Accounting And Disclosure Changes	9 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2011
New Accounting Pronouncements and Changes in Accounting Principles [Abstract]
Accounting And Disclosure Changes	ACCOUNTING AND DISCLOSURE CHANGES (a) Recently adopted accounting pronouncements On April 1, 2011, the Company adopted prospectively Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements – a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2009-13”), which addresses the allocation of revenue in arrangements containing multiple deliverables. Specifically, ASU 2009-13 modifies existing GAAP by providing new guidance concerning (1) the determination of whether an arrangement involving multiple deliverables contains more than one unit of accounting, and (2) the manner in which arrangement consideration should be allocated to such deliverables. The guidance requires the use of an entity’s best estimate of the selling price of a deliverable if vendor specific objective evidence or third-party evidence of the selling price cannot be determined. Additionally, ASU 2009-13 eliminates the use of the residual method of allocating consideration when vendor specific objective evidence or third-party evidence of the selling price is known for some, but not all, of the delivered items in a multiple element arrangement. Finally, ASU 2009-13 requires expanded qualitative and quantitative disclosures in the financial statements. The Company currently has contracts in place that contain multiple deliverables, principally product supply agreements for gases and container rental. These arrangements provide for the purchase of gas product and the rental of storage vessels under a single agreement. The Company treats the deliverables in these arrangements as separate units of accounting with selling prices derived from Company specific or third-party evidence, both of which are determined from the highly competitive markets within the specific localities of the Company’s packaged gas distribution business. Revenue for gas product in these arrangements is recognized when the product is shipped, while revenue for container rental in these arrangements is recognized over the period in which the customer is utilizing the container. The adoption of ASU 2009-13 did not have an effect on the Company’s accounting for its multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements and did not impact the Company’s consolidated financial statements in the periods since the initial adoption. On April 1, 2011, the Company adopted ASU No. 2010-28, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts – a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2010-28”), which provides additional guidance on when Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test must be performed. The guidance clarifies that for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts, Step 2 must be performed if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists based on the evaluation of certain qualitative factors. The Company’s consolidated financial statements were not impacted by the adoption of ASU 2010-28. On April 1, 2011, the Company adopted ASU No. 2010-29, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations – a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2010-29”), which provides clarification on disclosure requirements and amends current guidance to require entities to disclose pro forma revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the acquisition date for all business combinations that occurred during the current year had been as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period. Qualitative disclosures describing the nature and amount of any material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combinations included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings are also required. Pro forma disclosures for acquisitions occurring on or after April 1, 2011 follow the new guidance – see Note 3 for disclosures related to the Company’s business combinations. In September 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued ASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment (“ASU 2011-08”), which simplifies the test for goodwill impairment. Under ASU 2011-08, entities are first permitted to perform a qualitative assessment about the likelihood of the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeding its fair value. If an entity determines that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount based on the qualitative assessment, it is required to perform the currently prescribed two-step goodwill impairment test to identify the potential goodwill impairment and measure the amount of the goodwill impairment loss, if any, to be recognized for that reporting unit. However, if an entity concludes otherwise based on the qualitative assessment, the two-step goodwill impairment test is not required. The new guidance is effective for goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, with early adoption permitted. The Company early adopted ASU 2011-08 effective October 1, 2011, and performed its annual goodwill impairment test under the new guidance – see Note 5 for results. (b) Accounting pronouncements not yet adopted In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (“ASU 2011-04”), which amends existing GAAP with respect to fair value measurements. The majority of the key provisions of ASU 2011-04 represent clarifications to existing fair value measurement guidance, including changes in the valuation premise and the application of premiums and discounts. However, new disclosures are required under ASU 2011-04, including more robust disclosures related to Level 3 fair value measurements, a broader scope related to the disclosure of transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements, and new disclosures around the fair value hierarchy related to assets and liabilities disclosed at fair value but not measured as such on the balance sheet. The new guidance is effective prospectively for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, with early adoption prohibited. The Company adopted ASU 2011-04 on January 1, 2012, and the Company will modify its fair value measurement disclosures as applicable in light of the new requirements. In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income (“ASU 2011-05”), which increases the prominence of items reported in other comprehensive income. Under ASU 2011-05, entities will be required to present all non-owner changes in stockholders’ equity in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements, thereby eliminating the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of stockholders’ equity. Currently, components of the Company’s other comprehensive income consist of foreign currency translation adjustments and the net gain or loss on derivative instruments. Subsequently, in December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05 (“ASU 2011-12”), which deferred certain provisions of ASU 2011-05. Under ASU 2011-12, the requirement within ASU 2011-05 to present reclassification adjustments from other comprehensive income to net income on the face of the financial statements has been deferred pending further deliberation by the FASB. The new guidance within ASU 2011-05 and ASU 2011-12 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, with early adoption permitted and full retrospective application required. The Company is currently evaluating the two alternative presentations of other comprehensive income; however, adoption of the new guidance will not impact the Company’s consolidated financial results. In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-09, Compensation – Retirement Benefits – Multiemployer Plans (Subtopic 715-80): Disclosures about an Employer’s Participation in a Multiemployer Plan (“ASU 2011-09”). ASU 2011-09 requires more robust disclosures surrounding entities’ participation in multiemployer pension plans (“MEPPs”). The Company historically participated in several MEPPs providing defined benefits to union employees under the terms of collective bargaining agreements (“CBAs”), but successfully negotiated the withdrawal from the last MEPP in which it participated in November 2011. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2011 and is required to be applied retrospectively for all prior periods presented in the financial statements. The Company will adopt ASU 2011-09 for its fiscal year ending March 31, 2012 and will modify its MEPP disclosures as appropriate.

