Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2012

Contingencies [Abstract]

Contingencies

Note 16. Contingencies

General

There are various pending or threatened claims, lawsuits and administrative proceedings against the Company or its subsidiaries, arising from the ordinary course of business which seek remedies or damages. Although no assurance can be given with respect to the ultimate outcome of these matters, the Company believes that any liability that may finally be determined with respect to commercial and non-asbestos product liability claims should not have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Legal costs are expensed as incurred.

Environmental

The Company is subject to environmental laws and regulations which may require that the Company investigate and remediate the effects of the release or disposal of materials at sites associated with past and present operations. At certain sites, the Company has been identified as a potentially responsible party under the federal Superfund laws and comparable state laws. The Company is currently involved in the investigation and remediation of a number of sites under applicable laws.

Estimates of the Company’s environmental liabilities are based on current facts, laws, regulations and technology. These estimates take into consideration the Company’s prior experience and professional judgment of the Company’s environmental specialists. Estimates of the Company’s environmental liabilities are further subject to uncertainties regarding the nature and extent of site contamination, the range of remediation alternatives available, evolving remediation standards, imprecise engineering evaluations and cost estimates, the extent of corrective actions that may be required and the number and financial condition of other potentially responsible parties, as well as the extent of their responsibility for the remediation.

Accordingly, as investigation and remediation proceed, it is likely that adjustments in the Company’s accruals will be necessary to reflect new information. The amounts of any such adjustments could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in a given period. Based on currently available information, however, the Company does not believe that future environmental costs in excess of those accrued with respect to sites for which the Company has been identified as a potentially responsible party are likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition.

Environmental liabilities are recorded when the liability is probable and the costs are reasonably estimable, which generally is not later than at completion of a feasibility study or when the Company has recommended a remedy or has committed to an appropriate plan of action. The liabilities are reviewed periodically and, as investigation and remediation proceed, adjustments are made as necessary. Liabilities for losses from environmental remediation obligations do not consider the effects of inflation and anticipated expenditures are not discounted to their present value. The liabilities are not reduced by possible recoveries from insurance carriers or other third parties, but do reflect anticipated allocations among potentially responsible parties at federal Superfund sites or similar state-managed sites, third party indemnity obligations or contractual obligations, and an assessment of the likelihood that such parties will fulfill their obligations at such sites.

The changes in the carrying amount of environmental liabilities for the three months ended March 31, 2012, in millions, are as follows:

Balance at December 31, 2011	$	68.3
Accruals and adjustments		6.5
Payments		(1.9	)
Foreign currency translation and other		0.3
Balance at March 31, 2012	$	73.2

At March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, $15.2 million and $13.3 million, respectively, of the accrued liability for environmental remediation were included in current liabilities as accrued expenses. At March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, $38.2 million and $32.8 million, respectively, was associated with ongoing operations and $35 million and $35.5 million, respectively, was associated with previously owned businesses.

The Company expects that it will expend present accruals over many years, and will generally complete remediation in less than 30 years at sites for which it has been identified as a potentially responsible party. This period includes operation and monitoring costs that are generally incurred over 15 to 25 years.

Certain states in the U.S. and countries globally are promulgating or proposing new or more demanding regulations or legislation impacting the use of various chemical substances by all companies. The Company continues to evaluate the potential impact, if any, of complying with such regulations and legislation.

Asbestos

The Company and some of its subsidiaries have been named as defendants in various actions by plaintiffs alleging damages as a result of exposure to asbestos fibers in products or at formerly owned facilities. The Company believes that pending and reasonably anticipated future actions are not likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. There can be no assurance, however, that future legislative or other developments will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations and cash flows in a given period.

Insurance Coverage

The Company maintains a comprehensive portfolio of insurance policies, including aviation products liability insurance which covers most of its products. The aviation products liability insurance typically provides first dollar coverage for defense and indemnity of third party claims.

A portion of the Company’s primary and excess layers of pre-1986 insurance coverage for third party claims, primarily related to certain long-tail toxic tort and environmental claims, was provided by certain insurance carriers who are either insolvent, undergoing solvent schemes of arrangement or in run-off. The Company has entered into settlement agreements with a number of these insurers pursuant to which the Company agreed to give up its rights with respect to certain insurance policies in exchange for negotiated payments. These settlements represent negotiated payments for the Company’s loss of insurance coverage, as it no longer has this insurance available for claims that may have qualified for coverage. The portion of these payments which related to recovery of past costs (recognized as expense in prior periods) or for which there are currently no anticipated future claims is recognized in income when the payments are received. The portion related to potential future claims is recorded as deferred settlement credits on the balance sheet.

