XML 31 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.22.1

Commitments and Contingencies | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Mar. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | 10. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES In the normal course of business, NCR is subject to various proceedings, lawsuits, claims and other matters, including, for example, those that relate to the environment and health and safety, labor and employment, employee benefits, import/export compliance, intellectual property, data privacy and security, product liability, commercial disputes and regulatory compliance, among others. Additionally, NCR is subject to diverse and complex laws and regulations, including those relating to corporate governance, public disclosure and reporting, environmental safety and the discharge of materials into the environment, product safety, import and export compliance, data privacy and security, antitrust and competition, government contracting, anti-corruption, and labor and human resources, which are rapidly changing and subject to many possible changes in the future. Compliance with these laws and regulations, including changes in accounting standards, taxation requirements, and federal securities laws among others, may create a substantial burden on, and substantially increase costs to NCR or could have an impact on NCR's future operating results. The Company has reflected all liabilities when a loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. We do not believe there is a reasonable possibility that losses exceeding amounts already recognized have been incurred, but there can be no assurances that the amounts required to satisfy alleged liabilities from such matters will not impact future operating results. Other than as stated below, the Company does not currently expect to incur material capital expenditures related to such matters. However, there can be no assurances that the actual amounts required to satisfy alleged liabilities from various lawsuits, claims, legal proceedings and other matters, including, but not limited to the Fox River and Kalamazoo River environmental matters and other matters discussed below, and to comply with applicable laws and regulations, will not exceed the amounts reflected in NCR’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements or will not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated results of operations, capital expenditures, competitive position, financial condition or cash flows. Environmental Matters NCR's facilities and operations are subject to a wide range of environmental protection laws, and NCR has investigatory and remedial activities underway at a number of facilities that it currently owns or operates, or formerly owned or operated, to comply, or to determine compliance, with such laws. Also, NCR has been identified, either by a government agency or by a private party seeking contribution to site clean-up costs, as a potentially responsible party (“PRP”) at a number of sites pursuant to various state and federal laws, including the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and comparable state statutes. Other than the Fox River matter, the Kalamazoo River matter and the Ebina matter discussed below, we currently do not anticipate material expenses and liabilities from these environmental matters. Fox River NCR is one of eight entities that were formally notified by governmental and other entities, such as local Native American tribes, that they are PRPs for environmental claims (under CERCLA and other statutes) arising out of the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”) in sediments in the lower Fox River and in the Bay of Green Bay in Wisconsin. Such notice was provided on September 30, 2003. The other Fox River PRPs that received notices include Appleton Papers Inc. (“API”; now known as Appvion, Inc.), P.H. Glatfelter Company (“Glatfelter”), Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP (“GP”, successor to Fort James Operating Company), and others. NCR was identified as a PRP because of alleged PCB discharges from two carbonless copy paper manufacturing facilities it previously owned, which were located along the Fox River. NCR sold its facilities in 1978 to API. The parties have also contended that NCR is responsible for PCB discharges from paper mills owned by other companies because NCR carbonless copy paper “broke” was allegedly purchased by those other mills as a raw material. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (together, “the Governments”) developed clean-up plans for the upper and lower parts of the Fox River and for portions of the Bay of Green Bay. On November 13, 2007, the Governments issued a unilateral administrative order (the “2007 Order”) under CERCLA to the eight original PRPs, requiring them to perform remedial work under the Governments’ clean-up plan for the lower parts of the river (operable units 2 through 5). In April 2009, NCR and API formed a limited liability company (the “LLC”), which entered into an agreement with an environmental remediation contractor to perform the work at the Fox River site. In-water dredging and remediation under the clean-up plan commenced shortly thereafter. NCR and API, along with B.A.T Industries p.l.c. (“BAT”), share among themselves a portion of the cost of the Fox River clean-up and natural resource damages (“NRD”) based upon a 1998 agreement (the “Cost Sharing Agreement”), a 2005 arbitration award (subsequently confirmed as a judgment), and a September 30, 2014 Funding Agreement (the “Funding Agreement”). The Cost Sharing Agreement and the arbitration resolved disputes that arose out of the Company's 1978 sale of its Fox River facilities to API. The Cost Sharing Agreement and arbitration award resulted in a 45% share for NCR of the first $75 million of such costs (a threshold that was reached in 2008), and a 40% share for amounts in excess of $75 million. The Funding Agreement arose out of a 2012 to 2014 arbitration dispute between NCR and API, and provides for regular, ongoing funding of NCR incurred Fox River remediation costs via contributions, made to a new limited liability corporation created by the Funding Agreement, by BAT, API and, for 2014, API's indemnitor, Windward Prospects. The Funding Agreement creates an obligation on BAT and API to fund 50% of NCR’s Fox River remediation costs from October 1, 2014 forward (API’s Fox River-related obligations under the Funding Agreement were fully satisfied in 2016); the Funding Agreement also provides NCR contractual avenues for payment of, via direct and third-party sources, (1) the difference between BAT’s and API’s 60% obligation under the Cost Sharing Agreement and arbitration award on the one hand and their ongoing (since September 2014) 50% payments under the Funding Agreement on the other, as well as (2) the difference between the amount NCR received under the Funding Agreement and the amount owed to it under the Cost Sharing Agreement and arbitration award for the period from April 2012 through September 2014. As of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, the receivable under the Funding Agreement was approximately $54 million and was included in Other assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The timing of collection of sums related to the receivable is uncertain, subject and pursuant to the terms of the Funding Agreement and related agreements. This receivable is not taken into account in calculating the Company’s Fox River net reserve. The Company's litigations relating to contribution and enforcement claims concerning the Fox River have been concluded. A proposed consent decree settlement (the “CD settlement”) with respect to the contribution action (a case originally filed by NCR and API) and the government enforcement action (a case originally filed by the federal and state governments against several PRPs, including the Company) was successfully negotiated by NCR and the federal and state governments and was approved on August 22, 2017 by the federal district court in Wisconsin that had been presiding over those cases. A final order of dismissal as to the Company in the contribution and government enforcement actions was subsequently entered; one party, Glatfelter, had appealed the approval of the CD settlement. On January 3, 2019, the United States lodged a proposed consent decree with the Wisconsin court, reflecting a settlement reached by the United States, Wisconsin and Glatfelter with respect to Glatfelter’s Fox River liability under the government enforcement action; a component of that settlement was withdrawal of Glatfelter’s appeal opposing the Company’s CD settlement. On March 14, 2019, the Wisconsin court approved the Glatfelter consent decree, and on April 3, 2019, Glatfelter's appeal was dismissed. The CD settlement has now resolved the remaining Fox River-related contribution and enforcement claims against the Company. The key components of the approved CD settlement include (1) the Company’s commitment to complete the remediation of the Fox River, which has now been completed; (2) the Company’s conditional agreement to waive its contribution claims against the two remaining defendants in the case, GP and Glatfelter; (3) the Company’s agreement not to appeal the trial court’s decision on divisibility of harm; (4) the Governments’ agreement to include in the settlement so-called “contribution protection” in the Company’s favor as to GP’s and Glatfelter’s contribution claims against the Company, the effect of which will be to extinguish those claims; (5) the Governments’ agreement not to pursue the Company for the Governments’ past oversight costs; and (6) the Governments’ agreement to exercise prosecutorial discretion in pursuing other parties for future oversight costs and long-term monitoring and maintenance, with the Company retaining so-called “backstop” liability in the event that the other parties fail to pay future oversight costs or to perform long-term monitoring and maintenance. Additionally, although certain state law claims by GP and Glatfelter against the Company may not be affected directly by the CD settlement, the CD settlement provides that the Company’s contribution claims against those two parties will revive if those parties attempt to assert any claims against the Company relating to the Fox River, including any state law claims. In the quarter ending September 30, 2017, the remediation general contractor commenced an arbitration against the LLC, in a dispute over contract interpretation. The hearing on this matter was completed in June 2019, and the parties submitted post-trial briefs in August 2019. The amounts claimed by the contractor range from approximately $46 million to approximately $53 million; the Company disputed the claims and contested them vigorously during the hearing. In November 2019, having rejected substantial portions of the