COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Letters of Credit The Company can issue letters of credit totaling $100 million under its secured receivables credit facility and $150 million under its senior unsecured revolving credit facility. For further discussion regarding the Company's secured receivables credit facility and senior unsecured revolving credit facility, see Note 13 to the consolidated financial statements in the Company's 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K. In support of its risk management program, to ensure the Company’s performance or payment to third parties, $71 million in letters of credit under the secured receivables credit facility were outstanding as of June 30, 2017. The letters of credit primarily represent collateral for current and future automobile liability and workers’ compensation loss payments. Contingent Lease Obligations The Company remains subject to contingent obligations under certain real estate leases, including leases that were entered into by certain predecessor companies of a subsidiary prior to the Company's acquisition of the subsidiary. No liability has been recorded for any of these potential contingent obligations. For further details, see Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in the Company’s 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Settlements and Agreement in Principle In June 2010, the Company received a subpoena from the Florida Attorney General's Office seeking documents relating to the Company's pricing and billing practices as they relate to Florida’s Medicaid program. The Company cooperated with the requests. In November 2013, the State of Florida intervened as a plaintiff in a civil lawsuit, Florida ex rel. Hunter Laboratories LLC v. Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, et al., filed in Florida Circuit Court. The suit, originally filed by a competitor laboratory, alleges that the Company overcharged Florida’s Medicaid program. The Company's motion to dismiss the state's amended complaint was denied. The Company filed a motion for summary judgment on the primary claim in the case; the motion was granted. The court found that the Company had properly billed the Medicaid program the Company’s “usual and customary charge.” The Company had filed a motion for summary judgment on the state’s remaining claim. The parties recently reached an agreement in principle to resolve this matter, subject to further negotiation of terms and conditions. In April 2015, a qui tam civil lawsuit entitled United States ex rel. Mayes v. Berkeley HeartLab, Inc., et al., filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, was unsealed. The complaint alleges that certain alleged business practices of the defendants violate the False Claims Act, and seeks monetary relief. The United States has intervened as a plaintiff as to Berkeley HeartLab, Inc., a subsidiary of the Company and filed a complaint in intervention; the United States did not intervene as a plaintiff as to Quest Diagnostics Incorporated. The Company previously reported that the parties had reached an agreement in principle to resolve these matters. The parties have finalized the settlement agreement, and the case has been dismissed as to Berkeley HeartLab and Quest Diagnostics. Legal Matters The Company is involved in various legal proceedings. Some of the proceedings against the Company involve claims that could be substantial in amount. In the normal course of business, the Company has been named, from time to time, as a defendant in various legal actions, including arbitrations, class actions and other litigation, arising in connection with the Company's activities as a provider of diagnostic testing, information and services. These legal actions may include lawsuits alleging negligence or other similar legal claims. These actions could involve claims for substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages, and could have an adverse impact on the Company's client base and reputation. The Company is also involved, from time to time, in other reviews, investigations and proceedings by governmental agencies regarding the Company's business, including, among other matters, operational matters, which may result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief. The number of these reviews, investigations and proceedings has increased in recent years with regard to many firms in the healthcare services industry, including the Company. The federal or state governments may bring claims based on the Company's current practices, which it believes are lawful. In addition, certain federal and state statutes, including the qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act, allow private individuals to bring lawsuits against healthcare companies on behalf of government or private payers. The Company is aware of lawsuits, and from time to time has received subpoenas, related to billing practices based on the qui tam provisions of the Civil False Claims Act or other federal and state statutes, regulations or other laws. The Company understands that there may be other pending qui tam claims brought by former employees or other "whistle blowers" as to which the Company cannot determine the extent of any potential liability. Management cannot predict the outcome of such matters. Although management does not anticipate that the ultimate outcome of such matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, given the high degree of judgment involved in establishing loss estimates related to these types of matters, the outcome of such matters may be material to the Company's results of operations or cash flows in the period in which the impact of such matters is determined or paid. These matters are in different stages. Some of these matters are in their early stages. Matters may involve responding to and cooperating with various government investigations and related subpoenas. As of June 30, 2017, the Company does not believe that material losses related to legal matters described above are probable. Reserves for legal matters, other than the matters described in Settlements and Agreement in Principle, totaled $2 million and $5 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. Reserves for General and Professional Liability Claims As a general matter, providers of clinical testing services may be subject to lawsuits alleging negligence or other similar legal claims. These suits could involve claims for substantial damages. Any professional liability litigation could also have an adverse impact on the Company's client base and reputation. The Company maintains various liability insurance coverages for, among other things, claims that could result from providing, or failing to provide, clinical testing services, including inaccurate testing results, and other exposures. The Company's insurance coverage limits its maximum exposure on individual claims; however, the Company is essentially self-insured for a significant portion of these claims. Reserves for such matters, including those associated with both asserted and incurred but not reported claims, are established by considering actuarially determined losses based upon the Company's historical and projected loss experience. Such reserves totaled $119 million and $117 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. Management believes that established reserves and present insurance coverage are sufficient to cover currently estimated exposures. Management cannot predict the outcome of any claims made against the Company. Although management does not anticipate that the ultimate outcome of any such proceedings or claims will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, given the high degree of judgment involved in establishing accruals for loss estimates related to these types of matters, the outcome may be material to the Company's results of operations or cash flows in the period in which the impact of such claims is determined or paid.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Letters of Credit

The Company can issue letters of credit totaling $100 million under its secured receivables credit facility and $150 million under its senior unsecured revolving credit facility. For further discussion regarding the Company's secured receivables credit facility and senior unsecured revolving credit facility, see Note 13 to the consolidated financial statements in the Company's 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In support of its risk management program, to ensure the Company’s performance or payment to third parties, $71 million in letters of credit under the secured receivables credit facility were outstanding as of June 30, 2017. The letters of credit primarily represent collateral for current and future automobile liability and workers’ compensation loss payments.

