XML 73 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v2.4.0.6

Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Contingencies [Text Block] | Contingencies 2012 Settlement of Legal Matter In connection with the purchase of Wyle from the VEBA Group ("VEBA") in August 2000, the company acquired certain of the then outstanding obligations of Wyle, including Wyle's 1994 indemnification obligations to the purchasers of its Wyle Laboratories division for environmental clean-up costs associated with any then existing contamination or violation of environmental regulations. Under the terms of the company's purchase of Wyle from VEBA, VEBA agreed to indemnify the company for certain costs associated with the Wyle environmental obligations, among other things. In 2000, VEBA merged with a publicly-traded German conglomerate; the combined entity is now known as E.ON SE ("E.ON"). The company is aware of two Wyle Laboratories facilities (in Huntsville, Alabama and Norco, California) at which contaminated groundwater was identified and will require environmental remediation. In addition, the company was named as a defendant in several lawsuits related to the Norco facility and a third site in El Segundo, California which have now been settled to the satisfaction of the parties. In October 2005, the company filed suit against E.ON in the Frankfurt am Main Regional Court in Germany. The suit sought indemnification, contribution, and a declaration of the parties' respective rights and obligations in connection with environmental clean-up costs associated with the Huntsville and Norco sites and certain related litigation and other costs. The litigation was suspended in December 2009 while the parties engaged in a court-facilitated mediation and settlement discussions. As part of the mediation, E.ON filed a counter claim against the company for certain income tax-related liabilities. During the fourth quarter of 2012, the company entered into a settlement agreement with E.ON and VEBA pursuant to which E.ON paid the company $110,000 and the company released E.ON and VEBA from their indemnification obligation for costs associated with environmental remediation and related litigation in connection with the company's acquisition of Wyle in August 2000. The settlement agreement also resolved claims for certain income tax related liabilities with respect to the Wyle acquisition. In connection with this settlement, the company has initially recorded a gain on the settlement of legal matters of $79,158 ($48,623 net of related taxes or $.45 and $.44 per share on a basic and diluted basis, respectively) representing the difference between the settlement amount and the amount receivable from E.ON for reimbursement of costs incurred to date by the company. As part of the settlement agreement the company accepted responsibility for any potential subsequent costs incurred related to the Wyle matters. The company expects these environmental liabilities to be resolved over an extended period of time. Costs are recorded for environmental matters when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. Accruals for environmental liabilities are adjusted periodically as facts and circumstances change, assessment and remediation efforts progress, or as additional technical or legal information becomes available. Environmental liabilities are difficult to assess and estimate due to various unknown factors such as the timing and extent of remediation, improvements in remediation technologies, and the extent to which environmental laws and regulations may change in the future. Accordingly the company cannot presently fully estimate the ultimate potential costs related to these sites until such time as a substantial portion of the investigation at the sites is completed and remedial action plans are developed and, in some instances implemented. To the extent that future environmental costs exceed amounts currently accrued by the company, net income would be adversely impacted and such impact could be material. The company believes the settlement amount together with potential recoveries from various insurance policies covering environmental remediation and related litigation will be sufficient to cover any potential future costs related to the Wyle acquisition; however, it is possible unexpected costs beyond those anticipated could occur. As part of the company's settlement agreement with E.ON and VEBA, the company retains the right to various Wyle insurance policies that covered liabilities arising out of operations at Norco and Huntsville and any future amounts recovered. The company has sued certain umbrella liability policy carriers because they have yet to make payment on claims filed by the company. These disputes generally relate to the umbrella liability policy carriers' proportional share of the total liability as opposed to the applicability of coverage. The resolution of these matters could likely take several years. With the exception of $4,375 for which a settlement was reached and the company is expecting payment in the first quarter of 2013, the company has not recorded a receivable for any potential future insurance recoveries related to the Norco and Huntsville environmental matters, as the realization of the claims for recovery are not deemed probable due to the on-going litigation. Environmental Matters - Huntsville Characterization of the extent of contaminated soil and groundwater continues at the site in Huntsville, Alabama. Under the direction of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, approximately $4,000 was spent to date. The pace of the ongoing remedial investigations, project management, and