(11)	Contingencies

The Company is subject to various investigations, claims and legal proceedings covering a wide range of matters that arise in the ordinary course of its business activities. The Company continually assesses all known facts and circumstances as they pertain to all legal and environmental matters and evaluates the need for reserves and disclosures as deemed necessary based on these facts and circumstances. These matters, either individually or in the aggregate, could result in actual costs that are significantly higher than the Company's current assessment and could have a material adverse effect on the Company's operating results and cash flows in future reporting periods. While these matters, specifically environmental matters, could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, based upon past experience, it is likely that payments significantly in excess of current reserves would be made over an extended number of years.

Environmental

In connection with laws and regulations pertaining to the protection of the environment, the Company and its subsidiaries are a party to several environmental proceedings and remediation investigations and cleanups and, along with other companies, have been named a potentially responsible party ("PRP") for certain waste disposal sites ("Superfund sites"). Additionally, the Company has retained the liability for certain environmental proceedings associated with discontinued operations.

It is the Company's policy to record appropriate liabilities for environmental matters where remedial efforts are probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated. Such liabilities are based on the Company's best estimate of the undiscounted future costs required to complete the remedial work. Each of these matters is subject to various uncertainties, and it is possible that some of these matters will be decided unfavorably against the Company. The resolution of such matters often spans several years and frequently involves regulatory oversight or adjudication. Additionally, many remediation requirements are fluid and are likely to be affected by future technological, site and regulatory developments. Consequently, the ultimate liability with respect to such matters, as well as the timing of cash disbursements cannot be determined with certainty.

In matters where the Company has been able to reasonably estimate its liability, the Company has accrued for the estimated costs associated with the study and remediation of applicable sites. These reserves were $6,790 and $7,786 at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The decrease in the reserve includes payments of $1,130 partially offset by adjustments to reserves of $68 and the impact of currency translation of $66. The reserves are adjusted periodically as remediation efforts progress or as additional technical, regulatory or legal information become available. Based upon available information and analysis, the Company's current reserve represents management's best estimate of the probable and estimable costs associated with environmental proceedings including amounts for current investigation fees where full investigation and remediation costs may not be estimable at the reporting date. Given the uncertainties regarding the outcome of investigative and study activities, the status of laws, regulations, enforcement, policies, the impact of other PRPs, technology and information related to individual sites, the Company does not believe it is possible to currently develop an estimate of the range of reasonably possible environmental loss in excess of its reserves.

CasChem

As a result of the sale of the Bayonne, New Jersey facility, the Company became obligated to investigate site conditions and conduct required remediation under the New Jersey Industrial Site Recovery Act. The Company intends to continue implementing a sampling plan at the property in 2012 pursuant to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection's ("NJDEP") private oversight program. The results of the completed sampling, and any additional sampling deemed necessary, will be used to develop an estimate of the Company's future liability for remediation costs, if any.

Cosan

In response to the NJDEP, the Company completed its initial investigation and submitted the results of the investigation and a proposed remediation plan to the NJDEP for its Cosan Clifton, New Jersey site. The NJDEP subsequently rejected the remediation plan and requested additional investigative work at the site and that work is on-going. The reserve was $967 at March 31, 2012, which was based on the initial remedial action plan. The results of the additional investigative work may impact the remediation plan and costs.

Additionally, the Company has a reserve of $848 for the Cosan Carlstadt, New Jersey site based on the investigations completed to date and the proposed remediation plan submitted to the NJDEP for its approval. The NJDEP has subsequently required the Company to perform additional investigative work prior to approval of the remediation plan. The results of this additional investigative work may impact the remediation plan and costs. The NJDEP has advised the Company that the site will be placed in the NJDEP's private oversight program. Under the program, the Company will be required to continue with the investigative plan in 2012.

Berry's Creek

The Company received a notice from the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("USEPA") that two former subsidiaries of the Company are considered PRPs at the Berry's Creek Study Area in New Jersey. These subsidiaries are among many other PRPs that were listed in the notice. Pursuant to the notice, the PRPs have been asked to perform a remedial investigation and feasibility study of the Berry's Creek site. The Company has joined the group of PRPs and entered into an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent with the USEPA agreeing to jointly conduct or fund an appropriate remedial investigation and feasibility study of the Berry's Creek site with other PRP signatories to the Agreement. The PRPs have engaged consultants to perform the work specified in the Agreement and develop a method to allocate related costs among the PRPs. As of March 31, 2012, the Company's reserve was $288 to cover the current phase of investigation based on a tentative agreement on the allocation of the site investigation costs among the PRPs. The investigation is ongoing and at this time it is too early to predict the extent of any additional liabilities.

