Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

1.   Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

      With its subsidiaries, Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc. (“PCS”) — together known as “PotashCorp” or “the company” except to the extent the context otherwise requires — forms an integrated fertilizer and related industrial and feed products company. The company’s accounting policies are in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in Canada (“Canadian GAAP”). These policies are consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“US GAAP”) except as outlined in Note 15. The accounting policies used in preparing these interim consolidated financial statements are consistent with those used in the preparation of the 2003 annual consolidated financial statements, except as disclosed in Note 2.

      In 2003, the company approved plans to restructure certain operations. Those plans required significant estimates to be made of: (i) the recoverability of the carrying value of certain assets based on their capacity to generate future cash flows, and (ii) employee termination, contract termination and other exit costs. Because restructuring activities are complex processes that can take several months to complete, they involve periodically reassessing estimates. As a result, the company may have to change originally reported estimates as actual payments are made or activities are completed.

Principles of Consolidation

      The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the company and its principal operating subsidiaries:

     — PCS Sales (Canada) Inc.

2.   Changes in Accounting Policy

Sources of GAAP

      Effective January 1, 2004, the company prospectively adopted new accounting requirements of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (“CICA”) as issued in Section 1100, “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles”. This section establishes standards for financial reporting in accordance with GAAP and provides guidance on sources to consult when selecting accounting policies and determining appropriate disclosures when a matter is not dealt with explicitly in the primary sources of GAAP. In light of the new Section 1100 provisions, the company reviewed the application of its accounting policies and changed the consolidated financial statement presentation of sales revenue, freight costs and transportation and distribution

5

Table of Contents

      In prior years, the company reported sales revenues (net of discounts, and including amounts recoverable from customers for freight, transportation and distribution) net of related freight, transportation and distribution expenses. The company now reports sales revenues (net of discounts, and including amounts recoverable from customers for freight, transportation and distribution), freight costs, and transportation and distribution expenses as separate line items on the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Retained Earnings.

Asset Retirement Obligations

      On January 1, 2004, the company adopted CICA Section 3110, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations”, which requires the company to record an asset and related liability for the costs associated with the retirement of long-lived tangible assets when a legal liability to retire such assets exists. This includes obligations incurred as a result of acquisition, construction, or normal operation of a long-lived asset. The provisions of Section 3110 require the asset retirement obligation to be recorded at fair value at the time the liability is incurred. Accretion expense is recognized as an operating expense using the credit-adjusted risk-free interest rate in effect when the liability was recognized. The associated asset retirement obligations are capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the long-lived asset and depreciated over the estimated remaining useful life of the asset. The company has recorded asset retirement obligations primarily associated with certain closure, reclamation, and restoration costs for its potash and phosphate operations.

      The adoption of Section 3110 did not have a significant effect on the results of operations or financial position of the company. Had the provisions of Section 3110 been applied as of January 1, 2003, the pro forma effects for the year ended December 31, 2003 on net loss would not have been material. As required under the standard, the company will make periodic assessments as to the reasonableness of its asset retirement obligation estimates and revise those estimates accordingly. The respective asset and liability balances will be adjusted, which will correspondingly increase or decrease the amounts expensed in future periods.

Hedging Relationships

      Effective January 1, 2004, the company adopted CICA Accounting Guideline 13 “Hedging Relationships”. This guideline sets out the criteria that must be met in order to apply hedge accounting for derivatives and is based on many of the principles outlined in the US standards relating to derivative instruments and hedging activities. Specifically, the guideline provides detailed guidance on the identification, designation, documentation and effectiveness of hedging relationships, for purposes of applying hedge accounting, and the discontinuance of hedge accounting. Income and expenses on derivative instruments designated and qualifying as hedges under this guideline are recognized in earnings in the same period as the related hedged item. Ineffective hedging relationships and hedges not designated in a hedging relationship are carried at fair value on the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position, and subsequent changes in their fair value are recorded in earnings. The adoption of this accounting guideline did not have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements for the quarter.

3.   Inventories

6

Table of Contents

4.   Long-Term Debt

      In January and February 2004, the company entered into interest rate swap contracts designated as fair value hedges that effectively converted a notional amount of $300.0 of fixed rate debt (due 2011) into floating rate debt based on six-month US dollar LIBOR rates. Net settlements on the swap instruments are recorded as adjustments to interest expense. The company did not enter into any interest rate swap contracts in 2003.