ACCOUNTING AND DISCLOSURE CHANGES

(a) Recently adopted accounting pronouncements

On April 1, 2011, the Company adopted prospectively Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements – a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2009-13”), which addresses the allocation of revenue in arrangements containing multiple deliverables. Specifically, ASU 2009-13 modifies existing GAAP by providing new guidance concerning (1) the determination of whether an arrangement involving multiple deliverables contains more than one unit of accounting, and (2) the manner in which arrangement consideration should be allocated to such deliverables. The guidance requires the use of an entity’s best estimate of the selling price of a deliverable if vendor specific objective evidence or third-party evidence of the selling price cannot be determined. Additionally, ASU 2009-13 eliminates the use of the residual method of allocating consideration when vendor specific objective evidence or third-party evidence of the selling price is known for some, but not all, of the delivered items in a multiple element arrangement. Finally, ASU 2009-13 requires expanded qualitative and quantitative disclosures in the financial statements.

The Company currently has contracts in place that contain multiple deliverables, principally product supply agreements for gases and container rental. These arrangements provide for the purchase of gas product and the rental of storage vessels under a single agreement. The Company treats the deliverables in these arrangements as separate units of accounting with selling prices derived from Company specific or third-party evidence, both of which are determined from the highly competitive markets within the specific localities of the Company’s packaged gas distribution business. Revenue for gas product in these arrangements is recognized when the product is shipped, while revenue for container rental in these arrangements is recognized over the period in which the customer is utilizing the container.

The adoption of ASU 2009-13 did not have an effect on the Company’s accounting for its multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements and did not impact the Company’s consolidated financial statements in the periods since the initial adoption.

On April 1, 2011, the Company adopted ASU No. 2010-28, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts – a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2010-28”), which provides additional guidance on when Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test must be performed. The guidance clarifies that for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts, Step 2 must be performed if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists based on the evaluation of certain qualitative factors. The Company’s consolidated financial statements were not impacted by the adoption of ASU 2010-28.

On April 1, 2011, the Company adopted ASU No. 2010-29, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations – a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2010-29”), which provides clarification on disclosure requirements and amends current guidance to require entities to disclose pro forma revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the acquisition date for all business combinations that occurred during the current year had been as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period. Qualitative disclosures describing the nature and amount of any material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combinations included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings are also required. Pro forma disclosures for acquisitions occurring on or after April 1, 2011 follow the new guidance – see Note 3 for disclosures related to the Company’s business combinations.

In September 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued ASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment (“ASU 2011-08”), which simplifies the test for goodwill impairment. Under ASU 2011-08, entities are first permitted to perform a qualitative assessment about the likelihood of the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeding its fair value. If an entity determines that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount based on the qualitative assessment, it is required to perform the currently prescribed two-step goodwill impairment test to identify the potential goodwill impairment and measure the amount of the goodwill impairment loss, if any, to be recognized for that reporting unit. However, if an entity concludes otherwise based on the qualitative assessment, the two-step goodwill impairment test is not required. The new guidance is effective for goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, with early adoption permitted. The Company early adopted ASU 2011-08 effective October 1, 2011, and performed its annual goodwill impairment test under the new guidance – see Note 5 for results.

(b) Accounting pronouncements not yet adopted

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (“ASU 2011-04”), which amends existing GAAP with respect to fair value measurements. The majority of the key provisions of ASU 2011-04 represent clarifications to existing fair value measurement guidance, including changes in the valuation premise and the application of premiums and discounts. However, new disclosures are required under ASU 2011-04, including more robust disclosures related to Level 3 fair value measurements, a broader scope related to the disclosure of transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements, and new disclosures around the fair value hierarchy related to assets and liabilities disclosed at fair value but not measured as such on the balance sheet. The new guidance is effective prospectively for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, with early adoption prohibited. The Company adopted ASU 2011-04 on January 1, 2012, and the Company will modify its fair value measurement disclosures as applicable in light of the new requirements.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income (“ASU 2011-05”), which increases the prominence of items reported in other comprehensive income. Under ASU 2011-05, entities will be required to present all non-owner changes in stockholders’ equity in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements, thereby eliminating the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of stockholders’ equity. Currently, components of the Company’s other comprehensive income consist of foreign currency translation adjustments and the net gain or loss on derivative instruments.

Subsequently, in December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05 (“ASU 2011-12”), which deferred certain provisions of ASU 2011-05. Under ASU 2011-12, the requirement within ASU 2011-05 to present reclassification adjustments from other comprehensive income to net income on the face of the financial statements has been deferred pending further deliberation by the FASB. The new guidance within ASU 2011-05 and ASU 2011-12 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, with early adoption permitted and full retrospective application required. The Company is currently evaluating the two alternative presentations of other comprehensive income; however, adoption of the new guidance will not impact the Company’s consolidated financial results.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-09, Compensation – Retirement Benefits – Multiemployer Plans (Subtopic 715-80): Disclosures about an Employer’s Participation in a Multiemployer Plan (“ASU 2011-09”). ASU 2011-09 requires more robust disclosures surrounding entities’ participation in multiemployer pension plans (“MEPPs”). The Company historically participated in several MEPPs providing defined benefits to union employees under the terms of collective bargaining agreements (“CBAs”), but successfully negotiated the withdrawal from the last MEPP in which it participated in November 2011. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2011 and is required to be applied retrospectively for all prior periods presented in the financial statements. The Company will adopt ASU 2011-09 for its fiscal year ending March 31, 2012 and will modify its MEPP disclosures as appropriate.