claims, the arbitration panel awarded the contractor approximately $10 million. The Company’s indemnitors and co-obligors, described below, were responsible for the majority of the award, with the Company’s share being approximately 25% of the award. With respect to the Company’s prior dispute with API, which was generally superseded by the Funding Agreement, the Company received timely payments as they came due under the Funding Agreement. Although API filed for bankruptcy protection in October 2017, it had made all of the payments to the Company in connection with the Fox River that are required of it by the Funding Agreement. NCR's eventual remediation liability, followed by long-term monitoring expected to be performed by others, will depend on a number of factors. In establishing the reserve, NCR attempts to estimate a range of reasonably possible outcomes for each of these factors, although each range is itself uncertain. NCR uses its best estimate within the range, if that is possible. Where there is a range of equally possible outcomes, and there is no amount within that range that is considered to be a better estimate than any other amount, NCR uses the low end of the range. The significant factors include: (1) the total remaining site costs, including the costs associated with decommissioning the site, the expected cost impact of which is expected to be neutral or non-material to the Company, including long-term monitoring following completion of the clean-up, and what parties are assigned to discharge the post-clean-up tasks (as noted, the Company no longer expects to bear long-term monitoring costs); (2) total NRD for the site and the share that NCR will bear (which is now resolved as to the Company); (3) the share of clean-up costs that NCR will bear (which is resolved under the CD settlement); (4) NCR's transaction and litigation costs to defend itself to the extent additional litigation is required with respect to claims brought by the general contractor; and (5) the share of NCR's payments that BAT will bear (which is governed by the Cost Sharing Agreement and the Funding Agreement, BAT has made all of the payments requested of it, and as discussed above; API is in bankruptcy and is not presumed likely to bear further shares of NCR’s payments). With respect to NRD, in connection with a certain settlement entered into by other PRPs in 2015, the Government withdrew the NRD claims it had prosecuted on behalf of NRD trustees, including those NRD claims asserted against the Company. While it is possible there could be additional changes to some elements of the reserve over upcoming periods, all in river-remediation, site demolition and site decommissioning have been completed. Final reporting and site completion certification is expected this year. Nonetheless, there can be no assurance that unexpected expenditures and liabilities will not have a material effect on NCR's capital expenditures, earnings, financial condition, cash flows, or competitive position. As of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, the gross reserve for the Fox River matter was approximately $4 million. As of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, the net reserve for the Fox River matter was approximately $26 million. NCR contributes to the LLC to fund remediation activities and generally, by contract, has funded certain amounts of remediation expenses in advance. As of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, approximately zero remained from this funding. NCR's reserve for the Fox River matter is reduced as the LLC makes payments to the remediation contractor and other vendors with respect to remediation activities. Under a 1996 agreement, AT&T Corp. (“AT&T”) and Nokia (as the successor to Lucent Technologies and Alcatel-Lucent USA) are responsible severally (not jointly) for indemnifying NCR for certain portions of the amounts paid by NCR for the Fox River matter over a defined threshold and subject to certain offsets. (The agreement governs certain aspects of AT&T's divestiture of NCR and of what was then known as Lucent Technologies.) Those companies have made the payments requested of them by the Company on an ongoing basis. Kalamazoo River In November 2010, USEPA issued a “general notice letter” to NCR with respect to the Allied Paper, Inc./Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River Superfund Site (“Kalamazoo River site”) in Michigan. Three other companies - International Paper, Mead Corporation, and Consumers Energy - also received general notice letters at or about the same time. USEPA asserts that the site is contaminated by various substances, primarily PCBs, as a result of discharges by various paper mills located along the river. USEPA does not claim that the Company made direct discharges into the Kalamazoo River, and NCR never had facilities at or near the Kalamazoo River site, but USEPA indicated that “NCR may be liable under Section 107 of CERCLA ... as an arranger, who by contract or agreement, arranged for the disposal, treatment and/or transportation of hazardous substances at the Site.” USEPA stated that it “may issue special notice letters to [NCR] and other PRPs for future RI/FS [remedial investigation / feasibility studies] and RD/RA [remedial design / remedial action] negotiations.” In connection with the Kalamazoo River site, in December 2010 the Company, along with two other defendants, was sued in federal court by three GP affiliate corporations