5.   Provision for Plant Shutdowns

Memphis and Geismar Nitrogen Operations

      In June 2003, the company indefinitely shut down its Memphis, Tennessee plant and suspended production of ammonia and nitrogen solutions at its Geismar, Louisiana facilities due to high US natural gas costs and low product margins. The plants have not been re-started since that time.

      The company determined that all employee positions pertaining to the affected operations would be eliminated and recorded $4.8 in connection with costs of special termination benefits in the third quarter of 2003. The number of employees terminated as a result of the shutdowns was 187, of which 185 had left the company as of March 31, 2004. The company has made payments relating to the terminations totaling $3.5. All remaining workforce reduction costs pertaining to the 187 employees are expected to be paid by December 31, 2004.

      In connection with the shutdowns, management had determined that the carrying amounts of the long-lived assets at the Memphis and Geismar nitrogen facilities were not fully recoverable, and an impairment loss of $101.6, equal to the amount by which the carrying amount of the facilities’ asset groups exceeded their respective fair values, was recognized. Of the total impairment charge, $100.6 related to property, plant and equipment and $1.0 related to other assets. As part of its review, management also wrote down certain parts inventories at these plants in the amount of $12.4.

      In addition to the costs described above, management expects to incur other shutdown-related costs of approximately $11.1 and nominal annual expenditures for site security and other maintenance costs. These amounts have not been recorded in the consolidated financial statements as of March 31, 2004. Such costs will be recognized and recorded in the period in which they are incurred.

Kinston Phosphate Feed Plant

      The phosphate feed plant at Kinston, North Carolina ceased operations in the first quarter of 2003. In that quarter, the company recorded $0.6 for costs of special termination benefits for Kinston employees, $0.3 for parts inventory writedowns, and $1.3 for long-lived asset impairment charges. In lieu of full plant closure, the company continued to operate the facility as a warehouse. In the third quarter of 2003, company management determined that the cost of operating Kinston as a stand-alone warehouse was uneconomical. This decision triggered a further review by management of the carrying amounts of the plant’s long-lived assets. As a result of this review, management determined that the carrying amounts of the long-lived assets were not recoverable, and an additional impairment charge of $2.7, equal to the amount by which the carrying amount of the plant’s long-lived assets exceeded their fair value, was recognized.

7

Table of Contents

      No additional costs were incurred in connection with the plant shutdowns in the first quarter of 2004. The following table summarizes, by reportable segment, the total amount of costs incurred to date and the total costs expected to be incurred in connection with the plant shutdowns described above:

      The following table summarizes, by reportable segment, the costs accrued as of March 31, 2004 in connection with the plant shutdowns described above:

      The accrued balance is included in accounts payable and accrued charges in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position as at March 31, 2004.

6.   Provision for PCS Yumbes S.C.M.

      In November 2003, the company entered into a share purchase agreement with Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile S.A. (“SQM”), whereby SQM is to acquire the shares of PCS Yumbes for an aggregate purchase price of $35.0, subject to adjustments. Under the terms of the share purchase agreement, and prior to the sale closing, PCS Yumbes will continue to operate the facility and expeditiously liquidate the inventory of nitrates. All other working capital is to be fully realized or discharged (as applicable) by the company prior to the closing. It is expected that the closing will occur no later than the end of 2004.

      In 2003, management conducted an assessment of the recoverability of the long-lived assets of the PCS Yumbes operations. As a result of its review, management determined that the carrying amounts of PCS Yumbes’ long-lived assets were not recoverable and recorded an impairment charge of $77.4, equal to the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset group exceeded fair value. Of the total impairment charge, $13.0 related to property, plant and equipment, $63.9 related to deferred pre-production costs, and $0.5 related to deferred acquisition costs. As part of the review, management also wrote down certain non-parts inventory

8

Table of Contents

      The company plans to eliminate all employee positions at PCS Yumbes by December 31, 2004 and has recorded a provision of $1.8 pertaining to contractual termination benefits to be paid, primarily under Chilean law. As of March 31, 2004, 124 of the employees had left the company. The remaining 100 employees are expected to leave the company by December 31, 2004, and all remaining workforce reduction costs are expected to be paid by that date.

      The company had incurred early termination penalties in respect of certain PCS Yumbes contractual arrangements. The company recorded a provision of $11.1 in the third quarter of 2003 for these contract termination costs and $0.5 remained to be paid at March 31, 2004.

      No costs were incurred in connection with the above in the first quarter of 2004. The following table summarizes the total amount of costs incurred to date and the total costs expected to be incurred in connection with PCS Yumbes:

      The following table summarizes the costs accrued as of March 31, 2004 in connection with PCS Yumbes as described above:

      The accrued balance is included in accounts payable and accrued charges in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position as at March 31, 2004.

7.   Income Taxes

      The company’s consolidated income tax rate for the current period approximates 33 percent. In the first quarter of 2003, this rate approximated 40 percent. The decrease in rate is due primarily to the impact of Saskatchewan resource tax incentives and changes to the Canadian federal resource allowance, plus the scheduled Canadian federal statutory rate reduction.

8.   Net Income Per Share

      Basic net income per share for the quarter is calculated on the weighted average shares issued and outstanding for the three months ended March 31, 2004 of 53,343,000 (2003 — 52,089,000). Diluted net income per share is calculated based on the weighted average shares issued and outstanding during the period, adjusted by the total of the additional common shares that would have been issued assuming exercise of all

9

Table of Contents

9.   Segment Information

      The company has three reportable business segments: potash, phosphate and nitrogen. These business segments are differentiated by the chemical nutrient contained in the product that each produces. Inter-segment sales are made under terms which approximate market prices.

10.   Stock-Based Compensation

      The company has two stock option plans. Prior to 2003, the company applied the intrinsic value based method of accounting for the plans.

      Effective December 15, 2003, the company adopted the fair value based method of accounting for stock options prospectively to all employee awards granted, modified, or settled after January 1, 2003. Prospective application of the fair value method did not have an impact on the first three fiscal quarters of 2003 since the company did not grant any options during those periods. Since the company’s stock option awards vest over two years, the compensation cost included in the determination of net income for the first quarter of 2004 and 2003 is less than that which would have been recognized if the fair value based method had been applied to all awards since the original effective date of CICA Section 3870, “Stock-based Compensation and Other Stock-

10

Table of Contents

      In calculating the foregoing pro forma amounts, the fair value of each option grant was estimated as of the date of grant using the Modified Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following weighted average assumptions:

      The fair value of options granted in the fourth quarter of 2003 was $15.7 (2002 — $20.1).

11. Post-Retirement/ Post-Employment Expenses

11

Table of Contents

      Pension plan contributions to be paid by the company during 2004 are not expected to differ significantly from the amounts previously disclosed in the consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2003.

12. Seasonality

      The company’s sales of fertilizer are seasonal. Typically, the second quarter of the year is when fertilizer sales will be highest, due to the North American spring planting season. However, planting conditions and the timing of customer purchases will vary each year and sales can be expected to shift from one quarter to another.

13. Contingencies

      PotashCorp is a shareholder in Canpotex which markets potash offshore. Should any operating losses or other liabilities be incurred by Canpotex, the shareholders have contractually agreed to reimburse Canpotex for such losses or liabilities in proportion to their productive capacity. There were no such operating losses or other liabilities during the first three months of 2004.

      In common with other companies in the industry, the company is unable to acquire insurance for underground assets.

      The terms of a shareholders agreement with Jordan Investment Company (“JIC”) provide that, from October 17, 2006 to October 16, 2009, JIC may seek to exercise a put option (the “Put”) to require the company to purchase JIC’s remaining common shares in Arab Potash Company (“APC”). If the Put were exercised, the company’s purchase price would be calculated in accordance with a specified formula based, in part, on future earnings of APC. The amount, if any, which the company may have to pay for JIC’s remaining common shares if there was to be a valid exercise of the Put is not presently determinable.

