certain property interests at the site.  As of January 2010, the EPA had allegedly incurred approximately $91 million in response costs to implement remedial measures at the Gilt Edge  site, and estimated future response costs of $72 million. Hecla Limited did not acquire CoCa until 1991, well after CoCa discontinued its involvement  with the Gilt Edge site. In addition, CoCa is and always has been a separate corporate entity from Hecla Limited. We believe that Hecla Limited is not liable for any cleanup at the site, and if CoCa might be liable, it has limited assets with which to satisfy any such  liability. Settlement negotiations with the EPA commenced in 2010 and are ongoing, but there can be no assurance such negotiations will be  successful. In August 2009, the EPA made a formal request to CoCa for information regarding the Nelson Tunnel/Commodore Waste Rock Pile Superfund Site  in Creede, Colorado. A timely response was provided and the EPA later arranged to copy additional documents. CoCa was involved in exploration and  mining activities in Creede during the 1970s and the 1980s. No formal claim for response costs under CERCLA has been made against CoCa for this  site. Hecla Limited did not acquire CoCa until 1991, well after CoCa discontinued its historical activities in the vicinity of the site. In addition, CoCa is  and always has been a separate corporate entity from Hecla Limited. Therefore, we believe that Hecla Limited is not liable for any cleanup, and if CoCa  might be liable, it has limited assets with which to satisfy any such liability. Our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2012 included approximately $3.4 million for commitments relating to capital items, along with $0.5  million for various non-capital costs. In addition, our commitments relating to open purchase orders at December 31, 2012 included approximately $4.1  million and $0.9 million, respectively, for various capital items at the Greens Creek and Lucky Friday units, and approximately $0.5 million and $0.3  million, respectively, for various non-capital costs. We also have total commitments of approximately $18.4 million relating to scheduled payments on  capital leases, including interest, primarily for equipment at our Greens Creek and Lucky Friday units (see Note 6 for more information). We had letters of credit for approximately $1.2 million outstanding as of December 31, 2012 for workers’ compensation insurance bonding.  On February 1, 2012, a purported Hecla stockholder filed a putative class action lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho against Hecla  and certain of our officers, one of whom is also a director. The complaint, purportedly brought on behalf of all purchasers of Hecla common stock from  October 26, 2010 through and including January 11, 2012, asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule  10b-5 promulgated thereunder and seeks, among other things, damages and costs and expenses. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Hecla, under  the authority and control of the individual defendants, made certain false and misleading statements and allegedly omitted certain material  information related to operational issues at the Lucky Friday mine. The complaint alleges that these actions artificially inflated the market price of Hecla  common stock during the class period, thus purportedly harming investors who purchased shares during that time. A second suit was filed on February  14, 2012, alleging virtually identical claims. These complaints have been consolidated into a single case, a lead plaintiff and lead counsel has been  appointed by the Court (Bricklayers of Western Pennsylvania Pension Plan, et al. v. Hecla Mining Company et al., Case No. 12-0042 (D. Idaho)), and a  consolidated amended complaint was filed on October 16, 2012. In January 2013, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. We cannot predict the  outcome of this lawsuit or estimate damages if plaintiffs were to prevail. We believe that these claims are without merit and intend to defend them  vigorously. Related to the above described class action lawsuit, Hecla is named as a nominal defendant in two pending shareholder derivative lawsuits which  name as defendants certain Hecla executives and members of Hecla’s Board of Directors. The cases are: In Re Hecla Mining Company Derivative  Shareholder Litigation, Case No. 2:12-cv-00097 (D. Idaho) and In Re Hecla Mining Inc. [sic] Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Case No. 12-1506  (Kootenai Cnty. Dist. Ct.). In general terms, these lawsuits allege breaches of fiduciary duties by the individual defendants and seek damages,  purportedly on behalf of Hecla. In January 2013, a consolidated amended complaint was filed in each of these lawsuits. In February 2013, we filed a  motion to dismiss each of these complaints. A third derivative case, South, et al. v. Baker, et al., Case No. 7294-VCL (Del. Ch. Ct.), was dismissed with  prejudice by the Delaware Court of Chancery on September 25, 2012. In addition, the Board of Directors has received two letters on behalf of  purported shareholders demanding that Hecla commence litigation against certain executives and directors on substantially similar grounds. Hecla’s  board has concluded the actions requested by both demands would be contrary to the Company’s best interest given the pendency of other, related  litigation against the Company. In March 2012, Hecla Limited received notice of a complaint filed against it by the United Steel Workers, Local 5114, with the Federal Mine Safety  and Health Review Commission for compensation for bargaining unit workers at the Lucky Friday mine idled as a result of the previously-announced,  temporary suspension of production at the mine. The complaint alleges the bargaining unit workers are entitled to compensation under Section 111 of  Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 from November 16, 2011 - the date an order was issued by the Mine Safety Health Administration  (“MSHA”) to Hecla Limited - until such time as the order is terminated. We submitted a motion for summary decision to the administrative law judge  within the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission which was denied in December 2012. Currently we are awaiting further proceedings.  We believe the claim is without merit, and that all wages due under Section 111, which was an immaterial amount, have already been paid. We may  face a liability as a result of the union’s claim in the range of $0 to $10 million; however, we have not recorded a liability relating to the claim as of  December 31, 2012. We are subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise from time to time. These can include, but are not limited to, legal proceedings  and/or claims pertaining to environmental or safety matters. For example, in April 2011, a fatal accident occurred at the Lucky Friday Mine which was  investigated by MSHA. In November 2011, an accident occurred as part of the construction of #4 Shaft which resulted in the fatality of one contractor  employee. In an unrelated incident, in December 2011, a rock burst occurred in a primary access way at the Lucky Friday and injured seven employees,  none fatally. At the end of 2011, MSHA began a special impact investigation at the Lucky Friday mine which resulted in an order to remove built-up  cementitious material from the Silver Shaft, the primary access way from the surface at the Lucky Friday mine. As a result of MSHA’s investigations  related to these events, Hecla Limited has been issued monetary penalties (none of which are material, individually or in the aggregate), and may face  additional enforcement actions, including additional monetary penalties from MSHA or other governmental agencies. Although there can be no  Other Contingencies Other Commitments Nelson Tunnel/Commodore Waste Rock Pile Superfund Site [ HL:10-K ] F-17