However, if there is a change in assumptions used or if there is a change in the conditions or circumstances influencing fair values in the future, then we may need to recognize an impairment charge.

Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

We utilize derivative and nonderivative financial instruments, such as foreign currency forwards, options and swaps, foreign currency debt obligations and foreign currency cash balances, to manage our exposure to fluctuations in certain foreign currency exchange rates, and interest rate swaps to manage our interest rate exposure in order to achieve a desired proportion of fixed and floating rate debt. In addition, we utilize our fuel derivatives program to mitigate a portion of the risk to our future cash flows attributable to potential fuel price increases, which we define as our “economic risk.” Our policy is to not use any financial instruments for trading or other speculative purposes.

All derivatives are recorded at fair value. The changes in fair value are recognized currently in earnings if the derivatives do not qualify as effective hedges, or if we do not seek to qualify for hedge accounting treatment, such as for our fuel derivatives. If a derivative is designated as a fair value hedge, then changes in the fair value of the derivative are offset against the changes in the fair value of the underlying hedged item. If a derivative is designated as a cash flow hedge, then the effective portion of the changes in the fair value of the derivative is recognized as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) until the underlying hedged item is recognized in earnings or the forecasted transaction is no longer probable. If a derivative or a nonderivative financial instrument is designated as a hedge of our net investment in a foreign operation, then changes in the fair value of the financial instrument are recognized as a component of AOCI to offset a portion of the change in the translated value of the net investment being hedged, until the investment is sold or liquidated. We formally document hedging relationships for all derivative and nonderivative hedges and the underlying hedged items, as well as our risk management objectives and strategies for undertaking the hedge transactions.

We classify the fair values of all our derivative contracts as either current or long-term, depending on whether the maturity date of the derivative contract is within or beyond one year from the balance sheet date. The cash flows from derivatives treated as hedges are classified in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows in the same category as the item being hedged. Our cash flows related to fuel derivatives are classified within investing activities.

The estimated fair values of our derivative financial instruments and their location on the Consolidated Balance Sheets were as follows (in millions):

 

 

regarding these fuel derivatives. At November 30, 2013, we had fuel derivatives consisting of zero cost collars on Brent to cover a portion of our estimated fuel consumption through 2017.

Our derivative contracts include rights of offset with our counterparties. We have elected to net certain of our derivative assets and liabilities within counterparties. The amounts recognized within assets and liabilities were as follows (in millions):

The effective portions of our derivatives qualifying and designated as hedging instruments recognized in other comprehensive (loss) income were as follows (in millions):

 

There are no credit risk related contingent features in our derivative agreements, except for bilateral credit provisions within our fuel derivative counterparty agreements. These provisions require interest-bearing, non-restricted cash to be posted or received as collateral to the extent the fuel derivative fair value payable to or receivable from an individual counterparty, respectively, exceeds $100 million . At August 31, 2014 and November 30, 2013 , no collateral was required to be posted to or received from our fuel derivative counterparties.

The amount of estimated cash flow hedges’ unrealized gains and losses that are expected to be reclassified to earnings in the next twelve months is not significant. We have not provided additional disclosures of the impact that derivative instruments and hedging activities have on our consolidated financial statements as of August 31, 2014 and November 30, 2013 and for the three and nine months ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 where such impacts were not significant.

Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risks

Overall Strategy

We manage our exposure to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates through our normal operating and financing activities, including netting certain exposures to take advantage of any natural offsets and, when considered appropriate, through the use of derivative and nonderivative financial instruments. Our primary focus is to manage the economic foreign currency exchange risks faced by our operations, which are the ultimate foreign currency exchange risks that would be realized by us if we exchanged one currency for another, and not accounting risks. Accordingly, we do not currently hedge foreign currency exchange accounting risks with derivative financial instruments. The financial impacts of the hedging instruments we do employ generally offset the changes in the underlying exposures being hedged.

Operational and Investment Currency Risks

Our European and Australian cruise brands subject us to foreign currency translation risk related to the euro, sterling and Australian dollar because these brands generate significant revenues and incur significant expenses in euro, sterling or the Australian dollar. Accordingly, exchange rate fluctuations of the euro, sterling and Australian dollar against the U.S. dollar will

affect our reported financial results since the reporting currency for our consolidated financial statements is the U.S. dollar. Any strengthening of the U.S. dollar against these foreign currencies has the financial statement effect of decreasing the U.S. dollar values reported for cruise revenues and expenses. Any weakening of the U.S. dollar has the opposite effect.