      In 1998, the company, along with other parties, was notified by EPA of potential liability under CERCLA with respect to certain soil and groundwater conditions at a PCS Joint Venture blending facility in Lakeland, Florida and certain adjoining property. In 1999, PCS Joint Venture signed an Administrative Order on Consent with EPA pursuant to which PCS Joint Venture agreed to conduct a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (“RI/ FS”) of these conditions. PCS Joint Venture and another party are sharing the costs of the RI/ FS. PCS Joint Venture continues to assess and evaluate the nature and extent of the impacts at the site. No final determination has yet been made of the nature, timing or cost of remedial action that may be needed nor to what extent costs incurred may be recoverable from third parties.

      Various other claims and lawsuits are pending against the company. While it is not possible to determine the ultimate outcome of such actions at this time, it is management’s opinion that the ultimate resolution of such actions, including those pertaining to environmental matters, will not have a material adverse effect on the company’s financial condition or results of operations.

14. Guarantees

      The company enters into agreements in the normal course of business that may contain features which meet the definition of a guarantee. Various debt obligations (such as overdrafts, lines of credit with counterparties for derivatives, and back-to-back loan arrangements) related to certain subsidiaries have been directly guaranteed by the company under agreements with third parties. The company would be required to

12

Table of Contents

      Refer to Note 29 of our 2003 Annual Report for a description of other guarantees relating to the company. There have been no significant changes to these guarantees during the first three months of 2004.

15. Reconciliation of Canadian and United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles

      Canadian GAAP varies in certain significant respects from US GAAP. As required by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the effect of these principal differences on the company’s interim consolidated financial statements is described and quantified below. For a complete discussion of US and Canadian GAAP differences, see Note 34 to the consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2003 in our 2003 Annual Report.

      Long-term investments: The company’s investment in Israel Chemicals Limited (“ICL”) is stated at cost. US GAAP requires that this investment be classified as available-for-sale and be stated at market value with the difference between market value and cost reported as a component of Other Comprehensive Income (“OCI”).

      Property, plant and equipment and goodwill: The net book value of property, plant and equipment and goodwill under Canadian GAAP is higher than under US GAAP, as past provisions for asset impairment under Canadian GAAP were measured based on the undiscounted cash flow from use together with the residual value of the assets. Under US GAAP they were measured based on fair value, which was lower than the undiscounted cash flow from use together with the residual value of the assets.

      Pre-operating costs: Operating costs incurred during the start-up phase of new projects are deferred under Canadian GAAP until commercial production levels are reached, at which time they are amortized over the estimated life of the project. US GAAP requires that these costs be expensed as incurred.

      Post-retirement and post-employment benefits: Under Canadian GAAP, when a defined benefit plan gives rise to an accrued benefit asset, a company must recognize a valuation allowance for the excess of the adjusted benefit asset over the expected future benefit to be realized from the plan asset. Changes in the pension valuation allowance are recognized in income. US GAAP does not specifically address pension valuation allowances, and the US regulators have interpreted this to be a difference between Canadian and US GAAP. In light of these developments, a difference between Canadian and US GAAP has been recorded for the effects of recognizing a pension valuation allowance and the changes therein under Canadian GAAP.

      The company’s accumulated benefit obligation for its US pension plans exceeds the fair value of plan assets. US GAAP requires the recognition of an additional minimum pension liability in the amount of the excess of the unfunded accumulated benefit obligation over the recorded pension benefits liability. An offsetting intangible asset is recorded equal to the unrecognized prior service costs, with any difference recorded as a reduction of accumulated OCI. No similar requirement exists under Canadian GAAP.

      Foreign currency translation adjustment: The company adopted the US dollar as its functional and reporting currency on January 1, 1995. At that time, the consolidated financial statements were translated into US dollars at the December 31, 1994 year-end exchange rate using the translation of convenience method under Canadian GAAP. This translation method was not permitted under US GAAP. US GAAP required the comparative Consolidated Statements of Income and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flow to be translated at applicable weighted-average exchange rates; whereas, the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position were permitted to be translated at the December 31, 1994 year-end exchange rate. The use of disparate

13

Table of Contents

      Derivative instruments and hedging activities: Under Canadian GAAP, income and expenses on derivative instruments designated as and qualifying as effective fair value hedges or cash flow hedges are recognized in earnings in the same period as the related hedged item. Gains or losses arising from settled natural gas hedging transactions are deferred as a component of inventory until the product containing the hedged item is sold, at which time both the natural gas purchase cost and the related hedging deferral are recorded as cost of goods sold. Derivatives associated with ineffective hedging relationships and hedges not designated in a hedging relationship are carried at fair value on the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position, and subsequent changes in their fair value are recorded in earnings. In accordance with SFAS No. 133 “Accounting for Derivative Instrument and Hedging Activities” and its related interpretations and amendments under US GAAP, the company records all derivatives as either assets or liabilities on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position and measures those instruments at fair value. For derivatives that are designated as and qualify as effective cash flow hedges, the portion of gain or loss on the derivative instrument effective at offsetting changes in the hedged item is reported as a component of accumulated OCI and reclassified into earnings as cost of goods sold when the hedged transaction affects earnings. For derivative instruments that are designated as and qualify as effective fair value hedges, the gain or loss on the derivative instrument as well as the offsetting gain or loss on the hedged item attributable to the hedged risk is recognized in earnings as interest expense in the period the changes in fair value occur. Ineffective portions of cash flow or fair value hedges are recorded in earnings in the current period. Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments are marked to market through earnings in the period the changes in fair value occur.

      Freight, transportation and distribution: The company has changed its accounting policy regarding consolidated financial statement presentation of freight costs and transportation and distribution expenses under US GAAP. In prior years, the company included freight costs in cost of goods sold and transportation and distribution expenses in operating expenses under US GAAP. Effective January 1, 2004, the company discloses freight costs and transportation and distribution expenses under US GAAP as separate line items within gross margin on the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Retained Earnings. This presentation is consistent with the new Canadian GAAP presentation described in Note 2. All comparative information has been appropriately reclassified.

      Depreciation and amortization: Depreciation and amortization under Canadian GAAP is higher than under US GAAP, as a result of differences in the carrying amounts of property, plant and equipment and goodwill under Canadian and US GAAP.

      Comprehensive income: Comprehensive income is recognized and measured under US GAAP pursuant to SFAS No. 130 “Reporting Comprehensive Income”. This standard defines comprehensive income as all changes in equity other than those resulting from investments by owners and distributions to owners. Comprehensive income is comprised of two components, net income and OCI. OCI refers to amounts that are recorded as an element of shareholders’ equity but are excluded from net income because these transactions or events were attributed to changes from non-owner sources. The concept of comprehensive income does not yet exist under Canadian GAAP.

      Income taxes: The income tax adjustment reflects the impact on income taxes of the US GAAP adjustments described above. Accounting for income taxes under Canadian and US GAAP is similar, except that income tax rates of enacted or substantively enacted tax law must be used to calculate future income tax assets and liabilities under Canadian GAAP; whereas only income tax rates of enacted tax law can be used under US GAAP.

14

Table of Contents

      The application of US GAAP, as described above, would have had the following effects on net income, net income per share, total assets, shareholders’ equity and other comprehensive income:

15

Table of Contents

      The balances related to each component of accumulated other comprehensive income, net of related income taxes, are as follows:

Supplemental US GAAP Disclosures

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

      In December 2003, the FASB revised FIN No. 46 “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities”, which clarifies the application of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51 “Consolidated Financial Statements” to those entities (defined as Variable Interest Entities (“VIEs”)) in which either the equity at risk is not sufficient to permit that entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties, or equity investors lack voting control, an obligation to absorb expected losses or the right to receive expected residual returns. FIN No. 46 requires consolidation by a business of VIEs in which it is the primary beneficiary. The primary beneficiary is defined as the party that has exposure to the majority of the expected losses and/or expected residual returns of the VIE. FIN No. 46 was effective for the company in the first quarter, and there was no material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows from adoption. In Canada, Accounting Guideline 15 “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” has harmonized with FIN No. 46 and is effective for the company no later than December 31, 2004. The company expects no material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows from adoption.