in a private-party contribution and cost recovery action for alleged pollution. The suit, pending in Michigan, asks that the Company and other defendants pay a “fair portion” of these companies’ costs. Various removal and remedial actions remain to be decided upon and performed at the Kalamazoo River site, the total costs for which generally remain undetermined; in 2017, Records of Decisions were issued for two parts of the river, and in 2018 such a decision was issued for another part of the river, but such decisions for the majority of the work are expected to be made only over the next several years. The suit alleges that the Company is liable to the GP entities as an “arranger” under CERCLA. The initial phase of the case was tried in a Michigan federal court in February 2013; on September 26, 2013 the court issued a decision that held NCR was liable as an “arranger” as of at least March 1969. (PCB-containing carbonless copy paper was produced from approximately 1954 to April 1971, and the majority of contamination at the Kalamazoo River site had occurred prior to 1969). NCR preserved its right to appeal the September 2013 decision. In the 2013 decision the Court did not determine NCR’s share of the overall liability. Relative shares of liability for the four companies were tried to the court in a subsequent phase of the case in December 2015. In a ruling issued on March 29, 2018, the court addressed responsibility for the costs that GP had incurred in the past, totaling to approximately $50 million (GP had sought approximately $105 million, but $55 million of those claims were removed by the court upon motions filed by the Company and other parties); NCR and GP were each assigned a 40% share of those costs, and the other two companies were assigned 15% and 5% as their allocations. The court entered a judgment in the case on June 19, 2018, in which it indicated that it would not allocate future costs, but would enter a declaratory judgment that the four companies together had responsibility for future costs, in amounts and shares to be determined. Cross-proceedings have been commenced to obtain recoveries from the other parties pursuant to the judgment; those proceedings were stayed pending the appeal referenced below. In July 2018, the Company appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit both the 2013 court decision, which it believes is in conflict with a decision from the Fox River trial court as to Operable Unit 1 of that site and an affirmance of that decision from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and the 2018 court decision, on various legal grounds. The Company filed a bond to stay any execution of the judgment pending the appeal, and its application for a stay was approved by the court and remains stayed until the Company filed its dismissal of the appeal on December 31, 2020 pursuant to a Consent Decree, noted below. During the pendency of the Sixth Circuit stay, the Company negotiated a settlement of the Kalamazoo River matter with the USEPA and other government agencies having oversight over the river. On December 5, 2019, the Company entered into a Consent Decree, filed with the District Court on December 11, 2019, and on December 2, 2020, the District Court approved the Consent Decree, which has now resolved all litigation associated with the river clean-up, including the Sixth Circuit appeal. The Consent Decree requires the Company to pay GP its 40% share of past costs, to pay the USEPA and state agencies their past and future administrative costs, and to dismiss its Sixth Circuit appeal. The Consent Decree further requires the Company to take responsibility for the remediation of a portion, but not all, of the Kalamazoo River. The Consent Decree further provides the Company protection from other PRPs, including GP, seeking contribution for their costs associated with the clean-up anywhere on the river, thereby resolving the allocation of future costs left unresolved by the June 19, 2019 judgment. NCR expects to have claims against BAT and API under the Funding Agreement discussed above for the Kalamazoo River remediation expenses. API filed for bankruptcy protection in October 2017, and thus payment of its potential share under the Funding Agreement for so-called “future sites,” which would include the Kalamazoo River site, may be at risk, but as liability under the Cost Sharing Agreement and the Funding Agreement is joint and several, the bankruptcy is not anticipated to affect the Company’s ability to seek that amount from BAT. The Company will also have indemnity or reimbursement claims against AT&T and Nokia under the arrangement discussed above in connection with the Fox River matter after expenses have met a contractual threshold set out in the 1996 agreement referenced above in the Fox River discussion. As of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, the total reserve for Kalamazoo was $96 million and $99 million, respectively. The reserve is reported on a basis that is net of expected contributions from the Company's co-obligors and indemnitors, subject to when the applicable threshold is reached. While the Company believes its co-obligors' and indemnitors' obligations are as previously reported, the reserve reflects changes in positions taken by some of those co-obligors and indemnitors with respect to the Kalamazoo River. The contributions from its co-obligors and indemnitors are expected to range from $70 million to $150 million and