Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jul. 03, 2011
Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 13: Commitments and Contingencies The Company is a party to various legal proceedings incidental to its business and is subject to a variety of environmental and pollution control laws and regulations in all jurisdictions in which it operates. The Company is also currently a defendant in a class action by persons who bought Company stock between February 7, 2007 and September 18, 2007. The complaint, as amended, alleges that the Company issued press releases and made public statements during the class period that were materially false and misleading. The complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages plus interest and attorneys’ fees. As is the case with other companies in similar industries, the Company faces exposure from actual or potential claims and legal proceedings. Some of these exposures have the potential to be material. Information with respect to these and other exposures appears in Part II — Item 8 — “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” (Note 14 — “Commitments and Contingencies”) in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company cannot currently estimate the final outcome of many of the items described or the ultimate amount of potential losses. Pursuant to U.S. GAAP, accruals for estimated losses are recorded at the time information becomes available indicating that losses are probable and that the amounts are reasonably estimable. Amounts so accrued are not discounted. While the ultimate liabilities relating to claims and proceedings may be significant to profitability in the period recognized, it is management’s opinion that such liabilities, when finally determined, will not have an adverse material effect on Sonoco’s consolidated financial position or liquidity. *Environmental Matters* During the fourth quarter of 2005, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notified U.S. Paper Mills Corp. (U.S. Mills), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, that U.S. Mills and NCR Corporation (NCR), an unrelated party, would be jointly held responsible to undertake a program to remove and dispose of certain PCB-contaminated sediments at a particular site on the lower Fox River in Wisconsin (the “Site”). U.S. Mills and NCR reached an agreement between themselves that each would fund 50% of the costs of remediation. The Company has expensed a total of $17,650 for its estimated share of the total cleanup cost of the Site, and through July 3, 2011, has spent a total of $14,467. The remaining accrual of $3,183 represents the Company’s best estimate of what it is likely to pay to complete the Site project. However, the actual costs associated with cleanup of the Site are dependent upon many factors and it is possible that remediation costs could be higher than the current estimate of project costs. The Company acquired U.S. Mills in 2001, and the alleged contamination predates the acquisition. The EPA and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) have also issued a general notice of potential liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and a request to participate in remedial action implementation negotiations relating to a stretch of the lower Fox River, including the bay at Green Bay, (Operating Units 2 – 5) to eight potentially responsible parties, including U.S. Mills. Operating Units 2 – 5 include, but also comprise a vastly larger area than, the Site. A detailed description of the claims and proceedings associated therewith appears in Part II — Item 8 — “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” (Note 14 — “Commitments and Contingencies”) in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K. On October 14, 2010, the EPA and WDNR filed suit against NCR, API, U.S. Mills and nine other defendants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (No. 10-CV-00910-WCG) pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA. The plaintiffs seek to recover unreimbursed costs incurred for activities undertaken in response to the release and threatened release of hazardous substances from facilities at or near the Lower Fox River and Green Bay as well as damages for injury to, loss of, and destruction of natural resources resulting from such releases. The plaintiffs also seek a ruling that the defendants are liable for future response costs of the plaintiffs and requiring the defendants to comply with the unilateral Administrative Order for Remedial Action discussed in prior filings. The Company does not believe that the remedies sought in the suit materially expand the Company’s potential liability beyond what has been disclosed in this report or in the Company’s prior filings with the SEC. U.S. Mills plans to defend the suit vigorously. Since 2007, U.S. Mills has expensed a total of $60,825 for potential liabilities associated with the Fox River contamination (not including amounts expensed for remediation at the Site) and through July 3, 2011, has spent a total of $6,201, primarily on legal fees. Although the Company lacks a reasonable basis for identifying any amount within the range of possible loss as a better estimate than any other amount, as has previously been disclosed, the upper end of the range may exceed the net worth of U.S. Mills. However, because the discharges of hazardous materials into the environment occurred before the Company acquired U.S. Mills, and U.S. Mills has been operated as a separate subsidiary of the Company, the Company does not believe that it bears financial responsibility for these legacy environmental liabilities of U.S. Mills. Therefore, the Company continues to believe that the maximum additional exposure to its consolidated financial position is limited to the equity position of U.S. Mills, which was approximately $86,000 at July 3, 2011. The Company has been named as a potentially responsible party at several other environmentally contaminated sites. All of the sites are also the responsibility of other parties. The potential remediation liabilities are shared with such other parties, and, in most cases, the Company’s share, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated at the current time. As of July 3, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company (and its subsidiaries) had accrued $61,006 and $62,026, respectively, related to environmental contingencies. Of these, a total of $57,807 and $58,727 relate to U.S. Mills at July 3, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively. These accruals are included in “Accrued expenses and other” on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. U.S. Mills recognized a $40,825 benefit in 2008 from settlements reached and proceeds received on certain insurance policies covering the Fox River contamination. U.S. Mills’ two remaining insurance carriers are in liquidation. It is possible that U.S. Mills may recover from these carriers a small portion of the costs it ultimately incurs. U.S. Mills may also be able to reallocate some of the costs it incurs among other parties. There can be no assurance that such claims for recovery or reallocation would be successful and no amounts have been recognized in the consolidated financial statements of the Company for such potential recovery or reallocation.