      In December 2003, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 104 “Revenue Recognition,” which supersedes SAB No. 101. The primary purpose of SAB No. 104 is to rescind accounting guidance contained in SAB No. 101 and the SEC’s “Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements Frequently Asked Questions and Answers” related to multiple element revenue arrangements. The changes noted in SAB No. 104 did not have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

      In December 2003, the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (the “Act”) was signed into law. The Act introduces a prescription drug benefit beginning in 2006 under Medicare (Medicare Part D) as well as a federal subsidy to sponsors of retiree health care benefit plans that provide a benefit that is at least actuarially equivalent to Medicare Part D. At this point, the company’s analysis regarding the impact of the legislation is preliminary, as it awaits guidance from various governmental and

16

Table of Contents

Available-For-Sale Security

      The company’s investment in ICL is classified as available-for-sale. The fair market value of this investment at March 31, 2004 was $179.5 and the unrealized holding gain was $86.7.

Stock-Based Compensation

      Prior to 2003, the company applied the intrinsic value based method of accounting for its stock option plans under US GAAP. Effective December 15, 2003, the company adopted the fair value based method of accounting for stock options prospectively to all employee awards granted, modified or settled after January 1, 2003 pursuant to the transitional provisions of SFAS No. 148 “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure”. Prospective application of the fair value method did not have an impact on the first three fiscal quarters of 2003 since the company did not grant any options during those periods. Since the company’s stock option awards vest over two years, the compensation cost included in the determination of net income for 2004 and 2003 is less than that which would have been recognized if the fair value based method had been applied to all awards since the original effective date of SFAS No. 123 “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation”. The following table illustrates the effect on net income and net income per share under US GAAP if the fair value based method had been applied to all outstanding and unvested awards in each period.

17

Table of Contents

Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

      The company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedge transactions. This process includes attributing derivatives that are designated as cash flow hedges to floating rate assets or liabilities or forecasted transactions and attributing derivatives that are designated as fair value hedges to fixed rate assets or liabilities. The company also formally assesses, both at the inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, whether each derivative is highly effective in offsetting changes in cash flows or fair value of the hedged item. Fluctuations in the value of the derivative instruments are generally offset by changes in the hedged item; however, if it is determined that a derivative is not highly effective as a hedge or if a derivative is sold, expires or ceases to be a highly effective hedge, the company will discontinue hedge accounting prospectively for the affected derivative.

      Cash Flow Hedges

      The company has designated its natural gas derivative instruments as cash flow hedges. The company’s natural gas purchase strategy is based on diversification of price for its total gas requirements. The objective is to acquire a reliable supply of natural gas feedstock and fuel on a location-adjusted, cost-competitive basis in a manner that minimizes volatility without undue risk. The company employs derivative instruments including futures, swaps and option agreements in order to manage the cost on a portion of its natural gas requirements. These instruments are intended to hedge the future cost of the committed and anticipated natural gas purchases primarily for its US nitrogen plants. The maximum period for these hedges cannot exceed five years. The company uses these instruments to reduce price risk, not for speculative purposes.

      The portion of gain or loss on derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges that are effective at offsetting changes in the hedged item is reported as a component of accumulated OCI and then is reclassified into cost of goods sold when the product containing the hedged item is sold. Any hedge ineffectiveness is recorded in cost of goods sold in the current period. During the quarter, a gain of $10.5 was recognized in cost of goods sold. Of the deferred gains at quarter-end, approximately $42.3 will be reclassified to cost of goods sold within the next 12 months. The fair value of the company’s gas hedging contracts at March 31, 2004 was $73.5. The ineffectiveness of hedges on existing derivative instruments for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 was not material.

      Fair Value Hedges

      The company primarily uses interest rate swaps to manage the interest rate mix of the total debt portfolio and related overall cost of borrowing. At March 31, 2004, the company had entered into interest rate swap agreements with total notional amounts of $300.0, whereby the company, over the remaining terms of the underlying notes, will receive a fixed rate payment equivalent to the fixed interest rate of the underlying note and pay a floating rate of interest that is based on six-month US dollar LIBOR. The fair value of the swaps outstanding at March 31, 2004 was an asset of $5.5. All interest rate swaps qualify for the shortcut method of hedge accounting, thus there is no ineffectiveness related to these hedges. Changes in the fair value of derivatives that hedge interest rate risk are recorded in interest expense each period. The offsetting changes in the fair values of the related debt are also recorded in interest expense. The company does not maintain any other fair value hedges.

16. Comparative Figures

      Certain of the prior period’s figures have been reclassified to conform with the current period’s presentation.

18

Table of Contents