Most of our brands also have non-functional currency risk related to their international sales operations, which has become an increasingly larger part of most of their businesses over time, and primarily includes the euro, sterling and Australian, Canadian and U.S. dollars. In addition, all of our brands have non-functional currency expenses for a portion of their operating expenses. Accordingly, these brands’ revenues and expenses in non-functional currencies create some degree of natural offset for recognized transactional currency gains and losses due to currency exchange movements.

We consider our investments in foreign operations to be denominated in relatively stable currencies and of a long-term nature. We partially mitigate our net investment currency exposures by denominating a portion of our foreign currency intercompany payables in our foreign operations’ functional currencies, substantially all sterling. As of August 31, 2014 and November 30, 2013 , we have designated $2.4 billion and $2.2 billion , respectively, of our foreign currency intercompany payables as nonderivative hedges of our net investments in foreign operations. Accordingly, we have included $209 million and $234 million of cumulative foreign currency transaction nonderivative gains in the cumulative translation adjustment component of AOCI at August 31, 2014 and November 30, 2013 , respectively, which offsets a portion of the losses recorded in AOCI upon translating our foreign operations’ net assets into U.S. dollars. During the three and nine months ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 , we recognized foreign currency nonderivative transaction gains (losses) of $14 million ( $(22) million in 2013) and $(25) million ( $83 million in 2013), respectively, in the cumulative translation adjustment component of AOCI.

Newbuild Currency Risks

Our shipbuilding contracts are typically denominated in euros. Our decisions regarding whether or not to hedge a non-functional currency ship commitment for our cruise brands are made on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the amount and duration of the exposure, market volatility, currency exchange rate correlation, economic trends, our overall expected net cash flows by currency and other offsetting risks. We use foreign currency derivative contracts and have used nonderivative financial instruments to manage foreign currency exchange rate risk for some of our ship construction payments.

In July 2012, we entered into foreign currency zero cost collars that are designated as cash flow hedges for a portion of P&O Cruises (UK) Britannia ’s euro-denominated shipyard payments. These collars mature in February 2015 at a weighted-average ceiling rate of £0.83 to the euro, or $304 million , and a weighted-average floor rate of £0.77 to the euro, or $282 million . In June 2014, we entered into foreign currency zero cost collars that are also designated as cash flow hedges for the remaining portion of Britannia ’s euro-denominated shipyard payments. These collars also mature in February 2015 at a weighted-average ceiling rate of £0.81 to the euro, or $298 million , and a weighted-average floor rate of £0.79 to the euro, or $291 million . If the spot rate is between the weighted-average ceiling and floor rates on the date of maturity, then we would not owe or receive any payments under these collars.

At August 31, 2014 , substantially all of our remaining newbuild currency exchange rate risk relates to euro-denominated newbuild construction payments for a Seabourn and a Princess newbuild, which represent a total unhedged commitment of $1.1 billion .

The cost of shipbuilding orders that we may place in the future that is denominated in a different currency than our cruise brands’ or the shipyards’ functional currency is expected to be affected by foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations. These foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations may affect our desire to order new cruise ships.

Interest Rate Risks

We manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates through our investment and debt portfolio management strategies. These strategies include purchasing high quality short-term investments with floating interest rates, and evaluating our debt portfolio as to whether to make periodic adjustments to the mix of fixed and floating rate debt through the use of interest rate swaps and the issuance of new debt or the early retirement of existing debt. At August 31, 2014 , 61% and 39% ( 59% and 41% at November 30, 2013 ) of our debt bore fixed and floating interest rates, respectively, including the effect of interest rate swaps.

Fuel Price Risks

Our exposure to market risk for changes in fuel prices substantially all relates to the consumption of fuel on our ships. We use our fuel derivatives program to mitigate a portion of our economic risk attributable to potential fuel price increases. We designed our fuel derivatives program to maximize operational flexibility by utilizing derivative markets with significant trading liquidity and our program currently consists of zero cost collars on Brent.

All of our derivatives are based on Brent prices whereas the actual fuel used on our ships is marine fuel. Changes in the Brent prices may not show a high degree of correlation with changes in our underlying marine fuel prices. We will not realize any economic gain or loss upon the monthly maturities of our zero cost collars unless the average monthly price of Brent is above the ceiling price or below the floor price. We believe that these derivatives will act as economic hedges; however, hedge accounting is not applied. As part of our fuel derivatives program, we will continue to evaluate various derivative products and strategies.

At August 31, 2014 , our outstanding fuel derivatives consisted of zero cost collars on Brent to cover a portion of our estimated fuel consumption as follows: