Commitments And Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2016
Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]
Legal Matters	12. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Legal Matters From time to time we are a party to various claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. We maintain various insurance coverages to minimize financial risk associated with these proceedings. None of these proceedings, separately or in the aggregate, are expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. With respect to all such proceedings, we record reserves when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. We expense routine legal costs related to these proceedings as they are incurred. The following is a discussion of our significant legal matters: Capstone Construction Claims From 2003 to 2005, two of our former subsidiaries performed HVAC and electrical work under contract with Capstone Building Corporation (“Capstone”) on a university student housing project in Texas. In 2005, our subsidiaries filed for arbitration against Capstone, seeking payment for work performed, change orders and other impacts. The parties settled those claims, and the release included a waiver of warranties associated with any of the HVAC work. Several years later the subsidiaries discontinued operations, and the Company sold their assets. On October 24, 2013, Capstone filed a petition in the 12th Judicial District Court of Walker County, Texas against these subsidiaries, among other subcontractors, seeking contribution, defense, indemnity and damages for breach of contract in connection with alleged construction defect claims brought against Capstone by the owner of the student housing project. The owner claims $9,600 in damages, plus attorneys’ fees and costs against Capstone, which Capstone is seeking to recover from the subcontractors. The claims against the Company are based on alleged defects in the mechanical design, construction and installation of the HVAC and electrical systems performed by our former subsidiaries. Based on the settlement reached in the 2005 arbitration, we moved for, and the District Court granted us, summary judgment, dismissing all of Capstone’s claims in the 2013 lawsuit. Capstone appealed, and on April 28, 2016, the 10th Court of Appeals, Waco, Texas Division, reversed the ruling with respect to the indemnity claims and remanded the case back to the District Court. We intend to file a petition for review to the Texas Supreme Court. Should the Texas Supreme Court agree that the claims should be remanded to the District Court, the Company will defend the claims and expects ultimately to prevail on the merits, but there can be no assurance that the Company will prevail or that it will not incur costs and liability for indemnity in connection with resolution of the claims. To date, the Company has not established a reserve with respect to this matter, as we believe the likelihood of our responsibility for damages is not probable and a potential range of exposure is not reasonably estimable. Ward Transformer Site Private Action In April 2009, Carolina Power and Light Company and Consolidation Coal Company filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (Western Division) against a number of entities, including one of our subsidiaries, to recover costs to remove Polychlorinated Byphenyls (“PCB”) contamination at Ward Transformer, an electric transformer resale and reconditioning facility located in Raleigh, North Carolina (the “Private Action”). Plaintiffs had been ordered under a settlement agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) to clean up the onsite contamination, including the groundwater underneath the facility, and were seeking to recover costs associated with the clean-up from other potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”). During the first quarter of fiscal year 2016, the parties to this matter reached an agreement in principle to settle the Company’s exposure, and following the first quarter, the parties settled this matter. The agreed upon settlement was fully accrued at September 30, 2015 and paid during the nine months ended June 30, 2016. EPA Action Contamination outside of and downstream from the Ward Transformer site is not subject to the Private Action. The EPA has not yet assessed costs for that portion of the remediation, and has not entered into any settlement agreement with any party to begin clean-up. While the costs to remediate the offsite conditions remain unknown, certain of the parties with larger exposure have agreed to undertake the clean-up. During the first quarter of fiscal year 2016, these parties agreed in principle to release several types of PRPs from liability for a nominal amount based on their limited involvement in the site, and following the third quarter, we settled this matter for $15, which we expect to pay in the fourth quarter. Risk-Management We retain the risk for workers’ compensation, employer’s liability, automobile liability, construction defects, general liability and employee group health claims, as well as pollution coverage, resulting from uninsured deductibles per accident or occurrence which are generally subject to annual aggregate limits. Our general liability program provides coverage for bodily injury and property damage. In many cases, we insure third parties, including general contractors, as additional insureds under our insurance policies. Losses up to the deductible amounts, or losses that are not covered under our policies, are accrued based upon our known claims incurred and an estimate of claims incurred but not reported. As a result, many of our claims are effectively self-insured. Many claims against our insurance are in the form of litigation. At June 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, we had $4,765 and $4,518, respectively, accrued for insurance liabilities. We are also subject to construction defect liabilities, primarily within our Residential segment. As of June 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, we had $285 and $464, respectively, reserved for these claims. Because the reserves are based on judgment and estimates, and involve variables that are inherently uncertain, such as the outcome of litigation and an assessment of insurance coverage, there can be no assurance that the ultimate liability will not be higher or lower than such estimates or that the timing of payments will not create liquidity issues for the Company. Some of the underwriters of our casualty insurance program require us to post letters of credit as collateral. This is common in the insurance industry. To date, we have not had a situation where an underwriter has had reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter of credit. At both June 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, $6,347 of our outstanding letters of credit was utilized to collateralize our insurance program. Surety As of June 30, 2016, the estimated cost to complete our bonded projects was approximately $55,706. We evaluate our bonding requirements on a regular basis, including the terms offered by our sureties. We believe the bonding capacity presently provided by our current sureties is adequate for our current operations and will be adequate for our operations for the foreseeable future. Posting letters of credit in favor of our sureties reduces the borrowing availability under our credit facility. Other Commitments and Contingencies Some of our customers and vendors require us to post letters of credit, or provide intercompany guarantees, as a means of guaranteeing performance under our contracts and ensuring payment by us to subcontractors and vendors. If our customer has reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter of credit, we would be required to reimburse our creditor for the letter of credit. At June 30, 2016, $571 of our outstanding letters of credit were to collateralize our vendors. From time to time, we may enter into firm purchase commitments for materials such as copper or aluminum wire which we expect to use in the ordinary course of business. These commitments are typically for terms of less than one year and require us to buy minimum quantities of materials at specific intervals at a fixed price over the term. As of June 30, 2016, we had such purchase orders totaling $804. We expect to use all of the materials purchased pursuant to these orders within the next 12 months.

Commitments And Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2016

Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]

12. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Legal Matters

From time to time we are a party to various claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. We maintain various insurance coverages to minimize financial risk associated with these proceedings. None of these proceedings, separately or in the aggregate, are expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. With respect to all such proceedings, we record reserves when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. We expense routine legal costs related to these proceedings as they are incurred.

The following is a discussion of our significant legal matters:

Capstone Construction Claims

From 2003 to 2005, two of our former subsidiaries performed HVAC and electrical work under contract with Capstone Building Corporation (“Capstone”) on a university student housing project in Texas. In 2005, our subsidiaries filed for arbitration against Capstone, seeking payment for work performed, change orders and other impacts. The parties settled those claims, and the release included a waiver of warranties associated with any of the HVAC work. Several years later the subsidiaries discontinued operations, and the Company sold their assets.

On October 24, 2013, Capstone filed a petition in the 12th Judicial District Court of Walker County, Texas against these subsidiaries, among other subcontractors, seeking contribution, defense, indemnity and damages for breach of contract in connection with alleged construction defect claims brought against Capstone by the owner of the student housing project. The owner claims $9,600 in damages, plus attorneys’ fees and costs against Capstone, which Capstone is seeking to recover from the subcontractors. The claims against the Company are based on alleged defects in the mechanical design, construction and installation of the HVAC and electrical systems performed by our former subsidiaries.

Based on the settlement reached in the 2005 arbitration, we moved for, and the District Court granted us, summary judgment, dismissing all of Capstone’s claims in the 2013 lawsuit. Capstone appealed, and on April 28, 2016, the 10th Court of Appeals, Waco, Texas Division, reversed the ruling with respect to the indemnity claims and remanded the case back to the District Court. We intend to file a petition for review to the Texas Supreme Court. Should the Texas Supreme Court agree that the claims should be remanded to the District Court, the Company will defend the claims and expects ultimately to prevail on the merits, but there can be no assurance that the Company will prevail or that it will not incur costs and liability for indemnity in connection with resolution of the claims. To date, the Company has not established a reserve with respect to this matter, as we believe the likelihood of our responsibility for damages is not probable and a potential range of exposure is not reasonably estimable.

Ward Transformer Site

Private Action

In April 2009, Carolina Power and Light Company and Consolidation Coal Company filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (Western Division) against a number of entities, including one of our subsidiaries, to recover costs to remove Polychlorinated Byphenyls (“PCB”) contamination at Ward Transformer, an electric transformer resale and reconditioning facility located in Raleigh, North Carolina (the “Private Action”). Plaintiffs had been ordered under a settlement agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) to clean up the onsite contamination, including the groundwater underneath the facility, and were seeking to recover costs associated with the clean-up from other potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”). During the first quarter of fiscal year 2016, the parties to this matter reached an agreement in principle to settle the Company’s exposure, and following the first quarter, the parties settled this matter. The agreed upon settlement was fully accrued at September 30, 2015 and paid during the nine months ended June 30, 2016.

EPA Action

Contamination outside of and downstream from the Ward Transformer site is not subject to the Private Action. The EPA has not yet assessed costs for that portion of the remediation, and has not entered into any settlement agreement with any party to begin clean-up. While the costs to remediate the offsite conditions remain unknown, certain of the parties with larger exposure have agreed to undertake the clean-up. During the first quarter of fiscal year 2016, these parties agreed in principle to release several types of PRPs from liability for a nominal amount based on their limited involvement in the site, and following the third quarter, we settled this matter for $15, which we expect to pay in the fourth quarter.

Risk-Management

We retain the risk for workers’ compensation, employer’s liability, automobile liability, construction defects, general liability and employee group health claims, as well as pollution coverage, resulting from uninsured deductibles per accident or occurrence which are generally subject to annual aggregate limits. Our general liability program provides coverage for bodily injury and property damage. In many cases, we insure third parties, including general contractors, as additional insureds under our insurance policies. Losses up to the deductible amounts, or losses that are not covered under our policies, are accrued based upon our known claims incurred and an estimate of claims incurred but not reported. As a result, many of our claims are effectively self-insured. Many claims against our insurance are in the form of litigation. At June 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, we had $4,765 and $4,518, respectively, accrued for insurance liabilities. We are also subject to construction defect liabilities, primarily within our Residential segment. As of June 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, we had $285 and $464, respectively, reserved for these claims. Because the reserves are based on judgment and estimates, and involve variables that are inherently uncertain, such as the outcome of litigation and an assessment of insurance coverage, there can be no assurance that the ultimate liability will not be higher or lower than such estimates or that the timing of payments will not create liquidity issues for the Company.

Some of the underwriters of our casualty insurance program require us to post letters of credit as collateral. This is common in the insurance industry. To date, we have not had a situation where an underwriter has had reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter of credit. At both June 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, $6,347 of our outstanding letters of credit was utilized to collateralize our insurance program.

Surety

As of June 30, 2016, the estimated cost to complete our bonded projects was approximately $55,706. We evaluate our bonding requirements on a regular basis, including the terms offered by our sureties. We believe the bonding capacity presently provided by our current sureties is adequate for our current operations and will be adequate for our operations for the foreseeable future. Posting letters of credit in favor of our sureties reduces the borrowing availability under our credit facility.

Other Commitments and Contingencies

Some of our customers and vendors require us to post letters of credit, or provide intercompany guarantees, as a means of guaranteeing performance under our contracts and ensuring payment by us to subcontractors and vendors. If our customer has reasonable cause to effect payment under a letter of credit, we would be required to reimburse our creditor for the letter of credit. At June 30, 2016, $571 of our outstanding letters of credit were to collateralize our vendors.

From time to time, we may enter into firm purchase commitments for materials such as copper or aluminum wire which we expect to use in the ordinary course of business. These commitments are typically for terms of less than one year and require us to buy minimum quantities of materials at specific intervals at a fixed price over the term. As of June 30, 2016, we had such purchase orders totaling $804. We expect to use all of the materials purchased pursuant to these orders within the next 12 months.