The deferred settlement credits partially offset future costs related to insurable claims utilizing a systematic and consistent approach. The recognition of the deferred settlement credits is calculated utilizing the estimated percent of costs incurred in the current period that insurance companies would have reimbursed to the Company if insurance coverage were still in place. This approach utilizes historical claims and insurance information of the Company and is reviewed and updated at least annually.

A summary of the deferred settlement credits activity for the three months ended March 31, 2012, in millions, is as follows:

Balance at December 31, 2011	$	43.5
Proceeds from insurance settlements		—
Amounts recorded as reduction of costs		(5.1	)
Balance at March 31, 2012	$	38.4

The current and long-term portions of the deferred settlement credits were as follows:

	March 31, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(Dollars in millions)
Accrued expenses	$	9.2	$	7.2
Other non-current liabilities		29.2		36.3
Total	$	38.4	$	43.5

It is not practical to estimate when the remaining deferred settlement credits are expected to be recognized. The proceeds from such insurance settlements were reported as a component of net cash provided by operating activities in the period payments were received.

Liabilities of Divested Businesses

In connection with the divestiture of the Company’s tire, vinyl and other businesses, the Company has received contractual rights of indemnification from third parties for environmental and other claims arising out of the divested businesses. Failure of these third parties to honor their indemnification obligations could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Aerostructures Long-term Contracts

The Company’s aerostructures business in the Nacelles and Interior Systems segment has several long-term contracts in the pre-production phase including the Airbus A350 XWB, the A320neo and the Pratt and Whitney PurePower ^® PW 1000G engine contracts, and in the early production phase, including the Boeing 787. These contracts are accounted for in accordance with long-term construction contract accounting.

The pre-production phase includes design of the product to meet customer specifications as well as design of the processes to manufacture the product. Also involved in this phase is securing the supply of material and subcomponents produced by third party suppliers, generally accomplished through long-term supply agreements.

Contracts in the early production phase include excess-over-average inventories, which represent the excess of current manufactured cost over the estimated average manufactured cost during the life of the contract.

Cost estimates over the lives of contracts are affected by estimates of future cost reductions including learning curve efficiencies. Because these contracts cover manufacturing periods of up to 20 years or more, there is risk associated with the estimates of future costs made during the pre-production and early production phases. These estimates may be different from actual costs due to various risk factors, including the following:

• Ability to recover costs incurred for change orders and claims;

• Costs, including material and labor costs and related escalation;

• Labor improvements due to the learning curve experience;

• Anticipated cost and/or productivity improvements, including overhead absorption, related to new, or changes to, manufacturing methods and processes;

• Supplier pricing, including escalation where applicable, potential supplier claims, the supplier’s financial viability and the supplier’s ability to perform;

• The cost impact of product design changes that frequently occur during the flight test and certification phases of a program; and

• Effect of foreign currency exchange fluctuations.

Additionally, total contract revenue is based on estimates of future units to be delivered to the customer, the ability to recover costs incurred for change orders and claims and sales price escalation, where applicable. There is a risk that there could be differences between the actual units delivered and the estimated total units to be delivered under the contract and differences in actual revenues compared to estimates. Changes in estimates could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and cash flows.

Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts are recorded in the period such losses are determined to the extent total estimated costs exceed total estimated contract revenues.

Aerostructures’ Boeing 787 Nacelle Contract

The Company’s contract with Boeing for the 787 nacelle extends through 2030 with original equipment sales estimated to be in excess of $10 billion. Aftermarket sales associated with this program are not accounted for using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting.

This program is in the early production phase to be followed by rapidly increasing production rates. For this contract to remain profitable, it will be important that assumptions are realized as currently estimated in the Company’s outlook, such as:

• Supplier pricing consistent with projected costs must be negotiated for portions of the product. These prices could be impacted by design changes, changes in material costs and availability of reliable suppliers in competitive cost countries;

• New automated equipment is being utilized to manufacture the 787 composite nacelle, which is expected to reduce costs significantly during the contract period;

• Nacelle product design changes continue to occur to improve product performance, reduce weight and lower cost. The Company expects that some of the costs for these changes will be recoverable from Boeing and also expects to have success on its various cost reduction initiatives; and

• Material and overhead cost escalation and inflation assumptions could be different than estimated.

While the Company continues to believe the contract will be profitable, it is important to note that changes to any of the current cost and/or revenue assumptions will have a significant impact on the overall profitability of the contract and could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations in the period identified. All of the risk factors listed in “Aerostructures Long-term Contracts” above could also affect the Company’s outlook of profitability on this contract.

Aerostructures’ Pratt & Whitney CSeries Nacelle Contract

The Company’s aerostructures business has a long-term supply contract with Pratt & Whitney (P&W) to supply nacelles and related components for use on its PurePower PW1000G ^® engine propulsion systems for the Bombardier CSeries aircraft.

P&W has asserted to the Company that it is entitled to damages as a result of the Company’s alleged breach of its contract with P&W. P&W believes the Company has failed to meet certain requirements under the contract. The Company believes that it has substantial legal and factual defenses to P&W’s assertions, and has significant counter assertions of its own. Discussions with P&W are ongoing. Given the nature and status of these discussions, the Company cannot yet determine the amount or a reasonable range of potential loss, if any. If P&W prevails on its assertions and the Company does not prevail on its counter assertions, it could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s estimate of profitability on this contract and/or cash flows in a given period.

JSTARS Program

In 2002, Seven Q Seven, Ltd. (7Q7) was selected by Northrop Grumman Corporation to provide propulsion pods for the re-engine program for the JT3D engines used by the U.S. Air Force. The Company was selected by 7Q7 as a supplier for the inlet, thrust reverser, exhaust, EBU, strut systems and wing interface systems. As of March 31, 2012, the Company had $18.5 million (net of advances of $8.8 million) of pre-production costs and inventory related to this program.

Future program funding remains uncertain and there can be no assurance of such funding. If the program were to be cancelled, the Company would recognize an impairment.

Tax

The Company is continuously undergoing examination by the IRS as well as various state and foreign jurisdictions. The IRS and other taxing authorities routinely challenge certain deductions and credits reported by the Company on its income tax returns. See Note 15, “Income Taxes”, for additional detail.

Tax Years 2007 and 2008

In January 2011, the IRS issued a Revenue Agent’s Report (RAR) for the tax years 2007 and 2008. In February 2011, the Company submitted a protest to the Appeals Division of the IRS with respect to certain unresolved issues which involve the proper timing of deductions. Although it is reasonably possible that these matters could be resolved during the next 12 months, the timing or ultimate outcome is uncertain.

Tax Years 2005 and 2006

During 2009, the IRS issued a RAR for the tax years 2005 and 2006. In July 2009, the Company submitted a protest to the Appeals Division of the IRS with respect to certain unresolved issues which involve the proper timing of deductions. Although it is reasonably possible that these matters could be resolved during the next 12 months, the timing or ultimate outcome is uncertain.

Tax Years 2000 to 2004

During 2007, the IRS and the Company reached agreement on substantially all of the issues raised with respect to the examination of taxable years 2000 to 2004. The Company submitted a protest to the Appeals Division of the IRS with respect to the remaining unresolved issues which involve the proper timing of certain deductions. The Company and the IRS were unable to reach agreement on the remaining issues. In December 2009, the Company filed a petition in the U.S. Tax Court and in March 2010 the Company also filed a complaint in the Federal District Court. On January 18, 2012, the District Court granted the government’s motion for partial summary judgment in this matter. Final judgment in the District Court case cannot be entered until the remaining issues are resolved. It is the Company’s intent to appeal the ruling once final judgment is entered. The Company believes the amount of the estimated tax liability if the IRS were to ultimately prevail is fully reserved. The Company cannot predict the timing or ultimate outcome of a final resolution.

Tax Years Prior to 2000

The previous examination cycle included the consolidated income tax groups for the audit periods identified below:

Coltec Industries Inc. and Subsidiaries	December, 1997 — July, 1999 (through date of acquisition)
Goodrich Corporation and Subsidiaries	1998 — 1999

The IRS and the Company previously reached final settlement on all but one of the issues raised in this examination cycle. The Company received statutory notices of deficiency dated June 14, 2007 related to the remaining unresolved issue which involves the proper timing of certain deductions. The Company filed a petition with the U.S. Tax Court in September 2007 to contest the notices of deficiency.

In December 2010, the Company reached a tentative agreement with the IRS to settle the remaining unresolved issue but due to the size of the potential refund, the agreement required approval by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). In January 2011, the JCT approved the terms of the settlement agreement. In March 2011, the U.S. Tax Court accepted the terms of the settlement agreement and agreed to the litigants’ request to dismiss the matter. The Company recognized a tax benefit of approximately $21 million in the three months ended March 31, 2011.