Contingent Lease Obligations

The Company remains subject to contingent obligations under certain real estate leases, including leases that were entered into by certain predecessor companies of a subsidiary prior to the Company's acquisition of the subsidiary. No liability has been recorded for any of these potential contingent obligations. For further details, see Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in the Company’s 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Settlements and Agreement in Principle

In June 2010, the Company received a subpoena from the Florida Attorney General's Office seeking documents relating to the Company's pricing and billing practices as they relate to Florida’s Medicaid program. The Company cooperated with the requests. In November 2013, the State of Florida intervened as a plaintiff in a civil lawsuit, Florida ex rel. Hunter Laboratories LLC v. Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, et al., filed in Florida Circuit Court. The suit, originally filed by a competitor laboratory, alleges that the Company overcharged Florida’s Medicaid program. The Company's motion to dismiss the state's amended complaint was denied. The Company filed a motion for summary judgment on the primary claim in the case; the motion was granted. The court found that the Company had properly billed the Medicaid program the Company’s “usual and customary charge.” The Company had filed a motion for summary judgment on the state’s remaining claim. The parties recently reached an agreement in principle to resolve this matter, subject to further negotiation of terms and conditions.

In April 2015, a qui tam civil lawsuit entitled United States ex rel. Mayes v. Berkeley HeartLab, Inc., et al., filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, was unsealed. The complaint alleges that certain alleged business practices of the defendants violate the False Claims Act, and seeks monetary relief. The United States has intervened as a plaintiff as to Berkeley HeartLab, Inc., a subsidiary of the Company and filed a complaint in intervention; the United States did not intervene as a plaintiff as to Quest Diagnostics Incorporated. The Company previously reported that the parties had reached an agreement in principle to resolve these matters. The parties have finalized the settlement agreement, and the case has been dismissed as to Berkeley HeartLab and Quest Diagnostics.

Legal Matters

The Company is involved in various legal proceedings. Some of the proceedings against the Company involve claims that could be substantial in amount.

In the normal course of business, the Company has been named, from time to time, as a defendant in various legal actions, including arbitrations, class actions and other litigation, arising in connection with the Company's activities as a provider of diagnostic testing, information and services. These legal actions may include lawsuits alleging negligence or other similar legal claims. These actions could involve claims for substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages, and could have an adverse impact on the Company's client base and reputation.

The Company is also involved, from time to time, in other reviews, investigations and proceedings by governmental agencies regarding the Company's business, including, among other matters, operational matters, which may result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief. The number of these reviews, investigations and proceedings has increased in recent years with regard to many firms in the healthcare services industry, including the Company.

The federal or state governments may bring claims based on the Company's current practices, which it believes are lawful. In addition, certain federal and state statutes, including the qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act, allow private individuals to bring lawsuits against healthcare companies on behalf of government or private payers. The Company is aware of lawsuits, and from time to time has received subpoenas, related to billing practices based on the qui tam provisions of the Civil False Claims Act or other federal and state statutes, regulations or other laws. The Company understands that there may be other pending qui tam claims brought by former employees or other "whistle blowers" as to which the Company cannot determine the extent of any potential liability.

Management cannot predict the outcome of such matters. Although management does not anticipate that the ultimate outcome of such matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, given the high degree of judgment involved in establishing loss estimates related to these types of matters, the outcome of such matters may be material to the Company's results of operations or cash flows in the period in which the impact of such matters is determined or paid.

These matters are in different stages. Some of these matters are in their early stages. Matters may involve responding to and cooperating with various government investigations and related subpoenas. As of June 30, 2017, the Company does not believe that material losses related to legal matters described above are probable.

Reserves for legal matters, other than the matters described in Settlements and Agreement in Principle, totaled $2 million and $5 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively.

Reserves for General and Professional Liability Claims

As a general matter, providers of clinical testing services may be subject to lawsuits alleging negligence or other similar legal claims. These suits could involve claims for substantial damages. Any professional liability litigation could also have an adverse impact on the Company's client base and reputation. The Company maintains various liability insurance coverages for, among other things, claims that could result from providing, or failing to provide, clinical testing services, including inaccurate testing results, and other exposures. The Company's insurance coverage limits its maximum exposure on individual claims; however, the Company is essentially self-insured for a significant portion of these claims. Reserves for such matters, including those associated with both asserted and incurred but not reported claims, are established by considering actuarially determined losses based upon the Company's historical and projected loss experience. Such reserves totaled $119 million and $117 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. Management believes that established reserves and present insurance coverage are sufficient to cover currently estimated exposures. Management cannot predict the outcome of any claims made against the Company. Although management does not anticipate that the ultimate outcome of any such proceedings or claims will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, given the high degree of judgment involved in establishing accruals for loss estimates related to these types of matters, the outcome may be material to the Company's results of operations or cash flows in the period in which the impact of such claims is determined or paid.