Commitments And Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2011
Commitments And Contingencies
Commitments And Contingencies	3. Commitments and Contingencies Asbestos Litigation Pittsburgh Corning Corporation. Corning and PPG Industries, Inc. (PPG) each own 50% of the capital stock of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation (PCC). Over a period of more than two decades, PCC and several other defendants have been named in numerous lawsuits involving claims alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos. On April 16, 2000, PCC filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. At the time PCC filed for bankruptcy protection, there were approximately 11,800 claims pending against Corning in state court lawsuits alleging various theories of liability based on exposure to PCC's asbestos products and typically requesting monetary damages in excess of one million dollars per claim. Corning has defended those claims on the basis of the separate corporate status of PCC and the absence of any facts supporting claims of direct liability arising from PCC's asbestos products. Corning is also currently involved in approximately 10,300 other cases (approximately 38,700 claims) alleging injuries from asbestos and similar amounts of monetary damages per case. Those cases have been covered by insurance without material impact to Corning to date. As described below, several of Corning's insurance carriers have filed a legal proceeding concerning the extent of any insurance coverage for these claims. Asbestos litigation is inherently difficult, and past trends in resolving these claims may not be indicators of future outcomes. Corning, with other relevant parties, has been involved in ongoing efforts to develop a Plan of Reorganization that would resolve the concerns and objections of the relevant courts and parties. In 2003, a plan was agreed to by various parties (the 2003 Plan), but, on December 21, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court issued an order denying the confirmation of that 2003 Plan. On January 29, 2009, an amended plan of reorganization (the Amended PCC Plan) – which addressed the issues raised by the Court when it denied confirmation of the 2003 Plan – was filed with the Bankruptcy Court. The proposed resolution of PCC asbestos claims under the Amended PCC Plan would have required Corning to contribute its equity interests in PCC and Pittsburgh Corning Europe N.V. (PCE), a Belgian corporation, and to contribute a fixed series of payments, recorded at present value. Corning would have had the option to use its shares rather than cash to make these payments, but the liability would have been fixed by dollar value and not the number of shares. The Amended PCC Plan would, originally, have required Corning to make (1) one payment of $100 million one year from the date the Amended PCC Plan becomes effective and certain conditions are met and (2) five additional payments of $50 million, on each of the five subsequent anniversaries of the first payment, the final payment of which is subject to reduction based on the application of credits under certain circumstances. Documents were filed with the Bankruptcy Court further modifying the Amended PCC Plan by reducing Corning's initial payment by $30 million and reducing its second and fourth payments by $15 million each. In return, Corning would relinquish its claim for reimbursement of its payments and contributions under the Amended PCC Plan from the insurance carriers involved in the bankruptcy proceeding with certain exceptions. On June 16, 2011, the Court entered an Order denying confirmation of the Amended PCC Plan. The Court's memorandum opinion accompanying the order rejected some objections to the Amended PCC Plan and made suggestions regarding modifications to the Amended PCC Plan that would allow the Plan to be confirmed. Corning and other parties have filed a motion for reconsideration, objecting to certain points of this order, and that motion is currently scheduled to be heard in September 2011. Corning is also considering the submission, possibly jointly with other relevant parties, of specific plan modifications suggested in the Court's opinion. The Amended PCC Plan does not include certain non-PCC asbestos claims that may be or have been raised against Corning. Corning has recorded an additional $150 million for such claims in its estimated asbestos litigation liability. The liability for non-PCC claims was estimated based upon industry data for asbestos claims since Corning does not have recent claim history due to the injunction issued by the Bankruptcy Court. The estimated liability represents the undiscounted projection of claims and related legal fees over the next 20 years. The amount may need to be adjusted in future periods as more data becomes available. The liability for the Amended PCC Plan and the non-PCC asbestos claims was estimated to be $644 million at June 30, 2011, compared with an estimate of the liability of $633 million at December 31, 2010. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, Corning recorded asbestos litigation expense of $5 million and $10 million, respectively. In the three months and six months ended June 30, 2010, Corning recorded asbestos litigation expense of $5 million and $7 million, respectively. In addition, during the first quarter of 2010, Corning recorded a $54 million credit to the asbestos litigation reserve related to the change in terms of the proposed settlement of the PCC asbestos claims. The entire obligation is classified as a non-current liability as installment payments for the cash portion of the obligation are not planned to commence until more than 12 months after the Amended PCC Plan becomes effective and the PCE portion of the obligation will be fulfilled through the direct contribution of Corning's investment in PCE (currently recorded as a non-current other equity method investment). Even if further modifications are made to the Amended PCC Plan to address the issues raised in the Court's June 16 opinion, that Plan would still be subject to a number of contingencies. Payment of the amounts required to fund the Amended PCC Plan from insurance and other sources are subject to a number of conditions that may not be achieved. The approval of the (further modified) Amended PCC Plan by the Bankruptcy Court would not be certain and would face potential objections by some parties. If the modified Amended PCC Plan were approved by the Bankruptcy Court, that approval would be subject to appeal. For these and other reasons, Corning's liability for these asbestos matters may be subject to changes in subsequent quarters. The estimate of the cost of resolving the non-PCC asbestos claims may also be subject to change as developments occur. Management continues to believe that the likelihood of the uncertainties surrounding these proceedings causing a material adverse impact to Corning's financial statements is remote. Several of Corning's insurers have commenced litigation in state courts for a declaration of the rights and obligations of the parties under insurance policies, including rights that may be affected by the potential resolutions described above. Corning is vigorously contesting these cases. Management is unable to predict the outcome of this insurance litigation and therefore cannot estimate the range of any possible loss. Other Commitments and Contingencies In the normal course of our business, we do not routinely provide significant third-party guarantees. When provided, these guarantees have various terms, and none of these guarantees are individually significant. Generally, third party guarantees provided by Corning are limited to certain financial guarantees including stand-by letters of credit and performance bonds, and the incurrence of contingent liabilities in the form of purchase price adjustments related to attainment of milestones. These guarantees have various terms, and none of these guarantees are individually significant. We have agreed to provide a credit facility to Dow Corning Corporation (Dow Corning). The funding of the Dow Corning credit facility will be required only if Dow Corning is not otherwise able to meet its scheduled funding obligations in its confirmed Bankruptcy Plan. We believe a significant majority of these guarantees and contingent liabilities will expire without being funded. As of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, contingent guarantees totaled a notional value of $187 million and $230 million, respectively. We believe a significant majority of these contingent guarantees will expire without being funded. We also were contingently liable for purchase obligations of $324 million and $408 million, at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively. Product warranty liability accruals were $25 million at June 30, 2011 and $24 million at December 31, 2010. Corning is a defendant in various lawsuits, including environmental litigation, product-related suits, the Dow Corning and PCC matters, and is subject to various claims which arise in the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, the likelihood that the ultimate disposition of these matters will have a material adverse effect on Corning's consolidated financial position, liquidity, or results of operations, is remote. Corning has been named by the Environmental Protection Agency (the Agency) under the Superfund Act, or by state governments under similar state laws, as a potentially responsible party for 18 hazardous waste sites. Under the Superfund Act, all parties who may have contributed any waste to a hazardous waste site, identified by the Agency, are jointly and severally liable for the cost of cleanup unless the Agency agrees otherwise. It is Corning's policy to accrue for its estimated liability related to Superfund sites and other environmental liabilities related to property owned by Corning based on expert analysis and continual monitoring by both internal and external consultants. At June 30, 2011, and December 31, 2010, Corning had accrued approximately $30 million (undiscounted) for the estimated liability for environmental cleanup and related litigation. Based upon the information developed to date, management believes that the accrued reserve is a reasonable estimate of the Company's liability and that the risk of an additional loss in an amount materially higher than that accrued is remote.

3. Commitments and Contingencies

Asbestos Litigation

Pittsburgh Corning Corporation. Corning and PPG Industries, Inc. (PPG) each own 50% of the capital stock of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation (PCC). Over a period of more than two decades, PCC and several other defendants have been named in numerous lawsuits involving claims alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos. On April 16, 2000, PCC filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. At the time PCC filed for bankruptcy protection, there were approximately 11,800 claims pending against Corning in state court lawsuits alleging various theories of liability based on exposure to PCC's asbestos products and typically requesting monetary damages in excess of one million dollars per claim. Corning has defended those claims on the basis of the separate corporate status of PCC and the absence of any facts supporting claims of direct liability arising from PCC's asbestos products. Corning is also currently involved in approximately 10,300 other cases (approximately 38,700 claims) alleging injuries from asbestos and similar amounts of monetary damages per case. Those cases have been covered by insurance without material impact to Corning to date. As described below, several of Corning's insurance carriers have filed a legal proceeding concerning the extent of any insurance coverage for these claims. Asbestos litigation is inherently difficult, and past trends in resolving these claims may not be indicators of future outcomes.

Corning, with other relevant parties, has been involved in ongoing efforts to develop a Plan of Reorganization that would resolve the concerns and objections of the relevant courts and parties. In 2003, a plan was agreed to by various parties (the 2003 Plan), but, on December 21, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court issued an order denying the confirmation of that 2003 Plan. On January 29, 2009, an amended plan of reorganization (the Amended PCC Plan) – which addressed the issues raised by the Court when it denied confirmation of the 2003 Plan – was filed with the Bankruptcy Court.

The proposed resolution of PCC asbestos claims under the Amended PCC Plan would have required Corning to contribute its equity interests in PCC and Pittsburgh Corning Europe N.V. (PCE), a Belgian corporation, and to contribute a fixed series of payments, recorded at present value. Corning would have had the option to use its shares rather than cash to make these payments, but the liability would have been fixed by dollar value and not the number of shares. The Amended PCC Plan would, originally, have required Corning to make (1) one payment of $100 million one year from the date the Amended PCC Plan becomes effective and certain conditions are met and (2) five additional payments of $50 million, on each of the five subsequent anniversaries of the first payment, the final payment of which is subject to reduction based on the application of credits under certain circumstances. Documents were filed with the Bankruptcy Court further modifying the Amended PCC Plan by reducing Corning's initial payment by $30 million and reducing its second and fourth payments by $15 million each. In return, Corning would relinquish its claim for reimbursement of its payments and contributions under the Amended PCC Plan from the insurance carriers involved in the bankruptcy proceeding with certain exceptions.

On June 16, 2011, the Court entered an Order denying confirmation of the Amended PCC Plan. The Court's memorandum opinion accompanying the order rejected some objections to the Amended PCC Plan and made suggestions regarding modifications to the Amended PCC Plan that would allow the Plan to be confirmed. Corning and other parties have filed a motion for reconsideration, objecting to certain points of this order, and that motion is currently scheduled to be heard in September 2011. Corning is also considering the submission, possibly jointly with other relevant parties, of specific plan modifications suggested in the Court's opinion.

The Amended PCC Plan does not include certain non-PCC asbestos claims that may be or have been raised against Corning. Corning has recorded an additional $150 million for such claims in its estimated asbestos litigation liability. The liability for non-PCC claims was estimated based upon industry data for asbestos claims since Corning does not have recent claim history due to the injunction issued by the Bankruptcy Court. The estimated liability represents the undiscounted projection of claims and related legal fees over the next 20 years. The amount may need to be adjusted in future periods as more data becomes available.

The liability for the Amended PCC Plan and the non-PCC asbestos claims was estimated to be $644 million at June 30, 2011, compared with an estimate of the liability of $633 million at December 31, 2010. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, Corning recorded asbestos litigation expense of $5 million and $10 million, respectively. In the three months and six months ended June 30, 2010, Corning recorded asbestos litigation expense of $5 million and $7 million, respectively. In addition, during the first quarter of 2010, Corning recorded a $54 million credit to the asbestos litigation reserve related to the change in terms of the proposed settlement of the PCC asbestos claims. The entire obligation is classified as a non-current liability as installment payments for the cash portion of the obligation are not planned to commence until more than 12 months after the Amended PCC Plan becomes effective and the PCE portion of the obligation will be fulfilled through the direct contribution of Corning's investment in PCE (currently recorded as a non-current other equity method investment).

Even if further modifications are made to the Amended PCC Plan to address the issues raised in the Court's June 16 opinion, that Plan would still be subject to a number of contingencies. Payment of the amounts required to fund the Amended PCC Plan from insurance and other sources are subject to a number of conditions that may not be achieved. The approval of the (further modified) Amended PCC Plan by the Bankruptcy Court would not be certain and would face potential objections by some parties. If the modified Amended PCC Plan were approved by the Bankruptcy Court, that approval would be subject to appeal. For these and other reasons, Corning's liability for these asbestos matters may be subject to changes in subsequent quarters. The estimate of the cost of resolving the non-PCC asbestos claims may also be subject to change as developments occur. Management continues to believe that the likelihood of the uncertainties surrounding these proceedings causing a material adverse impact to Corning's financial statements is remote.

Several of Corning's insurers have commenced litigation in state courts for a declaration of the rights and obligations of the parties under insurance policies, including rights that may be affected by the potential resolutions described above. Corning is vigorously contesting these cases. Management is unable to predict the outcome of this insurance litigation and therefore cannot estimate the range of any possible loss.

Other Commitments and Contingencies

In the normal course of our business, we do not routinely provide significant third-party guarantees. When provided, these guarantees have various terms, and none of these guarantees are individually significant. Generally, third party guarantees provided by Corning are limited to certain financial guarantees including stand-by letters of credit and performance bonds, and the incurrence of contingent liabilities in the form of purchase price adjustments related to attainment of milestones. These guarantees have various terms, and none of these guarantees are individually significant.

We have agreed to provide a credit facility to Dow Corning Corporation (Dow Corning). The funding of the Dow Corning credit facility will be required only if Dow Corning is not otherwise able to meet its scheduled funding obligations in its confirmed Bankruptcy Plan. We believe a significant majority of these guarantees and contingent liabilities will expire without being funded.

As of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, contingent guarantees totaled a notional value of $187 million and $230 million, respectively. We believe a significant majority of these contingent guarantees will expire without being funded. We also were contingently liable for purchase obligations of $324 million and $408 million, at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.

Product warranty liability accruals were $25 million at June 30, 2011 and $24 million at December 31, 2010.

Corning is a defendant in various lawsuits, including environmental litigation, product-related suits, the Dow Corning and PCC matters, and is subject to various claims which arise in the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, the likelihood that the ultimate disposition of these matters will have a material adverse effect on Corning's consolidated financial position, liquidity, or results of operations, is remote.

Corning has been named by the Environmental Protection Agency (the Agency) under the Superfund Act, or by state governments under similar state laws, as a potentially responsible party for 18 hazardous waste sites. Under the Superfund Act, all parties who may have contributed any waste to a hazardous waste site, identified by the Agency, are jointly and severally liable for the cost of cleanup unless the Agency agrees otherwise. It is Corning's policy to accrue for its estimated liability related to Superfund sites and other environmental liabilities related to property owned by Corning based on expert analysis and continual monitoring by both internal and external consultants. At June 30, 2011, and December 31, 2010, Corning had accrued approximately $30 million (undiscounted) for the estimated liability for environmental cleanup and related litigation. Based upon the information developed to date, management believes that the accrued reserve is a reasonable estimate of the Company's liability and that the risk of an additional loss in an amount materially higher than that accrued is remote.