COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Indemnification Agreements

In conjunction with the sale of the Company’s products in the ordinary course of business, the Company provides standard indemnification of business partners and customers for losses suffered or incurred for property damages, death and injury and for patent, copyright or any other intellectual property infringement claims by any third parties with respect to its products. The terms of these indemnification arrangements are generally perpetual. Except for losses related to property damages, the maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these arrangements is unlimited. As of October 2, 2015, the Company had not incurred any significant costs since the Spin-offs to defend lawsuits or settle claims related to these indemnification arrangements. As a result, the Company believes the estimated fair value of these arrangements is minimal.

VMS has entered into indemnification agreements with its directors and officers and certain of its employees that serve as officers or directors of its foreign subsidiaries that may require VMS to indemnify its directors and officers and those certain employees against liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers, and to advance their expenses incurred as a result of any legal proceeding against them as to which they could be indemnified.

Product Warranty

The following table reflects the changes in the Company’s accrued product warranty:



	Fiscal Years
(In millions)	2015			2014
Accrued product warranty, at beginning of period	$	49.3		$	53.2
Charged to cost of revenues	50.8			51.9
Actual product warranty expenditures	(54.2		)	(55.8		)
Accrued product warranty, at end of period	$	45.9		$	49.3

Long-term accrued product warranty costs were $2.0 million at both October 2, 2015 and September 26, 2014, respectively, and are included in other long-term liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Lease Commitments

At October 2, 2015, the Company was committed to minimum rentals under non-cancelable operating leases (including rent escalation clauses) for fiscal years 2016 through 2020 and thereafter, as follows (in millions): $22.2, $18.4, $13.0, $9.2, $7.3 and $20.9, respectively. Rental expenses were $28.8 million, $28.7 million and $26.0 million for fiscal years 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Other Commitments

As of October 2, 2015, the Company's outstanding commitment under the loan to Maryland Proton Therapy Center (“MPTC”) was $22.8 million, to be paid in four installments of $5.7 million each on June 30, 2016, September 30, 2016, December 30, 2016 and March 31, 2017. As of October 2, 2015, the Company's remaining commitment under the loan related to the New York Proton Center (“NYPC”) was $72.8 million, to be paid primarily through fiscal year 2018. See Note 16, "VPT Loans" for additional information.

Subsequent to fiscal year 2015, in October 2015, the Company committed to grant the noncontrolling shareholders of MeVis Medical Solutions AG (“MeVis”): (1) an annual recurring net compensation of €0.95 per MeVis share starting from January 1, 2015 and (2) a put right for their MeVis shares at €19.77 per MeVis share. As of October 2, 2015, noncontrolling shareholders together held approximately 482,000 shares of MeVis, representing 26.5% of the outstanding shares. See Note 15, "Business Combinations" for additional information.

Contingencies

Environmental Remediation Liabilities

The Company’s operations and facilities, past and present, are subject to environmental laws, including laws that regulate the handling, storage, transport and disposal of hazardous substances. Certain of those laws impose cleanup liabilities under certain circumstances. In connection with those laws and certain of the Company’s past and present operations and facilities, the Company oversees various environmental cleanup projects and also reimburses certain third parties for cleanup activities. Those include facilities sold as part of the Company’s electron devices business in 1995 and thin film systems business in 1997. In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) or third parties have named the Company as a potentially responsible party under the amended Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”), at sites to which the Company or the facilities of the sold businesses were alleged to have shipped waste for recycling or disposal (the “CERCLA sites”). In connection with the CERCLA sites, the Company to date has been required to pay only a small portion of the total amount as its contributions to cleanup efforts. Under the agreement that governs the Spin-offs, VI and VSEA are each obligated to indemnify the Company for one-third of the environmental cleanup costs associated with corporate, discontinued or sold operations prior to the Spin-offs (after adjusting for any insurance proceeds or tax benefits received by the Company), as well as fully indemnify the Company for other liabilities arising from the operations of the business transferred to it as part of the Spin-offs.

The Company spent $1.3 million, $1.2 million and $1.0 million (net of amounts borne by VI and VSEA) during fiscal years 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively, on environmental cleanup costs, third-party claim costs, project management costs and legal costs.