regulatory oversight is likely to increase though the complete scope of the activities is not yet known, the company currently estimates additional investigative and related expenditures at the site of approximately $500 to $750. The nature and scope of both feasibility studies and subsequent remediation at the site has not yet been determined, but assuming the outcome includes source control and certain other measures, the cost is estimated to be between $3,000 and $4,000. Despite the amount of work undertaken and planned to date, the company is unable to estimate any potential costs in addition to those discussed above because the complete scope of the work is not yet known, and, accordingly, the associated costs have yet to be determined. Environmental Matters - Norco In October 2003, the company entered into a consent decree with Wyle Laboratories and the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (the "DTSC") in connection with the Norco site. In April 2005, a Remedial Investigation Work Plan was approved by DTSC that provided for site-wide characterization of known and potential environmental issues. Investigations performed in connection with this work plan and a series of subsequent technical memoranda continued until the filing of a final Remedial Investigation Report early in 2008. The development of a final Remedial Action Work Plan is ongoing. Approximately $31,000 was expended to date on project management, regulatory oversight, and investigative and feasibility study activities. The company currently estimates that the additional cost of project management and regulatory oversight to be $200. Project management and regulatory oversight include costs incurred by project consultants for project management and costs billed by DTSC to provide regulatory oversight. Ongoing remedial investigations (including costs related to soil and groundwater investigations), and the preparation of a final remedial investigation report are projected to cost $200. Work is under way pertaining to the remediation of contaminated groundwater at certain areas on the Norco site and of soil gas in a limited area immediately adjacent to the site. In 2008, a hydraulic containment system was installed to capture and treat groundwater before it moves into the adjacent offsite area. Approximately $12,000 was expended on remediation to date, and it is anticipated that these activities, along with the initial phases of the treatment of contaminated groundwater in the offsite area and remaining Remedial Action Work Plan costs, will give rise to an additional estimated $17,200 to $23,700. Despite the amount of work undertaken and planned to date, the company is unable to estimate any potential costs in addition to those discussed above because the complete scope of the work under the consent decree is not yet known, and, accordingly, the associated costs have yet to be determined. Accruals for environmental liabilities are included in "Accrued expenses" and "Other liabilities" in the company's consolidated balance sheets. 2011 Settlement of Legal Matter During 2011, the company recorded a charge of $5,875 ($3,609 net of related taxes or $.03 per share on both a basic and diluted basis) in connection with the settlement of a legal matter, inclusive of related legal costs. This matter related to a customer dispute that originated in 1997. The company had successfully defended itself in a trial, but the verdict was subsequently overturned, in part, by an appellate court and remanded for a new trial. The company ultimately decided to settle this matter to avoid further legal expense and the burden on management's time that such a trial would entail. Tekelec Matter In 2000, the company purchased Tekelec Europe SA ("Tekelec") from Tekelec Airtronic SA and certain other selling shareholders. Subsequent to the closing of the acquisition, Tekelec received a product liability claim in the amount of €11,333. The product liability claim was the subject of a French legal proceeding started by the claimant in 2002, under which separate determinations were made as to whether the products that are subject to the claim were defective and the amount of damages sustained by the purchaser. The manufacturer of the products also participated in this proceeding. The claimant has commenced legal proceedings against Tekelec and its insurers to recover damages in the amount of €3,742 and expenses of €312 plus interest. In May 2012, the French court ruled in favor of Tekelec and dismissed the plaintiff's claims. However, that decision has been appealed by the plaintiff. The company believes that any amount in addition to the amount accrued by the company would not materially adversely impact the company's consolidated financial position, liquidity, or results of operations. Other From time to time, in the normal course of business, the company may become liable with respect to other pending and threatened litigation, environmental, regulatory, labor, product, and tax matters. While such matters are subject to inherent uncertainties, it is not currently anticipated that any such matters will materially impact the company's consolidated financial position, liquidity, or results of operations.

X
- Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6952336&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name FASB Interpretation (FIN) -Number 14 -Paragraph 3 -LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy. Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) -Number 5 -Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12 -LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy. Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration