XML 31 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.5.0.2

Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Oct. 01, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Contingencies [Text Block] | Contingencies Environmental Matters In connection with the purchase of Wyle in August 2000, the company acquired certain of the then outstanding obligations of Wyle, including Wyle's 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 the sellers, the sellers agreed to indemnify the company for certain costs associated with the Wyle environmental obligations, among other things. In 2012, the company entered into a settlement agreement with the sellers pursuant to which the sellers paid $110,000 and the company released the sellers from their indemnification obligation. As part of the settlement agreement, the company accepted responsibility for any potential subsequent costs incurred related to the Wyle matters. 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. 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. Accruals for environmental liabilities are included in "Accrued expenses" and "Other liabilities" in the company's consolidated balance sheets. The company has determined that there is no amount within the environmental liability range that is a better estimate than any other amount, and therefore has recorded the accruals at the minimum amount of the ranges. As successor-in-interest to Wyle, the company is the beneficiary of various Wyle insurance policies that covered liabilities arising out of operations at Norco and Huntsville. To date, the company has recovered approximately $37,000 from certain insurance carriers relating to environmental clean-up matters at the Norco site. The company is considering the best way to pursue its potential claims against insurers regarding liabilities arising out of operations at Huntsville. The resolution of these matters will likely take several years. 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 at this time. 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. Environmental Matters - Huntsville In February 2015, the company and the Alabama Department of Environmental Management ("ADEM") finalized and executed a consent decree in connection with the Huntsville, Alabama site. Characterization of the extent of contaminated soil and groundwater continues at the site. Under the direction of the ADEM, approximately $5,000 was spent to date. The pace of the ongoing remedial investigations, project management, and regulatory oversight is likely to increase somewhat and, 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 $300 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. 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. In September 2013, the DTSC approved the final Remedial Action Plan ("RAP") and work is currently progressing under the RAP. The approval of the RAP includes the potential for additional remediation action after the five year review of the hydraulic containment system if the review finds that contaminants have not been sufficiently reduced in the offsite area. Approximately $53,000 was spent to date on remediation, project management, regulatory oversight, and investigative and feasibility study activities. The company currently estimates that these activities will give rise to an additional $22,300 to $33,000. Project management and regulatory oversight include costs incurred by project consultants for project management and costs billed by DTSC to provide regulatory oversight. 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 RAP is not yet known, and, accordingly, the associated costs have yet to be determined. 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 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. In January 2015, the Court of Appeals confirmed the French court's ruling. Our counsel obtained a certificate of non-appeal in July 2016. Accordingly, the plaintiffs are precluded from appealing or bringing a new action asserting the same claims. Based upon these developments, the company has released the contingency reserve related to Tekelec during the third quarter of 2016. Antitrust Investigation On January 21, 2014, the company received a Civil Investigative Demand in connection with an investigation by the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") relating generally to the use of a database program (the “database program”) that has operated for more than ten years under the auspices of the Global Technology Distribution Council ("GTDC"), a trade group of which the company is a member. Under the database program, certain members of the GTDC who participate in the program provide sales data to a third party independent contractor chosen by the GTDC. The data is aggregated by the third party and the aggregated data is made available to the program participants. The company understands that other members participating in the database program have received similar Civil Investigative Demands. In April 2014, the company responded to the Civil Investigative Demand. The Civil Investigative Demand merely sought information, and no proceedings have been instituted against any person. The company continues to believe that there has not been any conduct by the company or its employees that would be actionable under the antitrust laws in connection with its participation in the database program. At this time, it is not possible to predict the potential impact, if any, of the Civil Investigative Demand or whether any actions may be instituted by the FTC against any person. 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
- References No definition available. + 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 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 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=51674963&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 3: 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=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 4: 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 5: 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 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration