Litigation	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2012
Litigation [Abstract]
Litigation	16. Litigation CHINESE-MANUFACTURED DRYWALL LAWSUITS L&W Supply Corporation is one of many defendants in lawsuits relating to Chinese-made wallboard installed in homes primarily in the southeastern United States during 2006 and 2007. The wallboard was made in China by a number of manufacturers, including Knauf Plasterboard (Tianjin) Co., or Knauf Tianjin, and was sold or used by hundreds of distributors, contractors, and homebuilders. Knauf Tianjin is an affiliate or indirect subsidiary of Knauf Gips KG, a multinational manufacturer of building materials headquartered in Germany. The plaintiffs in these lawsuits, most of whom are homeowners, claim that the Chinese-made wallboard is defective and emits elevated levels of sulfur gases causing a bad smell and corrosion of copper or other metal surfaces. Plaintiffs also allege that the Chinese-made wallboard causes health problems such as respiratory problems and allergic reactions. The plaintiffs seek damages for the costs of removing and replacing the Chinese-made wallboard and other allegedly damaged property as well as damages for bodily injury, including medical monitoring in some cases. Most of the lawsuits against L&W Supply are part of the consolidated multi-district litigation titled In re Chinese-Manufactured Drywall Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2047, pending in New Orleans, Louisiana. The focus of the litigation to date has been on plaintiffs’ property damage claims and not their alleged bodily injury claims. L&W Supply’s sales of Knauf Tianjin wallboard, which were confined to the Florida region in 2006, were relatively limited. The amount of Knauf Tianjin wallboard potentially sold by L&W Supply Corporation could completely furnish approximately 250-300 average-size houses; however, the actual number of homes involved is greater because many homes contain a mixture of different brands of wallboard. Our records contain the addresses of the homes and other construction sites to which L&W Supply delivered wallboard, but do not specifically identify the manufacturer of the wallboard delivered. Therefore, when Chinese-made wallboard is identified in a home, we can determine from our records whether L&W Supply delivered wallboard to that home. Of the property damage claims asserted to date where our records indicate we delivered wallboard to the home, we have identified approximately 290 homes where we have confirmed the presence of Knauf Tianjin wallboard or, based on the date and location, the wallboard in the home could be Knauf Tianjin wallboard. We have resolved the claims relating to approximately 170 of those homes and, as described below, recently reached a class settlement agreement that may resolve the remainder of those claims. In early 2011, we entered into an agreement with Knauf that effectively caps our responsibility for property damage claims relating to Knauf Tianjin wallboard at a fixed amount per square foot for the property at issue. In late 2011, Knauf reached a class settlement resolving claims of homeowners who had filed lawsuits against Knauf relating to Knauf Tianjin wallboard. Pursuant to the settlement, Knauf will establish a fund to either pay for the remediation of the homeowner’s property or provide a cash payment to the homeowner to resolve their claims, including any bodily injury claims. In the first quarter of 2012, we effectively joined in this class settlement by entering into an agreement pursuant to which we will contribute to the class settlement fund the same fixed amount per square foot as was agreed to in our earlier settlement with Knauf. Our per-square-foot contribution is limited to those homes to which we supplied Knauf Tianjin wallboard. Homeowners will have the right to accept the terms of the settlement or opt out and continue to pursue their claims in litigation. The class settlement has been preliminarily approved by the judge presiding over the multi-district litigation. It is expected that the court will set a date for final approval in July of 2012. If the class settlement is not approved, or any plaintiffs decline to participate in the class settlement, our original settlement with Knauf remains in effect and caps our responsibility for Knauf Tianjin property damage claims. Although the vast majority of Chinese drywall claims against us relate to Knauf Tianjin board, we have received some claims relating to other Chinese-made wallboard sold by L&W Supply Corporation. Most, but not all, of the other Chinese-made wallboard we sold was manufactured by Knauf at other plants in China. We are not aware of any instances in which the wallboard from the other Knauf Chinese plants has been determined to cause odor or corrosion problems. A small percentage of claims made against L&W Supply Corporation relate to Chinese-made wallboard that was not manufactured by Knauf, but which is alleged to have odor and corrosion problems. Those claims are not encompassed within our settlement with Knauf. As of March 31, 2012, we have an accrual of $12 million for our estimated cost of resolving all the Chinese wallboard property damage claims pending against L&W Supply and estimated to be asserted in the future, and, based on the terms of our settlement with Knauf, we have recorded a related receivable of $9 million. Our accrual does not take into account litigation costs, which are expensed as incurred, or any set-off for potential insurance recoveries. Our estimated liability is based on the information available to us regarding the number and type of pending claims, estimates of likely future claims, and the costs of resolving those claims. Our estimated liability could be higher if the other Knauf Chinese wallboard that we sold is determined to be problematic, the number of Chinese wallboard claims significantly exceeds our estimates, or the cost of resolving bodily injury claims is more than estimated. Considering all factors known to date, we do not believe that these claims and other similar claims that might be asserted will have a material effect on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. However, there can be no assurance that the lawsuits will not have such an effect. ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION We have been notified by state and federal environmental protection agencies of possible involvement as one of numerous “potentially responsible parties” in a number of Superfund sites in the United States. As a potentially responsible party, we may be responsible to pay for some part of the cleanup of hazardous waste at those sites. In most of these sites, our involvement is expected to be minimal. In addition, we are involved in environmental cleanups of other property that we own or owned. As of March 31, 2012, we have an accrual of $13 million for our probable liability in connection with these matters. Our accruals take into account all known or estimated undiscounted costs associated with these sites, including site investigations and feasibility costs, site cleanup and remediation, certain legal costs, and fines and penalties, if any. However, we continue to review these accruals as additional information becomes available and revise them as appropriate. OTHER LITIGATION We are named as defendants in other claims and lawsuits arising from our operations, including claims and lawsuits arising from the operation of our vehicles, product warranties, personal injury and commercial disputes. We believe that we have properly accrued for our probable liability in connection with these claims and suits, taking into account the probability of liability, whether our exposure can be reasonably estimated and, if so, our estimate of our liability or the range of our liability. We do not expect these or any other litigation matters involving USG to have a material effect upon our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