Note 13: Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is a party to various legal proceedings incidental to its business and is subject to a variety of environmental and pollution control laws and regulations in all jurisdictions in which it operates. The Company is also currently a defendant in a class action by persons who bought Company stock between February 7, 2007 and September 18, 2007. The complaint, as amended, alleges that the Company issued press releases and made public statements during the class period that were materially false and misleading. The complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages plus interest and attorneys’ fees. As is the case with other companies in similar industries, the Company faces exposure from actual or potential claims and legal proceedings. Some of these exposures have the potential to be material. Information with respect to these and other exposures appears in Part II — Item 8 — “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” (Note 14 — “Commitments and Contingencies”) in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company cannot currently estimate the final outcome of many of the items described or the ultimate amount of potential losses.

Pursuant to U.S. GAAP, accruals for estimated losses are recorded at the time information becomes available indicating that losses are probable and that the amounts are reasonably estimable. Amounts so accrued are not discounted. While the ultimate liabilities relating to claims and proceedings may be significant to profitability in the period recognized, it is management’s opinion that such liabilities, when finally determined, will not have an adverse material effect on Sonoco’s consolidated financial position or liquidity.

Environmental Matters

During the fourth quarter of 2005, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notified U.S. Paper Mills Corp. (U.S. Mills), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, that U.S. Mills and NCR Corporation (NCR), an unrelated party, would be jointly held responsible to undertake a program to remove and dispose of certain PCB-contaminated sediments at a particular site on the lower Fox River in Wisconsin (the “Site”). U.S. Mills and NCR reached an agreement between themselves that each would fund 50% of the costs of remediation. The Company has expensed a total of $17,650 for its estimated share of the total cleanup cost of the Site, and through July 3, 2011, has spent a total of $14,467. The remaining accrual of $3,183 represents the Company’s best estimate of what it is likely to pay to complete the Site project. However, the actual costs associated with cleanup of the Site are dependent upon many factors and it is possible that remediation costs could be higher than the current estimate of project costs. The Company acquired U.S. Mills in 2001, and the alleged contamination predates the acquisition.

The EPA and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) have also issued a general notice of potential liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and a request to participate in remedial action implementation negotiations relating to a stretch of the lower Fox River, including the bay at Green Bay, (Operating Units 2 – 5) to eight potentially responsible parties, including U.S. Mills. Operating Units 2 – 5 include, but also comprise a vastly larger area than, the Site. A detailed description of the claims and proceedings associated therewith appears in Part II — Item 8 — “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” (Note 14 — “Commitments and Contingencies”) in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K.

On October 14, 2010, the EPA and WDNR filed suit against NCR, API, U.S. Mills and nine other defendants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (No. 10-CV-00910-WCG) pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA. The plaintiffs seek to recover unreimbursed costs incurred for activities undertaken in response to the release and threatened release of hazardous substances from facilities at or near the Lower Fox River and Green Bay as well as damages for injury to, loss of, and destruction of natural resources resulting from such releases. The plaintiffs also seek a ruling that the defendants are liable for future response costs of the plaintiffs and requiring the defendants to comply with the unilateral Administrative Order for Remedial Action discussed in prior filings. The Company does not believe that the remedies sought in the suit materially expand the Company’s potential liability beyond what has been disclosed in this report or in the Company’s prior filings with the SEC. U.S. Mills plans to defend the suit vigorously.

Since 2007, U.S. Mills has expensed a total of $60,825 for potential liabilities associated with the Fox River contamination (not including amounts expensed for remediation at the Site) and through July 3, 2011, has spent a total of $6,201, primarily on legal fees. Although the Company lacks a reasonable basis for identifying any amount within the range of possible loss as a better estimate than any other amount, as has previously been disclosed, the upper end of the range may exceed the net worth of U.S. Mills. However, because the discharges of hazardous materials into the environment occurred before the Company acquired U.S. Mills, and U.S. Mills has been operated as a separate subsidiary of the Company, the Company does not believe that it bears financial responsibility for these legacy environmental liabilities of U.S. Mills. Therefore, the Company continues to believe that the maximum additional exposure to its consolidated financial position is limited to the equity position of U.S. Mills, which was approximately $86,000 at July 3, 2011.

The Company has been named as a potentially responsible party at several other environmentally contaminated sites. All of the sites are also the responsibility of other parties. The potential remediation liabilities are shared with such other parties, and, in most cases, the Company’s share, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated at the current time.

As of July 3, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company (and its subsidiaries) had accrued $61,006 and $62,026, respectively, related to environmental contingencies. Of these, a total of $57,807 and $58,727 relate to U.S. Mills at July 3, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively. These accruals are included in “Accrued expenses and other” on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. U.S. Mills recognized a $40,825 benefit in 2008 from settlements reached and proceeds received on certain insurance policies covering the Fox River contamination. U.S. Mills’ two remaining insurance carriers are in liquidation. It is possible that U.S. Mills may recover from these carriers a small portion of the costs it ultimately incurs. U.S. Mills may also be able to reallocate some of the costs it incurs among other parties. There can be no assurance that such claims for recovery or reallocation would be successful and no amounts have been recognized in the consolidated financial statements of the Company for such potential recovery or reallocation.