Subsequent Events	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2012
Subsequent Events [Abstract]
Subsequent Events [Text Block]	14. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS Fox River Environmental Matter In relation to the Fox River environmental matter discussed in Note 8, "Commitments and Contingencies,” on July 3, 2012 the Wisconsin federal court issued its ruling on the February 2012 trial (which was a trial to the court without a jury). The court ruled in NCR's favor on the issue of “arranger” liability as applied to Operable Unit 1 of the Fox River, and held, among other things, that the Company's predecessor companies at the Fox River did not, in the sale of carbonless copy paper “broke,” intend to arrange for the disposal of hazardous substances; the court issued other rulings regarding insurance offsets and certain aspects of counterclaim damages. The Company has reviewed the ruling, and concluded that it requires no additions to the Company's Fox River reserve. There remain certain issues to be resolved in the federal district court before a final judgment can be issued, including the treatment of certain claims under state law and other matters not resolved in the July 3, 2012 order. When a final judgment is entered, the Company will pursue an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit with respect to certain of the court's orders, including the orders of December 2009 and February 2011 discussed in Note 8. Kalamazoo River Environmental Matter In relation to the Kalamazoo River environmental matter discussed in Note 8, "Commitments and Contingencies,” the July 3, 2012 decision by the Wisconsin federal court in NCR's favor with respect to the Company's purported “arranger” liability at the Fox River may have a bearing on the claims and potential claims against the Company at the Kalamazoo River, as those include claims based on alleged “arranger” liability arising from Fox River sites, certain aspects of which were the primary focus of the February 2012 trial in the Fox River matter. On July 27, 2012 the Company moved for summary judgment with respect to this matter based, in part, on the July 3, 2012 ruling in the Fox River matter. ATL Litigation In relation to the ATL litigation discussed in Note 8, "Commitments and Contingencies", ATL's motion for reconsideration of the appellate decision in favor of NCR's indemnitees and customers, 7-Eleven and Cardtronics, was denied on July 2, 2012.

14. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

Fox River Environmental Matter In relation to the Fox River environmental matter discussed in Note 8, "Commitments and Contingencies,” on July 3, 2012 the Wisconsin federal court issued its ruling on the February 2012 trial (which was a trial to the court without a jury). The court ruled in NCR's favor on the issue of “arranger” liability as applied to Operable Unit 1 of the Fox River, and held, among other things, that the Company's predecessor companies at the Fox River did not, in the sale of carbonless copy paper “broke,” intend to arrange for the disposal of hazardous substances; the court issued other rulings regarding insurance offsets and certain aspects of counterclaim damages. The Company has reviewed the ruling, and concluded that it requires no additions to the Company's Fox River reserve. There remain certain issues to be resolved in the federal district court before a final judgment can be issued, including the treatment of certain claims under state law and other matters not resolved in the July 3, 2012 order. When a final judgment is entered, the Company will pursue an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit with respect to certain of the court's orders, including the orders of December 2009 and February 2011 discussed in Note 8.

Kalamazoo River Environmental Matter In relation to the Kalamazoo River environmental matter discussed in Note 8, "Commitments and Contingencies,” the July 3, 2012 decision by the Wisconsin federal court in NCR's favor with respect to the Company's purported “arranger” liability at the Fox River may have a bearing on the claims and potential claims against the Company at the Kalamazoo River, as those include claims based on alleged “arranger” liability arising from Fox River sites, certain aspects of which were the primary focus of the February 2012 trial in the Fox River matter. On July 27, 2012 the Company moved for summary judgment with respect to this matter based, in part, on the July 3, 2012 ruling in the Fox River matter.

ATL Litigation In relation to the ATL litigation discussed in Note 8, "Commitments and Contingencies", ATL's motion for reconsideration of the appellate decision in favor of NCR's indemnitees and customers, 7-Eleven and Cardtronics, was denied on July 2, 2012.