2.2.0.7 false Commitments and Contingencies 0212 - Disclosure - Commitments and Contingencies true false false false 1 USD false false USD Standard http://www.xbrl.org/2003/iso4217 USD iso4217 0 USDEPS Divide http://www.xbrl.org/2003/iso4217 USD iso4217 http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance shares xbrli 0 Shares Standard http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance shares xbrli 0 $ 2 Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract] 0 omg_CommitmentsAndContingenciesAbstract omg false na duration Commitments And Contingencies. false false false false false true false false false false false false 1 false false false false 0 0 false false false xbrli:stringItemType string Commitments And Contingencies. false 3 Commitments and Contingencies 1 us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock us-gaap true na duration No definition available. false false false false false false false false false false false verboselabel false 1 false false false false 0 0   <div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> <div align="left" style="font-size: 10pt; margin-top: 12pt"><b>Note 12 — Commitments and Contingencies</b> </div> <div align="left" style="font-size: 10pt; margin-top: 6pt">In October 2010, GTL was served in Jersey, Channel Islands, with an injunction obtained by Marange Investments (Proprietary) Limited (“Marange”), which restrains Gécamines (a partner in GTL) from removing any of its assets from the island of Jersey up to the amount of 14.5 million British Pounds, pending the resolution of proceedings brought by Marange against Gécamines in the Supreme Court of South Africa. As a result, GTL has been enjoined from making payments to Gécamines under the Long Term Slag Sales Agreement between GTL and Gécamines up to the value of 14.5 million British Pounds. </div> <div align="left" style="font-size: 10pt; margin-top: 6pt">In March 2009, GTL was served in Jersey, Channel Islands, with an injunction obtained by FG Hemisphere Associates LLC (“FG Hemisphere”), which was seeking to enforce two arbitration awards made in 2003 by an arbitral tribunal operating under the auspices of the International Court of Arbitration against the DRC and Société Nationale D’Electricité for $108.3 million (the “Arbitration Awards”). In November 2010, the Royal Court of Jersey (the “Court”) released its Final Judgment in favor of FG Hemisphere for the full amount of the Arbitration Awards. The Court rejected Gécamines’ argument that it was not an organ of the DRC and rejected GTL’s various arguments, including that the Court did not have jurisdiction to seize monies to be paid to Gécamines under the Long Term Slag Sales Agreement between GTL and Gécamines on the basis that such monies are not held in Jersey. GTL intends to appeal the decision of the Court; as a condition of not paying FG Hemisphere such monies prior to appeal, the Court requires that all amounts owed by GTL to Gécamines (up to the amount of the Arbitration Awards), including monies payable under the Long Term Slag Sales Agreement, be deposited into Court. As a result, the amounts due from GTL to Gécamines (included in Accounts payable on the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets), which was $63.8 million at September 30, 2010, will be deposited with the Court during the fourth quarter of 2010 in connection with the filing of such appeal. Until the appeal is resolved, additional amounts due from GTL to Gécamines, up to the amount of the Arbitration Awards, will be deposited with the Court as they become due. While there can be no assurances with respect to the final outcome of either matter, the Company believes that, based on the information currently available to it, this matter will not have a material adverse effect upon its financial condition or results of operations. </div> <div align="left" style="font-size: 10pt; margin-top: 6pt">The Company has potential contingent liabilities with respect to environmental matters related to its former Precious Metals Group (“PMG”) operations in Brazil. The Company has been informed by the purchaser of the PMG operations of potential environmental issues at three of the operating locations in Brazil. Environmental cost-sharing arrangements are in place between the original owner and operator of those PMG operations, the Company and the subsequent purchaser of the PMG operations. The Company has reviewed the limited information made available to it on the environmental conditions and is awaiting more detailed information from the purchaser of PMG. The Company cannot currently evaluate whether or not, or to what extent, it will be responsible for any remediation costs until more detailed information is received. </div> <div align="left" style="font-size: 10pt; margin-top: 6pt">The Company is subject to a variety of environmental and pollution control laws and regulations in the jurisdictions in which it operates. As is the case with other companies in similar industries, the Company faces exposure from actual or potential claims and legal proceedings involving environmental matters. A number of factors affect the cost of environmental remediation, including the determination of the extent of contamination, the length of time the remediation may require, the complexity of environmental regulations, and the continuing improvements in remediation techniques. Taking these factors into consideration, the Company estimates the undiscounted costs of remediation, which will be incurred over several years, and accrues an amount consistent with the estimates of these costs when it is probable that a liability has been incurred. At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Company has recorded environmental liabilities of $2.3 million and $2.8 million, respectively, related to remediation and decommissioning at the Company’s closed manufacturing sites in Newark, New Jersey and Vasset, France. In addition, at September 30, 2010, the Company has recorded a $1.3 million environmental liability associated with the Joplin, Missouri site. The $1.3 million liability related to the Joplin, Missouri site was a liability acquired with the EaglePicher Technologies acquisition. Although it is difficult to quantify the potential impact of compliance with, or liability under, environmental protection laws, the Company believes that any amount it may be required to pay in connection with environmental matters is not reasonably likely to exceed amounts accrued by an amount that would have a material adverse effect upon its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. </div> <div align="left" style="font-size: 10pt; margin-top: 6pt">From time to time, the Company is subject to various legal and regulatory proceedings, claims and assessments that arise in the normal course of business. The ultimate resolution of such proceedings, claims and assessments is inherently unpredictable and, as a result, the Company’s estimates of liability, if any, are subject to change and actual results may materially differ from the Company’s estimates. The Company’s estimate of any costs to be incurred as a result of these proceedings, claims and assessments are accrued when the liability is considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The Company believes the amount of any potential liability with respect to legal and regulatory proceedings, claims and assessments will not have a material adverse effect upon its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. </div> </div>  <!-- Begin Block Tagged Note false false false us-types:textBlockItemType textblock Includes disclosure of commitments and contingencies. This element may be used as a single block of text to encapsulate the entire disclosure including data and tables. Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name FASB Interpretation (FIN) -Number 14 -Paragraph 3 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) -Number 5 -Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12 false 1 2 false UnKnown UnKnown UnKnown false true