Benefit Plans

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Compensation and Retirement Disclosure [Abstract]

Compensation and Employee Benefit Plans [Text Block]

Note 6 – Benefit Plans

Defined Contribution Plan

 The Company has a defined contribution plan covering all full time employees qualified under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code, in which the Company matches a portion of an employee’s salary deferral. The Company’s contributions to this plan were $200 and $227, for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Defined Benefit Pension Plan

 Substantially all union employees who met certain requirements of age, length of service and hours worked per year were covered by a Company sponsored non-contributory defined benefit pension plan. Benefits paid to retirees are based upon age at retirement and years of credited service. On August 1, 2006, the plan was frozen.

The following table sets forth the change in projected benefit obligation, change in plan assets and funded status of the defined benefit pension plan:

	2011			2010
Change in Benefit Obligation
Benefit obligation at beginning of year	$	2,791		$	2,460
Service cost		0			0
Interest cost		145			144
Plan participants’ contributions		0			0
Amendments		0			0
Actuarial loss (gain)		571			250
Business combinations		0			0
Divestitures		0			0
Curtailments		0			0
Settlements		0			0
Special termination benefits		0			0
Benefits paid		(213	)		(63	)
Currency translation adjustment		0			0
Benefit obligation at end of year	$	3,294		$	2,791
Change in Plan Assets
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year	$	2,591		$	2,163
Actual return on plan assets		(65	)		291
Employer contribution		200			200
Business combinations		0			0
Divestitures		0			0
Settlements		0			0
Plan participants’ contributions		0			0
Benefits paid		(213	)		(63	)
Administrative Expenses Paid		0			0
Currency Translation Adjustment		0			0
Fair value of plan assets at end of year	$	2,513		$	2,591
Funded status	$	(781	)	$	(200	)
Amounts Recognized in the Statement of Financial Position consists of:
Noncurrent assets	$	0		$	0
Current liabilities	$	0		$	0
Noncurrent liabilities	$	(781	)	$	(200	)
Net amount recognized	$	(781	)	$	(200	)

	2011		2010
Change in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)		-		-
Amounts Recognized in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) consist of:
Net actuarial loss (gain)	$	1,942	$	1,256
Prior service cost (credit)		-		-
Unrecognized net initial obligation (asset)		-		-
Total (before tax effects)	$	1,942	$	1,256
Accumulated benefit Obligation End of Year	$	3,294	$	2,791

	2011			2010
Information for Pension Plans with an Accumulated Benefit Obligation in excess of Plan Assets:
Projected benefit of obligation	$	3,294		$	2,791
Accumulated benefit obligation	$	3,294		$	2,791
Fair value of plan assets	$	2,513		$	2,591
Weighted-Average Assumptions Used to Determine Benefit Obligation in Excess of Plan Assets:
Discount Rate		4.50	%		5.50	%
Salary Scale		N/A			N/A
Components of Net Periodic Benefit Cost and Other Amounts Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Net periodic cost
Service cost	$	0		$	0
Interest cost		145			144
Expected return on plan assets		(180	)		(150	)
Recognized prior service cost (credit)		0			0
Recognized actuarial (gain) loss		130			118
Recognized net initial obligation (asset)		0			0
Recognized actuarial (gain) loss due to curtailments		0			0
Recognized actuarial (gain) loss due to settlements		0			0
Recognized actuarial (gain) loss due to special termination benefits		0			0
Net periodic benefit cost	$	95		$	112
Other Changes in Plan Assets and Benefit Obligations Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Net actuarial loss (gain)	$	816		$	110
Recognized actuarial loss (gain)		(130	)		(118	)
Prior service cost (credit)		0			0
Recognized prior service cost (credit)		0			0
Total net obligation		0			0
Total recognized in other comprehensive income (before tax effects)	$	686		$	(8	)
Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income (loss) (before tax effects)	$	780		$	104

	2011			2010
Amounts Expected to be Recognized in Net Periodic Cost in the Coming Year
(Gain)/loss recognition	$	206		$	125
Prior service cost recognition	$	0		$	0
Net initial obligations/(asset) recognition	$	0		$	0
Weighted-Average Assumptions Used to Determine Net Periodic Cost for Fiscal Periods Ending as of December 31
Discount rate		5.50	%		6.00	%
Expected asset return		7.00	%		7.00	%
Salary Scale		N/A			N/A

Plan Assets

Asset Category	Expected Long- Term Return			Target Allocation			2011			2010
Equity securities		8.50	%		55	%		68	%		63	%
Debt securities		5.50	%		45	%		32	%		37	%
Total		7.00	%		100	%		100	%		100	%

Estimated Future Benefit Payments
Expected company contributions in the following fiscal year	$	200
Expected Benefit Payments:
In the first year following the disclosure date	$	69
In the second year following the disclosure date	$	134
In the third year following the disclosure date	$	84
In the fourth year following the disclosure date	$	136
In the fifth year following the disclosure date	$	134
In the sixth year following the disclosure date	$	759

ASC Topic 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” (“ASC 820”), establishes a framework for measuring fair value. That framework provides a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. This hierarchy consists of three broad levels: Level 1 inputs consist of unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and have the highest priority, Level 2 inputs consist of observable inputs other than quoted prices for similar assets, and Level 3 inputs have the lowest priority. The plan uses appropriate valuation techniques based on the available inputs to measure the fair value of its investments. When available, the plan measures fair value using Level 1 inputs because they generally provide the most reliable evidence of fair value. Level 3 inputs were used only when Level 1 or Level 2 inputs were not available. The three levels of the fair value hierarchy under ASC 820 are described below:

Level 1

Inputs to the valuation methodology are unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that the plan has the ability to access.

Level 2

Inputs to the valuation methodology include:

· Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets

· Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in inactive markets

· Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability

· Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means

If the asset or liability has a specified (contractual) term, the Level 2 input must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

Level 3

Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

The asset’s or liability’s fair value measurement level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Valuation techniques used need to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs.

Following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for assets measured at fair value:

Pooled separate accounts: Units of pooled separate accounts that are invested mainly in short term securities, such as commercial paper; fixed securities, such as asset backed securities, residential mortgage backed securities, commercial mortgage backed securities and government bonds; and international stocks, which have observable level 1 or 2 inputs, including quoted prices for similar assets, are valued per unit using a pricing service, Interactive Data Corporation. Units of pooled separate accounts that are invested directly in mutual funds or domestic stocks which have observable level 1 inputs are used in determining the net asset value (NAV) of the pooled separate account, which is not publicly quoted.

The methods described above may produce a fair value calculation that may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair values. Furthermore, while the plan believes its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different fair value measurement at the reporting date.

The plan invests 100% in pooled separate accounts which are valued utilizing level 2 inputs.