Litigation

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2012

16. Litigation

CHINESE-MANUFACTURED DRYWALL LAWSUITS

L&W Supply Corporation is one of many defendants in lawsuits relating to Chinese-made wallboard installed in homes primarily in the southeastern United States during 2006 and 2007. The wallboard was made in China by a number of manufacturers, including Knauf Plasterboard (Tianjin) Co., or Knauf Tianjin, and was sold or used by hundreds of distributors, contractors, and homebuilders. Knauf Tianjin is an affiliate or indirect subsidiary of Knauf Gips KG, a multinational manufacturer of building materials headquartered in Germany. The plaintiffs in these lawsuits, most of whom are homeowners, claim that the Chinese-made wallboard is defective and emits elevated levels of sulfur gases causing a bad smell and corrosion of copper or other metal surfaces. Plaintiffs also allege that the Chinese-made wallboard causes health problems such as respiratory problems and allergic reactions. The plaintiffs seek damages for the costs of removing and replacing the Chinese-made wallboard and other allegedly damaged property as well as damages for bodily injury, including medical monitoring in some cases. Most of the lawsuits against L&W Supply are part of the consolidated multi-district litigation titled In re Chinese-Manufactured Drywall Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2047, pending in New Orleans, Louisiana. The focus of the litigation to date has been on plaintiffs’ property damage claims and not their alleged bodily injury claims.

L&W Supply’s sales of Knauf Tianjin wallboard, which were confined to the Florida region in 2006, were relatively limited. The amount of Knauf Tianjin wallboard potentially sold by L&W Supply Corporation could completely furnish approximately 250-300 average-size houses; however, the actual number of homes involved is greater because many homes contain a mixture of different brands of wallboard. Our records contain the addresses of the homes and other construction sites to which L&W Supply delivered wallboard, but do not specifically identify the manufacturer of the wallboard delivered. Therefore, when Chinese-made wallboard is identified in a home, we can determine from our records whether L&W Supply delivered wallboard to that home. Of the property damage claims asserted to date where our records indicate we delivered wallboard to the home, we have identified approximately 290 homes where we have confirmed the presence of Knauf Tianjin wallboard or, based on the date and location, the wallboard in the home could be Knauf Tianjin wallboard. We have resolved the claims relating to approximately 170 of those homes and, as described below, recently reached a class settlement agreement that may resolve the remainder of those claims.

In early 2011, we entered into an agreement with Knauf that effectively caps our responsibility for property damage claims relating to Knauf Tianjin wallboard at a fixed amount per square foot for the property at issue. In late 2011, Knauf reached a class settlement resolving claims of homeowners who had filed lawsuits against Knauf relating to Knauf Tianjin wallboard. Pursuant to the settlement, Knauf will establish a fund to either pay for the remediation of the homeowner’s property or provide a cash payment to the homeowner to resolve their claims, including any bodily injury claims. In the first quarter of 2012, we effectively joined in this class settlement by entering into an agreement pursuant to which we will contribute to the class settlement fund the same fixed amount per square foot as was agreed to in our earlier settlement with Knauf. Our per-square-foot contribution is limited to those homes to which we supplied Knauf Tianjin wallboard. Homeowners will have the right to accept the terms of the settlement or opt out and continue to pursue their claims in litigation. The class settlement has been preliminarily approved by the judge presiding over the multi-district litigation. It is expected that the court will set a date for final approval in July of 2012. If the class settlement is not approved, or any plaintiffs decline to participate in the class settlement, our original settlement with Knauf remains in effect and caps our responsibility for Knauf Tianjin property damage claims.

Although the vast majority of Chinese drywall claims against us relate to Knauf Tianjin board, we have received some claims relating to other Chinese-made wallboard sold by L&W Supply Corporation. Most, but not all, of the other Chinese-made wallboard we sold was manufactured by Knauf at other plants in China. We are not aware of any instances in which the wallboard from the other Knauf Chinese plants has been determined to cause odor or corrosion problems. A small percentage of claims made against L&W Supply Corporation relate to Chinese-made wallboard that was not manufactured by Knauf, but which is alleged to have odor and corrosion problems. Those claims are not encompassed within our settlement with Knauf.

As of March 31, 2012, we have an accrual of $12 million for our estimated cost of resolving all the Chinese wallboard property damage claims pending against L&W Supply and estimated to be asserted in the future, and, based on the terms of our settlement with Knauf, we have recorded a related receivable of $9 million. Our accrual does not take into account litigation costs, which are expensed as incurred, or any set-off for potential insurance recoveries. Our estimated liability is based on the information available to us regarding the number and type of pending claims, estimates of likely future claims, and the costs of resolving those claims. Our estimated liability could be higher if the other Knauf Chinese wallboard that we sold is determined to be problematic, the number of Chinese wallboard claims significantly exceeds our estimates, or the cost of resolving bodily injury claims is more than estimated. Considering all factors known to date, we do not believe that these claims and other similar claims that might be asserted will have a material effect on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. However, there can be no assurance that the lawsuits will not have such an effect.

ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION

We have been notified by state and federal environmental protection agencies of possible involvement as one of numerous “potentially responsible parties” in a number of Superfund sites in the United States. As a potentially responsible party, we may be responsible to pay for some part of the cleanup of hazardous waste at those sites. In most of these sites, our involvement is expected to be minimal. In addition, we are involved in environmental cleanups of other property that we own or owned. As of March 31, 2012, we have an accrual of $13 million for our probable liability in connection with these matters. Our accruals take into account all known or estimated undiscounted costs associated with these sites, including site investigations and feasibility costs, site cleanup and remediation, certain legal costs, and fines and penalties, if any. However, we continue to review these accruals as additional information becomes available and revise them as appropriate.

OTHER LITIGATION

We are named as defendants in other claims and lawsuits arising from our operations, including claims and lawsuits arising from the operation of our vehicles, product warranties, personal injury and commercial disputes. We believe that we have properly accrued for our probable liability in connection with these claims and suits, taking into account the probability of liability, whether our exposure can be reasonably estimated and, if so, our estimate of our liability or the range of our liability. We do not expect these or any other litigation matters involving USG to have a material effect upon our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.