Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies The Company leases facilities under non-cancellable operating leases. The leases expire at various dates through fiscal 2018 and frequently include renewal provisions for varying periods of time, provisions which require us to pay taxes, insurance and maintenance costs, and provisions for minimum rent increases. Minimum lease payments, including scheduled rent increases are recognized as rent expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Litigation The Company is involved in legal proceedings from time to time in the ordinary course of its business. Management does not believe that any of these claims and proceedings against it is likely to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Accordingly, the Company cannot determine the final amount, if any, of its liability beyond the amount accrued in the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements as of September 30, 2018, nor is it possible to estimate what litigation-related costs will be in the future. Applied Utility Systems, Inc. The Company is undergoing a sales and use tax audit by the State of California (the "State") with respect to Applied Utility Systems, Inc., a former subsidiary of the Company that was sold in 2009, for the period of 2007 through 2009. The audit has identified a project performed by the Company during that time period for which sales tax was not collected and remitted and for which the State asserts that proper documentation of resale may not have been obtained and that the Company owes sales tax of $1.5 million, inclusive of interest. The Company contends and believes that it received sufficient and proper documentation from its customer to support not collecting and remitting sales tax from that customer and is actively disputing the audit report with the State. On August 12, 2013, the Company appeared at an appeals conference with the State Board of Equalization ("BOE"). On July 21, 2014, the Company received a Decision and Recommendation ("D&R") from the BOE. The D&R's conclusion was that the basis for the calculation of the aforementioned $1.5 million tax due should be reduced from $12.2 million to $9.0 million with a commensurate reduction in the tax owed to the State. Regardless of this finding, the Company continues to believe that it will prevail in this matter, as it believes that the State did not adequately address the legal arguments related to the Company's acceptance of the valid resale certificate from its customer. The Company has not agreed to these findings, and therefore, it will be appealing at a higher level at the BOE. Based on a re-audit, the BOE lowered the tax due to $0.9 million, inclusive of interest. The Company continues to disagree with these findings based on the aforementioned reasons. However, in October 2015, the Company offered to settle this case for $0.1 million, which is based on the expected cost of continuing to contest this audit. Accordingly, an accrual was charged to discontinued operations during the year ended December 31, 2015 to reflect the offer to settle this case. Should the Company not prevail with the offer to settle this case, it plans to continue with the appeals process. Further, should the Company not prevail in this case, it will pursue reimbursement from the customer for all assessments from the State.

Commitments and Contingencies

The Company leases facilities under non-cancellable operating leases. The leases expire at various dates through fiscal 2018 and frequently include renewal provisions for varying periods of time, provisions which require us to pay taxes, insurance and maintenance costs, and provisions for minimum rent increases. Minimum lease payments, including scheduled rent increases are recognized as rent expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease.

Litigation

The Company is involved in legal proceedings from time to time in the ordinary course of its business. Management does not believe that any of these claims and proceedings against it is likely to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Accordingly, the Company cannot determine the final amount, if any, of its liability beyond the amount accrued in the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements as of September 30, 2018, nor is it possible to estimate what litigation-related costs will be in the future.

Applied Utility Systems, Inc.

The Company is undergoing a sales and use tax audit by the State of California (the "State") with respect to Applied Utility Systems, Inc., a former subsidiary of the Company that was sold in 2009, for the period of 2007 through 2009. The audit has identified a project performed by the Company during that time period for which sales tax was not collected and remitted and for which the State asserts that proper documentation of resale may not have been obtained and that the Company owes sales tax of $1.5 million, inclusive of interest. The Company contends and believes that it received sufficient and proper documentation from its customer to support not collecting and remitting sales tax from that customer and is actively disputing the audit report with the State. On August 12, 2013, the Company appeared at an appeals conference with the State Board of Equalization ("BOE"). On July 21, 2014, the Company received a Decision and Recommendation ("D&R") from the BOE. The D&R's conclusion was that the basis for the calculation of the aforementioned $1.5 million tax due should be reduced from $12.2 million to $9.0 million with a commensurate reduction in the tax owed to the State. Regardless of this finding, the Company continues to believe that it will prevail in this matter, as it believes that the State did not adequately address the legal arguments related to the Company's acceptance of the valid resale certificate from its customer. The Company has not agreed to these findings, and therefore, it will be appealing at a higher level at the BOE. Based on a re-audit, the BOE lowered the tax due to $0.9 million, inclusive of interest. The Company continues to disagree with these findings based on the aforementioned reasons. However, in October 2015, the Company offered to settle this case for $0.1 million, which is based on the expected cost of continuing to contest this audit. Accordingly, an accrual was charged to discontinued operations during the year ended December 31, 2015 to reflect the offer to settle this case. Should the Company not prevail with the offer to settle this case, it plans to continue with the appeals process. Further, should the Company not prevail in this case, it will pursue reimbursement from the customer for all assessments from the State.