the Company will continue to pursue such contribution. As many aspects of the costs of remediation will not be determined for several years (and thus the high end of a range of possible costs for many areas of the site cannot be quantified at this time), the Company has made what it considers to be reasonable estimates of the low end of a range for such costs where remedies are identified, and/or of the costs of investigations and studies for areas of the river where remedies have not yet been determined, and the reserve is informed by those estimates. The extent of NCR’s potential liability remains subject to many uncertainties, notwithstanding the settlement of this matter and related Consent Decree noted above, particularly in as much as remedy decisions and cost estimates will not be generated until times in the future and as most of the work to be performed will take place through the 2030s. Under other assumptions or estimates for possible costs of remediation, which the Company does not at this point consider to be reasonably estimable or verifiable, it is possible that the reserve the Company has taken to discontinued operations reflected in this paragraph could more than approximately double the reflected reserve. Ebina The Company is engaged in cooperative regulatory compliance activities with the government of Japan in connection with certain environmental contaminants generated in its past operations in that country. The Company has quantities of PCB and other wastes primarily from its former plant at Oiso, Japan, including capsulated undiluted solutions manufactured in the past, capacitors, light ballasts and PCB-affected soil from the Oiso plant that was excavated and placed in steel drums. These wastes are stored in a facility at Ebina, Japan in accordance with Japanese regulations governing such materials. Over the past several years Japan has enacted and amended legislation governing such wastes, and has set a current deadline for treating and disposing of (at government-constructed disposal facilities) the highest-concentration wastes by 2027. Lower-concentration wastes can be and have been disposed of via private contractors, and as of March 31, 2022, NCR had disposed of approximately 68% of its lower-concentration wastes and approximately 47% of its higher-concentration wastes. The Company and its consultants have met and communicated regularly with the Japanese agency charged with administration of the law, and are working with that agency on a program to manage disposal of the high-concentration wastes, including tests of technologies to make the disposal more efficient. The government has given its final approvals, and the Company started to dispose of the high-concentration wastes in 2021, with final deadlines for various of the government-constructed disposal sites currently set for 2022, 2023 and later. Low-concentration wastes are required to be contracted for disposal by 2027, a timetable that the Company expects to meet. In September 2019, the Company’s environmental consultants, following a series of communications and meetings with the Japanese agency, at the Company’s request prepared an estimate of remaining disposal costs over the coming several years. While the estimate is subject to a range of assumptions and uncertainties, including prospects of cost reduction in coordination with the agency as certain field testing to separate high-concentration and low-concentration waste progresses over the coming years, the Company adjusted its existing reserve for the matter to take into account this cost estimate. The reserve as of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021 is $15 million and $16 million, respectively. The Japan environmental waste issue is treated as a compliance matter and not as litigation or enforcement, and the Company has received no threats of litigation or enforcement. Environmental-Related Insurance Recoveries In connection with the Fox River and other environmental sites, through March 31, 2022, NCR has received a combined gross total of approximately $205 million in settlements reached with various of its insurance carriers. Portions of many of these settlements agreed in the 2010 through 2013 timeframe are payable to a law firm that litigated the claims on the Company's behalf. Some of the settlements cover not only the Fox River but also other environmental sites; some are limited to either the Fox River or the Kalamazoo River site. Some of the settlements are directed to defense costs and some are directed to indemnity; some settlements cover both defense costs and indemnity. The Company does not anticipate that further material insurance recoveries specific to Kalamazoo River remediation costs will be available to it, but is currently in settlement discussions with certain carriers over amounts potentially owed to the Company. In December 2021, the Company recovered approximately $3 million as a result of those discussions. Settlement discussions are continuing with the remaining carriers. Claims with respect to Kalamazoo River defense costs have now been settled, with the amounts of those settlements included in the sum reported above. Environmental Remediation Estimates It is difficult to estimate the future financial impact of environmental laws, including potential liabilities. NCR records environmental provisions when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount or range of the liability is reasonably estimable; in accordance