Maybrook and Harriman Sites

The Company's Nepera, Inc. subsidiary ("Nepera") is named a PRP of the Maybrook site in Hamptonburgh, New York by the USEPA in connection with the discharge, under appropriate permits, of wastewater at that site prior to Cambrex's acquisition of Nepera in 1986. The USEPA also issued the Company a Notice of Potential Liability and the Company signed a consent decree to complete the Record of Decision ("ROD") and has provided the USEPA with appropriate financial assurance to guarantee the obligation under the consent decree. The PRPs began to implement remedial action at this site in the third quarter of 2011 and is expected to be completed by the end of 2012. The Company's reserve for completing this project is $1,750.

Nepera is also named a responsible party of its former Harriman, New York production facility by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ("NYSDEC"). A final ROD was issued that describes the remediation plan for the site. Implementation of the ROD is on-going. In December 2010, the NYSDEC notified the PRPs and the current owners of the property that they intended to combine the investigation and remediation being conducted by various parties pursuant to different regulatory programs under one regulatory plan. This development could potentially lead to increased liabilities for the Company. There are on-going discussions between the NYSDEC and all parties to try to resolve this matter. As of March 31, 2012, the reserve recorded by the Company for the Nepera Harriman site was $300, which represents the Company's best estimate to complete the existing ROD.

Scientific Chemical Processing ("SCP") Superfund Site

Nepera was named a PRP of the SCP Superfund site, located in Carlstadt, New Jersey, in the early 1980's along with approximately 130 other PRPs. The site is a former waste processing facility that accepted various waste for recovery and disposal including processing wastewater from Nepera. The PRPs are in the process of implementing a final remedy for soil and groundwater contamination at the site. The SCP Superfund site has also been identified as a PRP in the Berry's Creek Superfund site (see previous discussion). For over a decade, the remediation has been funded by de minimus settlements and by the insurers of the SCP Superfund site's owners and operators. However, due to an unexpected increase in remediation costs at the site and costs to contribute to the Berry's Creek investigation, the PRP group has recently approved the assessment of an additional cash contribution by the PRP group. While the Company continues to dispute the methodology used by the PRP group to arrive at its allocation for the cash contribution, the Company has paid the initial funding requests.

Newark Bay Complex Litigation

CasChem and Cosan have been named as two of several hundred third-party defendants in a third-party complaint filed in February 2009, by Maxus Energy Corporation ("Maxus") and Tierra Solutions, Inc. ("Tierra"). The original plaintiffs include the NJDEP, the Commissioner of the NJDEP and the Administrator of the New Jersey Spill Compensation Fund, which originally filed suit in 2005 against Maxus, Tierra and other defendants seeking recovery of cleanup and removal costs for alleged discharges of dioxin and other hazardous substances into the Passaic River, Newark Bay, Hackensack River, Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull and adjacent waters (the "Newark Bay Complex"). Maxus and Tierra are now seeking contributions from third-party defendants, including subsidiaries of the Company, for cleanup and removal costs for which each may be held liable in the primary lawsuit. Maxus and Tierra also seek recovery for cleanup and removal costs that each has incurred or will incur relating to the Newark Bay Complex. The Company expects to vigorously defend against the lawsuit. At this time it is too early to predict whether the Company will have any liability in this matter.

The Company is involved in other environmental matters where the range of liability is not reasonably estimable at this time and it is not foreseeable when information will become available to provide a basis for adjusting or recording a reserve, should a reserve ultimately be required.

Litigation and Other Matters

Lorazepam and Clorazepate

In 1998, the Company and a subsidiary were named as defendants along with Mylan Laboratories, Inc. ("Mylan") and Gyma Laboratories, Inc. ("Gyma") in a proceeding instituted by the Federal Trade Commission in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the "District Court"). Suits were also commenced by several State Attorneys General and class action complaints by private plaintiffs in various state courts. The suits alleged violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act arising from exclusive license agreements between the Company and Mylan covering two APIs (Lorazepam and Clorazepate).

All cases have been resolved except for one brought by four health care insurers. In the remaining case, the District Court entered judgment after trial in 2008 against Mylan, Gyma and Cambrex in the total amount of $19,200, payable jointly and severally, and also a punitive damage award against each defendant in the amount of $16,709. In addition, the District Court ruled that the defendants were subject to a total of approximately $7,500 in prejudgment interest. Several motions are currently pending in connection with the defendant's appeal of the judgment.

In 2003, Cambrex paid $12,415 to Mylan in exchange for a release and full indemnity against future costs or liabilities in related litigation brought by the purchasers of Lorazepam and Clorazepate, as well as potential future claims related to the ongoing matter. Mylan has submitted a surety bond underwritten by a third-party insurance company in the amount of $74,500. In the event of a final settlement or final judgment, Cambrex expects any payment required by the Company to be made by Mylan under the indemnity described above.