Inherent uncertainties make it difficult to estimate the likelihood of the cost of future cleanup, third-party claims, project management and legal services for the CERCLA sites and one of the Company’s past facilities. Nonetheless, as of October 2, 2015, the Company estimated that, net of VI’s and VSEA’s indemnification obligations, future costs associated with the CERCLA sites and this facility would range in total from $1.4 million to $9.9 million. The time frames over which these cleanup project costs are estimated vary, ranging from one year up to thirty years as of October 2, 2015. Management believes that no amount in that range is more probable of being incurred than any other amount and therefore had accrued $1.4 million for these cleanup projects as of October 2, 2015. The accrued amount has not been discounted to present value due to the uncertainties that make it difficult to develop a single best estimate.

The Company believes it has gained sufficient knowledge to better estimate the scope and cost of monitoring, cleanup and management activities for its other past and present facilities. This, in part, is based on agreements with other parties and also cleanup plans approved by or completed in accordance with the requirements of the governmental agencies having jurisdiction. As of October 2, 2015, the Company estimated that the Company’s future exposure, net of VI’s and VSEA’s indemnification obligations, for the costs at these facilities, and reimbursements of third-party’s claims for these facilities, ranged in total from $5.5 million to $26.0 million. The time frames over which these costs are estimated to be incurred vary, ranging from one to thirty years as of October 2, 2015. As to each of these facilities, management determined that a particular amount within the range of estimated costs was a better estimate than any other amount within the range, and that the amount and timing of these future costs were reliably determinable. The best estimate within that range was $8.8 million at October 2, 2015. Accordingly, the Company had accrued $7.4 million for these costs as of October 2, 2015, which represented the best estimate discounted at 4%, net of inflation. This accrual is in addition to the $1.4 million described in the preceding paragraph.

The table that follows presents information about the Company’s liabilities for future environmental costs at October 2, 2015, based on estimates as of that date.



(In millions)	Recurring Costs		Non-Recurring Costs		Total Anticipated Future Costs
Fiscal Years:
2016	$	0.5	$	1.2	$	1.7
2017	0.5		0.6		1.1
2018	0.4		0.6		1.0
2019	0.5		0.2		0.7
2020	0.4		0.7		1.1
Thereafter	3.7		1.1		4.8
Total costs	$	6.0	$	4.4	10.4
Less imputed interest					1.6
Reserve amount					$	8.8

Recurring costs include expenses for such tasks as the ongoing operation, maintenance and monitoring of cleanup. Non-recurring costs include expenses for such tasks as soil excavation and treatment, installation of injection and monitoring wells, other costs for soil and groundwater treatment by injection, construction of ground and surface water treatment systems, soil and groundwater investigation, governmental agency costs required to be reimbursed by the Company, removal and closure of treatment systems and monitoring wells, and the defense and settlement of pending and anticipated third-party claims.

These amounts are only estimates of anticipated future costs. The amounts the Company will actually spend may be greater or less than these estimates, even as the Company believes the degree of uncertainty will narrow as cleanup activities progress. While the Company believes its reserve is adequate, as the scope of the Company’s obligations becomes more clearly defined, the Company may modify the reserve, and charge or credit future earnings accordingly. Nevertheless, based on information currently known to management, and assuming VI and VSEA satisfy their indemnification obligations, management believes the costs of these environmental related matters are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial statements of the Company in any one fiscal year.

The Company evaluates its liability for investigation and cleanup costs in light of the obligations and apparent financial strength of potentially responsible parties and insurance companies with respect to which the Company believes it has rights to indemnity or reimbursement. The Company has asserted claims for recovery of environmental investigation and cleanup costs already incurred, and to be incurred in the future against various insurance companies and other third parties. The Company receives certain cash payments in the form of settlements and judgments from defendants, insurers and other third parties from time to time. The Company has also reached an agreement with an insurance company under which that insurer has agreed to pay a portion of the Company’s past and future environmental related expenditures. Receivables from that insurer amounted to $2.1 million at October 2, 2015 and $2.2 million at September 26, 2014, with the respective current portion included in prepaid expenses and other current assets and the respective noncurrent portion included in other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company believes that this receivable is recoverable because it is based on a binding, written settlement agreement with what appears to be a financially viable insurance company, and the insurance company has paid the Company’s claims in the past.

The availability of the indemnities of VI and VSEA will depend upon the future financial strength of VI and VSEA. Given the long-term nature of some of the liabilities, VI and VSEA may be unable to fund the indemnities in the future. It is also possible that a court would disregard this contractual allocation among the parties and require the Company to assume responsibility for obligations allocated to another party, particularly if the other party were to refuse or was unable to pay any of its allocated share. The agreement governing the Spin-offs generally provides that if a court prohibits a company from satisfying its shared indemnification obligations, the indemnification obligations will be shared equally by the two other companies.

Other Matters

From time to time, the Company is a party to or otherwise involved in legal proceedings, claims and government inspections or investigations and other legal matters, both inside and outside the United States, arising in the ordinary course of its business or otherwise. The Company accrues amounts, to the extent they can be reasonably estimated, that it believes are adequate to address any liabilities related to legal proceedings and other loss contingencies that the Company believes will result in a probable loss (including, among other things, probable settlement value). A loss or a range of loss is disclosed when it is reasonably possible that a material loss will be incurred and can be estimated or when it is reasonably possible that the amount of a loss, when material, will exceed the recorded provision.

In September 2015, Elekta Ltd. and William Beaumont Hospital served the Company with a complaint alleging infringement of three patents related to certain aspects of cone beam imaging in conjunction with radiotherapy. During September 2015 and October 2015, the Company filed several complaints in the U.S. and foreign courts and the U.S. International Trade Commission against Elekta AB and its subsidiaries alleging infringement of various patents relating to certain aspects of cone beam imaging, cone-beam imaging gantries, volumetric modulated arc therapy (“VMAT”), and MR-Linac. These lawsuits are in the initial stages and at this time, the Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of this matter, and therefore no amounts have been accrued as of October 2, 2015.

In June 2015, a foreign subsidiary of the Company was charged by the Department for Investigation and Penal Action of Lisbon with alleged improper activities relating to three tenders of medical equipment in Portugal during the period of 2003 to 2009. The Company has requested a judicial review available under Portuguese criminal procedure processes as to whether or not such changes are proper under Portuguese law. The Company previously undertook an internal investigation of this matter and voluntarily disclosed the results of this investigation to the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. At this time, the Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of this matter, and therefore no amounts have been accrued as of October 2, 2015.

In April 2007, a patent infringement lawsuit was initiated by the University of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education (the “University of Pittsburgh”) regarding the Company’s Real-time Position Management™ (“RPM”) technology. In January 2014, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with the University of Pittsburgh and in the third quarter of fiscal year 2014 paid $35.6 million in full settlement of the lawsuit. Prior to the beginning of the second quarter of fiscal year 2014, the Company had accrued in aggregate approximately $5.0 million for the low end of the range of the probable settlement value for this matter. In the second quarter of fiscal year 2014, the Company accrued an additional $25.1 million of the $35.6 million for all damages and interest related to the case and in the third quarter of fiscal year 2014 recorded the remaining amount of approximately $5.5 million for future royalties as prepaid royalties. The amount of prepaid royalties is being amortized beginning with the third quarter of fiscal year 2014, over the remaining life of the patent of approximately two and a half years.

In addition to the above, the Company is involved in other legal matters. However, such matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes are not predictable with assurance. The Company is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to such matters. There can be no assurances as to whether the Company will become subject to significant additional claims and liabilities with respect to ongoing or future proceedings. If actual liabilities significantly exceed the estimates made, the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows could be materially adversely affected. Legal expenses relating to legal matters are expensed as incurred.

Restructuring Charges

As part of the Company’s plan to enhance operational performance through productivity initiatives, the Company offered an enhanced retirement program to its qualifying employees across all reporting segments during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2014. The program required the participating employees to submit their applications by October 10, 2014, and as a result, the restructuring charges relating to this program were primarily incurred in the first quarter of fiscal year 2015. The Company also incurred additional restructuring charges across all reportable segments for workforce reductions in fiscal year 2015. In fiscal year 2015, the Company incurred $13.3 million in restructuring charges in connection with the above mentioned restructuring programs, and a significant portion of these charges were paid in cash in fiscal year 2015. The restructuring charges are included in selling, general and administrative expenses in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings. As of October 2, 2015, any remaining restructuring charges related to these restructuring programs are not expected to be material and are expected to be substantially completed in fiscal year 2016.

There were no restructuring charges incurred in fiscal year 2014. In a similar enhanced retirement program offered in fiscal year 2013, the Company incurred restructuring charges of $6.7 million during fiscal year 2013.