with accounting guidance, where liabilities are not expected to be quantifiable or estimable for a period of years, the estimated costs of investigating those liabilities are recorded as a component of the reserve for that particular site. Provisions for estimated losses from environmental restoration and remediation are, depending on the site, based generally on internal and third-party environmental studies, estimates as to the number and participation level of other PRPs, the extent of contamination, estimated amounts for attorney and other fees, and the nature of required clean-up and restoration actions. Reserves are adjusted as further information develops or circumstances change. Management expects that the amounts reserved from time to time will be paid out over the period of investigation, negotiation, remediation and restoration for the applicable sites. The amounts provided for environmental matters in NCR's Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements are the estimated gross undiscounted amounts of such liabilities, without deductions for indemnity insurance, third-party indemnity claims or recoveries from other PRPs, except as qualified in the following sentences. In those cases where insurance carriers or third-party indemnitors have agreed to pay any amounts and management believes that collectability of such amounts is probable, the amounts are recorded in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. For the Fox River and Kalamazoo River sites, as described above, assets relating to the AT&T and Nokia indemnities and to the BAT obligations are recorded as payment is supported by contractual agreements, public filings and/or payment history. Guarantees and Product Warranties In the ordinary course of business, NCR may issue performance guarantees on behalf of its subsidiaries to certain of its customers and other parties. Some of those guarantees may be backed by standby letters of credit, surety bonds, or similar instruments. In general, under the guarantees, NCR would be obligated to perform, or cause performance, over the term of the underlying contract in the event of an unexcused, uncured breach by its subsidiary, or some other specified triggering event, in each case as defined by the applicable guarantee. NCR believes the likelihood of having to perform under any such guarantee is remote. As of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, NCR had no material obligations related to such guarantees, and therefore its Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements do not have any associated liability balance. NCR provides its customers a standard manufacturer’s warranty and records, at the time of the sale, a corresponding estimated liability for potential warranty costs. Estimated future obligations due to warranty claims are based upon historical factors, such as labor rates, average repair time, travel time, number of service calls per machine and cost of replacement parts. When a sale is consummated, the total customer revenue is recognized, provided that all revenue recognition criteria are otherwise satisfied, and the associated warranty liability is recorded using pre-established warranty percentages for the respective product classes. From time to time, product design or quality corrections are accomplished through modification programs. When identified, associated costs of labor and parts for such programs are estimated and accrued as part of the warranty reserve. The Company recorded the activity related to the warranty reserve for the three months ended March 31 as follows:
In millions | 2022 |  | 2021
Warranty reserve liability |  |  |
Beginning balance as of January 1 | $ | 19 |  |  | $ | 18 |
Accruals for warranties issued | 5 |  |  | 7 |
Settlements (in cash or in kind) | (7) |  |  | (7) |
Ending balance as of March 31 | $ | 17 |  |  | $ | 18 |
In addition, NCR provides its customers with certain indemnification rights. In general, NCR agrees to indemnify the customer if a third-party asserts patent or other infringement on the part of its customers for its use of the Company’s products subject to certain conditions that are generally standard within the Company’s industries. On limited occasions the Company will undertake additional indemnification obligations for business reasons. From time to time, NCR also enters into agreements in connection with its acquisition and divestiture activities that include indemnification obligations by the Company. The fair value of these indemnification obligations is not readily determinable due to the conditional nature of the Company’s potential obligations and the specific facts and circumstances involved with each particular agreement. The Company has not recorded a liability in connection with these indemnifications, and no current indemnification instance is material to the Company’s financial position. Historically, payments made by the Company under these types of agreements have not had a material effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Purchase Commitments The Company has purchase commitments for materials, supplies, services, and property, plant and equipment as part of the normal course of business. This includes a long-term service agreement with Accenture, under which many of NCR's key transaction processing activities and functions are performed.

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://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration