Legal Proceedings	6 Months Ended
Jul. 31, 2021
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Legal Proceedings	Note 9 Legal Proceedings Environmental Matters New York State Environmental Matters In August 1997, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“NYSDEC”) and the Company entered into a consent order whereby we assumed responsibility for conducting a remedial investigation and feasibility study and implementing an interim remedial measure with regard to the site of a knitting mill operated by a former subsidiary of ours from 1965 to 1969. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), which assumed primary regulatory responsibility for the site from NYSDEC, issued a Record of Decision in September 2007. The Record of Decision specified a remedy of a combination of groundwater extraction and treatment and in-situ chemical oxidation. In September 2015, the EPA adopted an amendment to the Record of Decision eliminating the separate ground-water extraction and treatment systems and the use of in-situ oxidation from the remedy adopted in the Record of Decision. The amendment provides for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing wellhead treatment systems on wells operated by the Village of Garden City, New York (the "Village"). It also requires us to perform certain ongoing monitoring, operation and maintenance activities and to reimburse EPA's future oversight cost, involving future costs to us estimated to be between $1.7 million and $2.0 million, and to reimburse EPA for approximately $1.25 million of interim oversight costs. On August 15, 2016, the Court entered a Consent Judgment implementing the remedy provided for by the amendment. The Village additionally asserted that we are liable for the costs associated with enhanced treatment required by the impact of the groundwater plume from the site on two public water supply wells, including historical total costs ranging from approximately $1.8 million to in excess of $2.5 million, and future operation and maintenance costs which the Village estimated at $126,400 annually while the enhanced treatment continues. On December 14, 2007, the Village filed a complaint (the "Village Lawsuit") against us and the owner of the property under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) as well as a number of state law theories in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, seeking an injunction requiring the defendants to remediate contamination from the site and to establish their liability for future costs that may be incurred in connection with it. In June 2016 we reached an agreement with the Village providing for the Village to continue to operate and maintain the well head treatment systems in accordance with the Record of Decision and to release its claims against us asserted in the Village Lawsuit in exchange for a lump-sum payment of $10.0 million by us. On August 25, 2016, the Village Lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice. The cost of the settlement with the Village and the estimated costs associated with our compliance with the Consent Judgment were covered by our existing provision for the site. The settlement with the Village did not have, and we expect that the Consent Judgment will not have, a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations. In April 2015, we received from EPA a Notice of Potential Liability and Demand for Costs (the "Notice") pursuant to CERCLA regarding the site in Gloversville, New York of a former leather tannery operated by us and by other, unrelated parties. The Notice demanded payment of approximately $2.2 million of response costs claimed by EPA to have been incurred to conduct assessments and removal activities at the site. In February 2017, we entered into a settlement agreement with EPA resolving their claim for past response costs in exchange for a payment by us of $1.5 million which was paid in May 2017. Our environmental insurance carrier has reimbursed us for 75% of the settlement amount, subject to a $500,000 self-insured retention. We do not expect any additional cost related to the matter. Note 9 Legal Proceedings, Continued Whitehall Environmental Matters We have performed sampling and analysis of soil, sediments, surface water, groundwater and waste management areas at our former Volunteer Leather Company facility in Whitehall, Michigan. In October 2010, we entered into a Consent Decree with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment providing for implementation of a remedial Work Plan for the facility site designed to bring the site into compliance with applicable regulatory standards. The Work Plan's implementation is substantially complete and we expect, based on our present understanding of the condition of the site, that our future obligations with respect to the site will be limited to periodic monitoring and that future costs related to the site should not have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations. Accrual for Environmental Contingencies Related to all outstanding environmental contingencies, we had accrued $1.4 million as of July 31, 2021, $1.5 million as of January 30, 2021 and $1.5 million as of August 1, 2020. All such provisions reflect our estimates of the most likely cost (undiscounted, including both current and noncurrent portions) of resolving the contingencies, based on facts and circumstances as of the time they were made. There is no assurance that relevant facts and circumstances will not change, necessitating future changes to the provisions. Such contingent liabilities are included in the liability arising from provision for discontinued operations on the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets because it relates to former facilities operated by us. We have made pretax accruals for certain of these contingencies which were not material for the first six months of Fiscal 2022 and Fiscal 2021. These charges are included in gain (loss) from discontinued operations, net in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and represent changes in estimates. In addition to the matters specifically described in this Note, we are a party to other legal and regulatory proceedings and claims arising in the ordinary course of our business. While management does not believe that our liability with respect to any of these other matters is likely to have a material effect on our financial statements, legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings could have a material adverse impact on our financial statements.

Legal Proceedings

6 Months Ended

Jul. 31, 2021

Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Note 9

Legal Proceedings

Environmental Matters

New York State Environmental Matters

In August 1997, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“NYSDEC”) and the Company entered into a consent order whereby we assumed responsibility for conducting a remedial investigation and feasibility study and implementing an interim remedial measure with regard to the site of a knitting mill operated by a former subsidiary of ours from 1965 to 1969. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), which assumed primary regulatory responsibility for the site from NYSDEC, issued a Record of Decision in September 2007. The Record of Decision specified a remedy of a combination of groundwater extraction and treatment and in-situ chemical oxidation.

In September 2015, the EPA adopted an amendment to the Record of Decision eliminating the separate ground-water extraction and treatment systems and the use of in-situ oxidation from the remedy adopted in the Record of Decision. The amendment provides for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing wellhead treatment systems on wells operated by the Village of Garden City, New York (the "Village"). It also requires us to perform certain ongoing monitoring, operation and maintenance activities and to reimburse EPA's future oversight cost, involving future costs to us estimated to be between $1.7 million and $2.0 million, and to reimburse EPA for approximately $1.25 million of interim oversight costs. On August 15, 2016, the Court entered a Consent Judgment implementing the remedy provided for by the amendment.

The Village additionally asserted that we are liable for the costs associated with enhanced treatment required by the impact of the groundwater plume from the site on two public water supply wells, including historical total costs ranging from approximately $1.8 million to in excess of $2.5 million, and future operation and maintenance costs which the Village estimated at $126,400 annually while the enhanced treatment continues. On December 14, 2007, the Village filed a complaint (the "Village Lawsuit") against us and the owner of the property under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) as well as a number of state law theories in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, seeking an injunction requiring the defendants to remediate contamination from the site and to establish their liability for future costs that may be incurred in connection with it.

In June 2016 we reached an agreement with the Village providing for the Village to continue to operate and maintain the well head treatment systems in accordance with the Record of Decision and to release its claims against us asserted in the Village Lawsuit in exchange for a lump-sum payment of $10.0 million by us. On August 25, 2016, the Village Lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice. The cost of the settlement with the Village and the estimated costs associated with our compliance with the Consent Judgment were covered by our existing provision for the site. The settlement with the Village did not have, and we expect that the Consent Judgment will not have, a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

In April 2015, we received from EPA a Notice of Potential Liability and Demand for Costs (the "Notice") pursuant to CERCLA regarding the site in Gloversville, New York of a former leather tannery operated by us and by other, unrelated parties. The Notice demanded payment of approximately $2.2 million of response costs claimed by EPA to have been incurred to conduct assessments and removal activities at the site. In February 2017, we entered into a settlement agreement with EPA resolving their claim for past response costs in exchange for a payment by us of $1.5 million which was paid in May 2017. Our environmental insurance carrier has reimbursed us for 75% of the settlement amount, subject to a $500,000 self-insured retention. We do not expect any additional cost related to the matter.

Note 9

Legal Proceedings, Continued

Whitehall Environmental Matters

We have performed sampling and analysis of soil, sediments, surface water, groundwater and waste management areas at our former Volunteer Leather Company facility in Whitehall, Michigan.

In October 2010, we entered into a Consent Decree with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment providing for implementation of a remedial Work Plan for the facility site designed to bring the site into compliance with applicable regulatory standards. The Work Plan's implementation is substantially complete and we expect, based on our present understanding of the condition of the site, that our future obligations with respect to the site will be limited to periodic monitoring and that future costs related to the site should not have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Accrual for Environmental Contingencies

Related to all outstanding environmental contingencies, we had accrued $1.4 million as of July 31, 2021, $1.5 million as of January 30, 2021 and $1.5 million as of August 1, 2020. All such provisions reflect our estimates of the most likely cost (undiscounted, including both current and noncurrent portions) of resolving the contingencies, based on facts and circumstances as of the time they were made. There is no assurance that relevant facts and circumstances will not change, necessitating future changes to the provisions. Such contingent liabilities are included in the liability arising from provision for discontinued operations on the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets because it relates to former facilities operated by us. We have made pretax accruals for certain of these contingencies which were not material for the first six months of Fiscal 2022 and Fiscal 2021. These charges are included in gain (loss) from discontinued operations, net in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and represent changes in estimates.

In addition to the matters specifically described in this Note, we are a party to other legal and regulatory proceedings and claims arising in the ordinary course of our business. While management does not believe that our liability with respect to any of these other matters is likely to have a material effect on our financial statements, legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings could have a material adverse impact on our financial statements.