Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies	(8) Commitments and Contingencies a. Litigation—General We are involved in litigation from time to time in the ordinary course of business. A portion of the defense and/or settlement costs associated with such litigation is covered by various commercial liability insurance policies purchased by us and, in limited cases, indemnification from third parties. Our policy is to establish reserves for loss contingencies when the losses are both probable and reasonably estimable. We record legal costs associated with loss contingencies as expenses in the period in which they are incurred. The matters described below represent our significant loss contingencies. We have evaluated each matter and, if both probable and estimable, accrued an amount that represents our estimate of any probable loss associated with such matter. In addition, we have estimated a reasonably possible range for all loss contingencies including those described below. We believe it is reasonably possible that we could incur aggregate losses in addition to amounts currently accrued for all matters up to an additional $43,000 over the next several years. b. Government Contract Billing Matter Since October 2001, we have provided services to the U.S. Government under several General Services Administration ("GSA") multiple award schedule contracts (the "Schedules"). From October 1, 2001 through September 30, 2013, we billed approximately $70,600 under the Schedules. The earliest of the Schedules was renewed in October 2006 with certain modifications to its terms. The Schedules contain a price reductions clause ("Price Reductions Clause") that requires us to offer to reduce the prices billed under the Schedules to correspond to the prices billed to certain benchmark commercial customers. In 2011, we initiated an internal review covering the contract period commencing in October 2006, and we discovered potential non-compliance with the Price Reductions Clause. We voluntarily disclosed the potential non-compliance for that period to the GSA and its Office of Inspector General ("OIG") in June 2011. In April 2012, the U.S. Government sent us a subpoena seeking information that substantially overlaps with the subjects that are covered by the voluntary disclosure process that we initiated with the GSA and OIG in June 2011, except that the subpoena seeks information dating back to 2000, including the initial GSA schedule period of 2001 to 2006, and seeks information about non-GSA federal and state and local customers. Despite the substantial overlap, we understand that the subpoena relates to a separate inquiry, under the civil False Claims Act, that has been initiated independent of the GSA and OIG voluntary disclosure matter. We continue to review this matter and provide the U.S. Government with information, including pricing practices and the proposed pricing adjustment amount to be refunded. The U.S. Government, however, may not agree with our determination of the refund amount and may request additional pricing adjustments, refunds, civil penalties, up to treble damages and/or interest. Given the above, it is reasonably possible that an adjustment to our estimates may be required in the future as a result of updated facts and circumstances. To the extent that an adjustment to our estimates is necessary in a future period, we will assess, at that time, whether the adjustment is a result of a change in estimate or the correction of an error. A change in estimate would be reflected as an adjustment through the then-current period statement of operations. A correction of an error would require a quantitative and qualitative analysis to determine the approach to correcting the error. A correction of an error could be reflected in the then-current period statement of operations or as a restatement of prior period financial information, depending upon the underlying facts and circumstances and our quantitative and qualitative analysis. c. State of Massachusetts Assessment During the third quarter of 2012, we applied for an abatement of assessments from the state of Massachusetts. The assessments, issued in the second quarter of 2012, related to a corporate excise audit of the 2004 through 2006 tax years in the aggregate amount of $8,191, including tax, interest and penalties through the assessment date. The applications for abatement were denied during the third quarter of 2012. On October 19, 2012 we filed petitions with the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board challenging the assessments. We intend to defend this matter vigorously at the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board. In addition, during the second quarter of 2013, Massachusetts assessed tax for the 2007 and 2008 tax years in the aggregate amount of $4,120, including tax, interest and penalties through the assessment date. The assessment is for issues consistent with those assessed in the earlier years. In the third quarter of 2013, we filed an application for abatement for the 2007 and 2008 tax years, which Massachusetts denied on October 15, 2013. We intend to file a petition with the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board to challenge the assessment for the 2007 and 2008 tax years and will vigorously defend the matter. Additionally, the state has begun an audit of the 2009-2011 tax years. d. Italy Fire On November 4, 2011, we experienced a fire at a facility we leased in Aprilia, Italy. The facility primarily stored archival and inactive business records for local area businesses. Despite quick response by local fire authorities, damage to the building was extensive, and the building and its contents were a total loss. We continue to assess the impact of the fire, and, although our warehouse legal liability insurer has reserved its rights to contest coverage related to certain types of potential claims, we believe we carry adequate insurance. We have been sued by three customers, and have received correspondence from other customers, under various theories of liabilities. We deny any liability with respect to the fire and we have referred these claims to our warehouse legal liability insurer for an appropriate response. We do not expect that this event will have a material impact on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As discussed in Note 10, we sold our Italian operations on April 27, 2012, and we indemnified the buyers related to certain obligations and contingencies associated with the fire. Our policy related to business interruption insurance recoveries is to record gains within other (income) expense, net in our consolidated statement of operations and proceeds received within cash flows from operating activities in our consolidated statement of cash flows. Such amounts are recorded in the period the cash is received. Our policy with respect to involuntary conversion of property, plant and equipment is to record any gain or loss within (gain) loss on disposal/write-down of property, plant and equipment, net within operating income in our consolidated statement of operations and proceeds received within cash flows from investing activities within our consolidated statement of cash flows. Losses are recorded when incurred and gains are recorded in the period when the cash received exceeds the carrying value of the related property, plant and equipment. As a result of the sale of the Italian operations, statements of operation and cash flow impacts related to the fire will be reflected as discontinued operations.

(8) Commitments and Contingencies

a.: Litigation—General

We are involved in litigation from time to time in the ordinary course of business. A portion of the defense and/or settlement costs associated with such litigation is covered by various commercial liability insurance policies purchased by us and, in limited cases, indemnification from third parties. Our policy is to establish reserves for loss contingencies when the losses are both probable and reasonably estimable. We record legal costs associated with loss contingencies as expenses in the period in which they are incurred. The matters described below represent our significant loss contingencies. We have evaluated each matter and, if both probable and estimable, accrued an amount that represents our estimate of any probable loss associated with such matter. In addition, we have estimated a reasonably possible range for all loss contingencies including those described below. We believe it is reasonably possible that we could incur aggregate losses in addition to amounts currently accrued for all matters up to an additional $43,000 over the next several years.

b.: Government Contract Billing Matter

Since October 2001, we have provided services to the U.S. Government under several General Services Administration ("GSA") multiple award schedule contracts (the "Schedules"). From October 1, 2001 through September 30, 2013, we billed approximately $70,600 under the Schedules. The earliest of the Schedules was renewed in October 2006 with certain modifications to its terms. The Schedules contain a price reductions clause ("Price Reductions Clause") that requires us to offer to reduce the prices billed under the Schedules to correspond to the prices billed to certain benchmark commercial customers. In 2011, we initiated an internal review covering the contract period commencing in October 2006, and we discovered potential non-compliance with the Price Reductions Clause. We voluntarily disclosed the potential non-compliance for that period to the GSA and its Office of Inspector General ("OIG") in June 2011.

In April 2012, the U.S. Government sent us a subpoena seeking information that substantially overlaps with the subjects that are covered by the voluntary disclosure process that we initiated with the GSA and OIG in June 2011, except that the subpoena seeks information dating back to 2000, including the initial GSA schedule period of 2001 to 2006, and seeks information about non-GSA federal and state and local customers. Despite the substantial overlap, we understand that the subpoena relates to a separate inquiry, under the civil False Claims Act, that has been initiated independent of the GSA and OIG voluntary disclosure matter.

We continue to review this matter and provide the U.S. Government with information, including pricing practices and the proposed pricing adjustment amount to be refunded. The U.S. Government, however, may not agree with our determination of the refund amount and may request additional pricing adjustments, refunds, civil penalties, up to treble damages and/or interest.

Given the above, it is reasonably possible that an adjustment to our estimates may be required in the future as a result of updated facts and circumstances. To the extent that an adjustment to our estimates is necessary in a future period, we will assess, at that time, whether the adjustment is a result of a change in estimate or the correction of an error. A change in estimate would be reflected as an adjustment through the then-current period statement of operations. A correction of an error would require a quantitative and qualitative analysis to determine the approach to correcting the error. A correction of an error could be reflected in the then-current period statement of operations or as a restatement of prior period financial information, depending upon the underlying facts and circumstances and our quantitative and qualitative analysis.

c.: State of Massachusetts Assessment

During the third quarter of 2012, we applied for an abatement of assessments from the state of Massachusetts. The assessments, issued in the second quarter of 2012, related to a corporate excise audit of the 2004 through 2006 tax years in the aggregate amount of $8,191, including tax, interest and penalties through the assessment date. The applications for abatement were denied during the third quarter of 2012. On October 19, 2012 we filed petitions with the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board challenging the assessments. We intend to defend this matter vigorously at the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board. In addition, during the second quarter of 2013, Massachusetts assessed tax for the 2007 and 2008 tax years in the aggregate amount of $4,120, including tax, interest and penalties through the assessment date. The assessment is for issues consistent with those assessed in the earlier years. In the third quarter of 2013, we filed an application for abatement for the 2007 and 2008 tax years, which Massachusetts denied on October 15, 2013. We intend to file a petition with the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board to challenge the assessment for the 2007 and 2008 tax years and will vigorously defend the matter. Additionally, the state has begun an audit of the 2009-2011 tax years.

d.: Italy Fire

On November 4, 2011, we experienced a fire at a facility we leased in Aprilia, Italy. The facility primarily stored archival and inactive business records for local area businesses. Despite quick response by local fire authorities, damage to the building was extensive, and the building and its contents were a total loss. We continue to assess the impact of the fire, and, although our warehouse legal liability insurer has reserved its rights to contest coverage related to certain types of potential claims, we believe we carry adequate insurance. We have been sued by three customers, and have received correspondence from other customers, under various theories of liabilities. We deny any liability with respect to the fire and we have referred these claims to our warehouse legal liability insurer for an appropriate response. We do not expect that this event will have a material impact on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As discussed in Note 10, we sold our Italian operations on April 27, 2012, and we indemnified the buyers related to certain obligations and contingencies associated with the fire.

Our policy related to business interruption insurance recoveries is to record gains within other (income) expense, net in our consolidated statement of operations and proceeds received within cash flows from operating activities in our consolidated statement of cash flows. Such amounts are recorded in the period the cash is received. Our policy with respect to involuntary conversion of property, plant and equipment is to record any gain or loss within (gain) loss on disposal/write-down of property, plant and equipment, net within operating income in our consolidated statement of operations and proceeds received within cash flows from investing activities within our consolidated statement of cash flows. Losses are recorded when incurred and gains are recorded in the period when the cash received exceeds the carrying value of the related property, plant and equipment. As a result of the sale of the Italian operations, statements of operation and cash flow impacts related to the fire will be reflected as discontinued operations.