Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2020
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES: Investments in Affiliates and Other Entities As described in Notes 2 and 11, Quanta holds investments in various entities, including joint venture entities that provide infrastructure-related services under specific customer contracts and partially owned entities that own, operate and/or maintain certain infrastructure assets. Losses incurred by these entities are generally shared ratably based on the percentage ownership of the participants in these structures. However, in Quanta’s joint venture structures that provide infrastructure-related services, each participant is typically jointly and severally liable for all of the obligations of the joint venture entity pursuant to the contract with the customer, as a general partner or through a parent guarantee and, therefore, can be liable for full performance of the contract with the customer. In circumstances where Quanta’s participation in a joint venture qualifies as a general partnership, the joint venture partners are jointly and severally liable for all obligations of the joint venture, including obligations owed to the customer or any other person or entity. Quanta is not aware of circumstances that would lead to future claims against it for material amounts in connection with these joint and several liabilities. Additionally, typically each joint venture participant agrees to indemnify the other participant for any liabilities incurred in excess of what the other participant is obligated to bear under the respective joint venture agreement or in accordance with the scope of work subcontracted to each participant. It is possible, however, that Quanta could be required to pay or perform obligations in excess of its share if another participant is unable or refuses to pay or perform its share of the obligations. Quanta is not aware of circumstances that would lead to future claims against it for material amounts that would not be indemnified. However, to the extent any such claims arise, they could be material and could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. As described in Note 2, Quanta also formed a partnership in 2017 with select investors to invest in certain specified infrastructure projects, and wholly owned subsidiaries of Quanta serve as the general partner of this partnership and as a separately operated registered investment adviser that manages the invested capital. Quanta’s investment balance related to this partnership was $21.4 million as of December 31, 2020. In October 2019, due to certain management changes at the registered investment adviser, the partnership entered into a period during which the investors and Quanta evaluated the partnership, and at the end of such period in April 2020, the investment period for any future investments ended. Committed Expenditures Quanta has capital commitments for the expansion of its equipment fleet in order to accommodate manufacturer lead times on certain types of vehicles. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had $69.7 million of production orders with expected delivery dates in 2021. Although Quanta has committed to purchase these vehicles at the time of their delivery, Quanta anticipates that the majority of these orders will be assigned to third-party leasing companies and made available under certain master equipment lease agreements, thereby releasing Quanta from its capital commitments. Legal Proceedings Quanta is from time to time party to various lawsuits, claims and other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. These actions typically seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, breach of contract, negligence or gross negligence and/or property damage, environmental liabilities, wage and hour and other employment-related damages, punitive damages, consequential damages, civil penalties or other losses, or injunctive or declaratory relief. With respect to all such lawsuits, claims and proceedings, Quanta records a reserve when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. In addition, Quanta discloses matters for which management believes a material loss is at least reasonably possible. Except as otherwise stated below, none of these proceedings are expected to have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In all instances, management has assessed the matter based on current information and made a judgment concerning its potential outcome, giving due consideration to the nature of the claim, the amount and nature of damages sought and the probability of success. Management’s judgment may prove materially inaccurate, and such judgment is made subject to the known uncertainties of litigation. Peru Project Dispute In 2015, Redes Andinas de Comunicaciones S.R.L. (Redes), a majority-owned subsidiary of Quanta, entered into two separate contracts with an agency of the Peruvian Ministry of Transportation and Communications (MTC), currently Programa Nacional de Telecomunicaciones (PRONATEL), as successor to Fondo de Inversion en Telecomunicaciones (FITEL), pursuant to which Redes would design, construct and operate certain telecommunication networks in rural regions of Peru. The aggregate consideration provided for in the contracts was approximately $248 million, consisting of approximately $151 million to be paid during the construction period and approximately $97 million to be paid during a 10-year post-construction operation and maintenance period. At the beginning of the project, FITEL made advance payments totaling approximately $87 million to Redes, which were secured by two on-demand advance payment bonds posted by Redes to guarantee proper use of the payments in the execution of the project. Redes also provided two on-demand performance bonds in the aggregate amount of $25 million to secure performance of its obligations under the contracts. During the construction phase, the project experienced numerous challenges and delays, primarily related to issues which Quanta believes were outside of the control of and not attributable to Redes, including, among others, weather-related issues, local opposition to the project, permitting delays, the inability to acquire clear title to certain required parcels of land and other delays which Quanta believes were attributable to FITEL/PRONATEL. In response to various of these challenges and delays, Redes requested and received multiple extensions to certain contractual deadlines and relief from related liquidated damages. However, in April 2019, PRONATEL provided notice to Redes claiming that Redes was in default under the contracts due to the delays and that PRONATEL would terminate the contracts if the alleged defaults were not cured. Redes responded by claiming that it was not in default, as the delays were due to events not attributable to Redes, and therefore PRONATEL was not entitled to terminate the contracts. PRONATEL subsequently terminated the contracts for alleged cause prior to completion of Redes’ scope of work, exercised the on-demand performance bonds and advance payment bonds against Redes, and indicated its intention to claim damages, including a verbal allegation of approximately $45 million of liquidated damages under the contracts. In August 2020, Redes received a formal claim from PRONATEL for liquidated damages in the amount of approximately $44 million, which represents the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amount asserted based on the December 31, 2020 exchange rate. In May 2019, Redes filed for arbitration before the Court of International Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) against PRONATEL and the MTC. In the arbitration, Redes claims that PRONATEL: (i) breached and wrongfully terminated the contracts; (ii) wrongfully executed the advance payment bonds and the performance bonds; and (iii) is not entitled to the alleged amount of liquidated damages. In addition, Redes is seeking compensation for all damages arising from PRONATEL’s actions, including but not limited to (i) repayment of the amounts collected by PRONATEL under the advance payment bonds and the performance bonds; (ii) payment of amounts owed for work completed by Redes under the contracts; (iii) lost income in connection with Redes’ future operation and maintenance of the networks; and (iv) other related costs and damages to Redes as a result of the breach and improper termination of the contracts (including construction costs caused by the delays and costs related to the transfer of the networks). The amount claimed by Redes in this arbitration is approximately $190 million. The arbitration hearing on the merits is presently scheduled to take place in November 2021. As of the date of the contract terminations, Redes had incurred costs of approximately $157 million related to the design and construction of the project and had received approximately $100 million of payments (inclusive of the approximately $87 million advance payments). Furthermore, upon completion of the transfer of the networks (as completed at the time of the contract terminations) to PRONATEL, which was required upon termination of the contracts and was completed in 2020, PRONATEL and the MTC are able to possess the networks, for which PRONATEL has paid approximately $100 million while also collecting approximately $112 million of bond proceeds. Quanta believes that PRONATEL’s actions represent an abuse of power and unfair and inequitable treatment and that PRONATEL and the MTC have been unjustly enriched. Specifically, under the terms of the contracts, the advance payment bonds were to be exercised only if it is determined that Redes did not use the advance payments for their intended purpose, in which case Redes would be obligated to return the portion of the advance payments not properly used. In connection with PRONATEL exercising the bonds, Redes was not afforded the opportunity to provide evidence of its proper use of the advance payments for project expenditures. Redes has incurred substantially more than the advance payment amounts in the execution of the project, and Quanta believes Redes has used the advance payment amounts for their intended purpose. Quanta believes Redes is entitled to all amounts described in the claims above and intends to vigorously pursue those claims in this pending arbitration proceeding. However, as a result of the contract terminations and the inherent uncertainty involved in arbitration proceedings and recovery of amounts owed, there can be no assurance that Redes will prevail on those claims or in defense of liquidated damages claims or any other claims that may be asserted by PRONATEL. As a result, during the three months ended June 30, 2019, Quanta recorded a charge to earnings of $79.2 million, which included a reduction of previously recognized earnings on the project, a reserve against a portion of the project costs incurred through the project termination date, an accrual for a portion of the alleged liquidated damages, and the estimated costs to complete the project turnover and close out the project. The reduction of previously recognized earnings on the project included $14.5 million related to the correction of prior period errors associated with the determination of total estimated project costs and the resulting revenue recognized. Quanta assessed the materiality of the prior period errors and determined that the errors were immaterial individually and in the aggregate to its previously issued financial statements. As of December 31, 2020, after taking into account the above charge, Quanta had a contract receivable of approximately $120 million related to the project, which includes the approximately $87 million PRONATEL collected through exercise of the advance payment bonds. The contract receivable from PRONATEL is included in “Other assets, net” in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2020. Quanta also reserves the right to seek full compensation for the loss of its investment under other applicable legal regimes, including investment treaties and customary international law, as well as to seek resolution through direct discussions with PRONATEL or the MTC. In connection with these rights, in May 2020 Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary delivered to the Peruvian government an official notice of dispute arising from the termination of the contracts and related acts by PRONATEL (which are attributable to Peru) under the Agreement on the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Peru (Investment Treaty). The Investment Treaty protects Quanta’s subsidiary’s indirect ownership stake in Redes and the project, and provides for rights and remedies distinct from the ICC arbitration. In December 2020, Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary filed a request for the institution of an arbitration proceeding against Peru with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) related to Peru’s breach of the Investment Treaty, which was registered by ICSID in January 2021. In the ICSID arbitration, Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary claims, without limitation, that Peru: (i) treated the subsidiary’s investment in Redes and the project unfairly and inequitably; and (ii) effectively expropriated the subsidiary’s investment in Redes and the project. In addition, Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary is seeking full compensation for all damages arising from Peru’s actions, including but not limited to (i) the fair market value of the investment and/or lost profits; (ii) attorneys’ fees and arbitration costs; (iii) other related costs and damages and (iv) pre- and post-award interest. If Quanta is not successful in these pending arbitration proceedings, this matter could result in an additional significant loss that could have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s consolidated results of operations and cash flows. However, based on the information currently available and the status of the pending arbitration proceedings, Quanta is not able to determine a range of reasonably possible additional loss, if any, with respect to this matter. Maurepas Project Dispute During the third quarter of 2017, Maurepas Pipeline, LLC (Maurepas) notified QPS Engineering, LLC (QPS), a subsidiary of Quanta, of its claim for liquidated damages allegedly arising from delay in mechanical completion of a project in Louisiana. Quanta disputes the claim and believes that QPS is not responsible for liquidated damages under the contract terms, and in June 2019 QPS filed suit against SemGroup Corporation, (now Energy Transfer LP), the parent company of Maurepas, under the parent guarantee issued to secure payment from Maurepas on the project. QPS is seeking to recover $22 million that it believes has been wrongfully withheld, which represents the maximum liability for liquidated damages pursuant to the contract terms. In July and August 2018, QPS also received notice from Maurepas claiming certain warranty defects on the project. In July 2019, Maurepas filed suit against QPS and Quanta, pursuant to a parent guarantee, for damages related to the warranty defects and for a declaratory judgment related to the liquidated damages claim, subsequently claiming approximately $59 million in damages related to a portion of the alleged warranty defects. The lawsuits relating to these claims have been consolidated and are pending in the Tulsa County District Court in Oklahoma. Quanta is continuing to evaluate the claimed warranty defects and, if they exist, the appropriate remedy. At this time, Quanta disputes the extent of the alleged defects or has not been able to substantiate them. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had recorded an accrual with respect to this matter based on the current estimated amount of probable loss. However, based on the information currently available, Quanta cannot estimate the range of additional reasonably possible loss in connection with this matter. If, upon final resolution of this matter, Quanta is unsuccessful, any liquidated damages or warranty defect damages in excess of Quanta’s current loss accrual would be recorded as additional costs on the project. Lorenzo Benton v. Telecom Network Specialists, Inc., et al. In June 2006, plaintiff Lorenzo Benton filed a class action complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, alleging various wage and hour violations against Telecom Network Specialists (TNS), a former subsidiary of Quanta. Quanta retained liability associated with this matter pursuant to the terms of Quanta’s sale of TNS in December 2012. Benton represents a class of workers that includes all persons who worked on certain TNS projects, including individuals that TNS retained through numerous staffing agencies. The plaintiff class in this matter is seeking damages for unpaid wages, penalties associated with the failure to provide meal and rest periods and overtime wages, interest and attorneys’ fees. In January 2017, the trial court granted a summary judgment motion filed by the plaintiff class and found that TNS was a joint employer of the class members and that it failed to provide adequate meal and rest breaks and failed to pay overtime wages. During 2019 and 2020, the parties filed additional summary judgment and other motions and a bench trial on liability and damages was held. Liability and damages for significantly all claims have been determined by the trial court, subject to issuance of a final order, with the amount of liability for TNS, including interest through the date of the trial court’s orders, expected to be approximately $9.5 million. This amount includes damages and interest, but does not include attorneys’ fees or costs, which are yet to be determined. Quanta believes the court’s decisions on liability and damages are not supported by controlling law and continues to contest its liability and the damage calculation asserted by the plaintiff class in this matter. Additionally, in November 2007, TNS filed cross complaints for indemnity and breach of contract against the staffing agencies, which employed many of the individuals in question. In December 2012, the trial court heard cross-motions for summary judgment filed by TNS and the staffing agencies pertaining to TNS’s demand for indemnity. The court denied TNS’s motion and granted the motions filed by the staffing agencies; however, the California Appellate Court reversed the trial court’s decision in part and instructed the trial court to reconsider its ruling. In February 2017, the court denied a new motion for summary judgment filed by the staffing companies and has since stated that the staffing companies would be liable to TNS for any damages owed to the class members that the staffing companies employed. The final amount of liability, if any, payable in connection with this matter remains the subject of pending litigation and will ultimately depend on various factors, including the outcome of Quanta’s appeal of the trial court’s rulings on liability and damages, the final determination with respect to any additional damages owed by Quanta, and the solvency of the staffing agencies. Based on review and analysis of the trial court’s rulings on liability, Quanta does not believe, at this time, that it is probable this matter will result in a material loss. However, if Quanta is unsuccessful in this litigation and the staffing agencies are unable to fund damages owed to class members, Quanta believes the range of reasonably possible loss to Quanta upon final resolution of this matter could be up to approximately $9.5 million, plus attorneys’ fees and expenses of the plaintiff class. Hallen Acquisition Assumed Liability In August 2019, in connection with the acquisition of Hallen, Quanta assumed certain contingent liabilities associated with a March 2014 natural gas-fed explosion and fire in the Manhattan borough of New York City, New York. The incident resulted in, among other things, loss of life, personal injury and the destruction of two buildings and other property damage. After investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board determined that the probable cause of the incident was the failure of certain natural gas infrastructure installed by Consolidated Edison, Inc. (Con Ed) and the failure of certain sewer infrastructure maintained by the City of New York. Pursuant to a contract with Con Ed, Hallen had performed certain work related to such natural gas infrastructure and agreed to indemnify Con Ed for certain claims, liabilities and costs associated with its work. Numerous lawsuits are pending in New York state courts related to the incident, which generally name Con Ed, the City of New York and Hallen as defendants. These lawsuits are at various preliminary stages and generally seek unspecified damages and, in some cases, punitive damages, for wrongful death, personal injury, property damage and business interruption. Hallen’s liabilities associated with this matter are expected to be covered under applicable insurance policies or contractual remedies negotiated by Quanta with the former owners of Hallen. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had not recorded an accrual for any probable and estimable loss related to this matter. However, the ultimate amount of liability in connection with this matter remains subject to uncertainties associated with pending litigation, including, among other things, the apportionment of liability among the defendants and other responsible parties and the likelihood and amount of potential damages claims. As a result, this matter could result in a loss that is in excess of, or not covered by, such insurance or contractual remedies, which could have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Concentrations of Credit Risk Quanta is subject to concentrations of credit risk related primarily to its cash and cash equivalents and its net receivable position with customers, which includes amounts related to billed and unbilled accounts receivable and contract assets net of advanced billings with the same customer. Substantially all of Quanta’s cash and cash equivalents are managed by what it believes to be high credit quality financial institutions. In accordance with Quanta’s investment policies, these institutions are authorized to invest cash and cash equivalents in a diversified portfolio of what Quanta believes to be high quality cash and cash equivalent investments, which consist primarily of interest-bearing demand deposits, money market investments and money market mutual funds. Although Quanta does not currently believe the principal amount of these cash and cash equivalents is subject to any material risk of loss, changes in economic conditions could impact the interest income Quanta receives from these investments. In addition, Quanta grants credit under normal payment terms, generally without collateral, to its customers, which include electric power and energy companies, governmental entities, general contractors, and builders, owners and managers of commercial and industrial properties located primarily in the United States, Canada and Australia. While Quanta generally has certain statutory lien rights with respect to services provided, Quanta is subject to potential credit risk related to business, economic and financial market conditions that affect these customers and locations, which has been heightened as a result of the unfavorable and uncertain economic and financial market conditions resulting from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the significant decline in commodity prices and volatility in commodity production volumes. Some of Quanta’s customers have experienced significant financial difficulties (including bankruptcy), and customers may experience financial difficulties in the future. These difficulties expose Quanta to increased risk related to collectability of billed and unbilled receivables and contract assets for services Quanta has performed. For example, on January 29, 2019, PG&E Corporation and its primary operating subsidiary, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (together, PG&E), one of Quanta’s largest customers, filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, as amended, which resulted in the delay in collection of approximately $165 million of billed and unbilled receivables. During the bankruptcy case, the bankruptcy court approved the early assumption by PG&E of certain contracts with subsidiaries of Quanta, and PG&E subsequently assumed its remaining contracts with Quanta’s subsidiaries as part of its Chapter 11 plan of reorganization, which was confirmed by the bankruptcy court in June 2020. As of December 31, 2020, substantially all of Quanta’s pre-petition receivables had been paid. Additionally, a customer within Quanta’s Underground Utility and Infrastructure Solutions segment encountered financial difficulties during 2020 that resulted in nonpayment of certain receivables owed, and as a result of which Quanta decided to foreclose the liens on the pipeline asset in order to recover the outstanding amounts. No customer represented 10% or more of Quanta’s consolidated revenues for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 or 2018, and no customer represented 10% or more of Quanta’s consolidated net receivable position at December 31, 2020 or 2019. Insurance As discussed in Note 2, Quanta carries various insurance policies. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the gross amount accrued for employer’s liability, workers’ compensation, auto liability, general liability and group health claims totaled $319.5 million and $287.6 million, with $238.0 million and $212.9 million considered to be long term and included in “Insurance and other non-current liabilities.” Related insurance recoveries/receivables as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 were $35.6 million and $35.1 million, of which $0.4 million and $0.3 million are included in “Prepaid expenses and other current assets” and $35.2 million and $34.8 million are included in “Other assets, net.” Quanta renews its insurance policies on an annual basis, and therefore deductibles and levels of insurance coverage may change in future periods. In addition, insurers may cancel Quanta’s coverage or determine to exclude certain items from coverage, or Quanta may elect not to obtain certain types or incremental levels of insurance based on the potential benefits considered relative to the cost of such insurance, or coverage may not be available at reasonable and competitive rates. In any such event, Quanta’s overall risk exposure would increase, which could negatively affect its results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. For example, due to the increased occurrence and future risk of wildfires in California and other areas in the western United States, Australia and other locations, insurers have reduced coverage availability and increased the cost of insurance coverage for such events in recent years. As a result, Quanta’s level of insurance coverage for wildfire events decreased, including in connection with annual insurance renewals in the spring of 2020 and 2019, and the levels of coverage may not be sufficient to cover potential losses. Quanta’s third-party insurers could also decide to further reduce or exclude coverage for wildfires or other events in connection with its insurance renewal in the spring of 2021 and/or in the future. In any such event, Quanta’s overall risk exposure would increase, which could negatively affect its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Letters of Credit Certain of Quanta’s vendors require letters of credit to ensure reimbursement for amounts they are disbursing on Quanta’s behalf, such as to beneficiaries under its insurance programs. In addition, from time to time, certain customers require Quanta to post letters of credit to ensure payment of subcontractors and vendors and guarantee performance under contracts. Such letters of credit are generally issued by a bank or similar financial institution, typically pursuant to Quanta’s senior credit facility. Each letter of credit commits the issuer to pay specified amounts to the holder of the letter of credit if the holder claims that Quanta has failed to perform specified actions. If this were to occur, Quanta would be required to reimburse the issuer of the letter of credit. Depending on the circumstances of such a reimbursement, Quanta may also be required to record a charge to earnings for the reimbursement. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had $348.3 million in outstanding letters of credit under its senior credit facility securing its casualty insurance program and various contractual commitments. These are irrevocable stand-by letters of credit with maturities generally expiring at various times throughout 2021. Quanta expects to renew the majority of the letters of credit related to the casualty insurance program for subsequent one-year periods upon maturity. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta also had $18.2 million of letters of credit issued by a financial institution that ceased to be a lender under the senior credit facility subsequent to the September 2020 amendment to the credit agreement, and such letters of credit are collateralized by a $19.1 million letter of credit issued by a lender in the senior credit facility. Quanta is not aware of any claims currently asserted or threatened under any of these letters of credit that are material, individually or in the aggregate. However, to the extent payment is required for any such claims, the amount paid could be material and could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Bonds and Parent Guarantees Many customers, particularly in connection with new construction, require Quanta to post performance and payment bonds. These bonds provide a guarantee that Quanta will perform under the terms of a contract and pay its subcontractors and vendors. In certain circumstances, the customer may demand that the surety make payments or provide services under the bond, and Quanta must reimburse the surety for any expenses or outlays it incurs. Quanta may also be required to post letters of credit in favor of the sureties, which would reduce the borrowing availability under its senior credit facility. Under Quanta’s underwriting, continuing indemnity and security agreement with its sureties, Quanta had also granted security interests in certain of its assets as collateral for its obligations to the sureties. However, in connection with the September 2020 amendment to the credit agreement, these security interests were automatically released. On September 22, 2020, Quanta also entered into an amendment to the underwriting, continuing indemnity and security agreement that further documented this release and removed the collateral reinstatement provision in the agreement that would have applied in the event Quanta’s corporate credit rating from either of Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. or Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC were to fall below an investment grade rating. Quanta has not been required to make any material reimbursements to its sureties for bond-related costs except related to the exercise of approximately $112 million advance payment and performance bonds in 2019 in connection with the terminated telecommunications project in Peru, as set forth in Legal Proceedings – Peru Project Dispute above. However, to the extent further reimbursements are required, the amounts could be material and could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta is not aware of any outstanding material obligations for payments related to bond obligations. Performance bonds expire at various times ranging from mechanical completion of a project to a period extending beyond contract completion in certain circumstances, and as such a determination of maximum potential amounts outstanding requires the use of certain estimates and assumptions. Such amounts can also fluctuate from period to period based upon the mix and level of Quanta’s bonded operating activity. As of December 31, 2020, the total amount of the outstanding performance bonds was estimated to be approximately $3.7 billion. Quanta’s estimated maximum exposure as it relates to the value of the performance bonds outstanding is lowered on each bonded project as the cost to complete is reduced, and each commitment under a performance bond generally extinguishes concurrently with the expiration of its related contractual obligation. The estimated cost to complete these bonded projects was approximately $1.4 billion as of December 31, 2020. Additionally, from time to time, Quanta guarantees certain obligations and liabilities of its subsidiaries that may arise in connection with, among other things, contracts with customers, equipment lease obligations, joint venture arrangements and contractor licenses. These guarantees may cover all of the subsidiary’s unperformed, undischarged and unreleased obligations and liabilities under or in connection with the relevant agreement. For example, with respect to customer contracts, a guarantee may cover a variety of obligations and liabilities arising during the ordinary course of the subsidiary’s business or operations, including, among other things, warranty and breach of contract claims, third party and environmental liabilities arising from the subsidiary’s work and for which it is responsible, liquidated damages, or indemnity claims. Quanta is not aware of any claims under any of these guarantees that are material, except as set forth in Legal Proceedings – Maurepas Project Dispute above. To the extent a subsidiary incurs a material obligation or liability and Quanta has guaranteed the performance or payment of such liability, the recovery by a customer or other counterparty or a third party will not be limited to the assets of the subsidiary. As a result, responsibility under the guarantee could exceed the amount recoverable from the subsidiary alone and could materially and adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Employment Agreements Quanta has various employment agreements with certain executives and other employees, which provide for compensation, other benefits and, under certain circumstances, severance payments and post-termination stock-based compensation benefits. Certain employment agreements also contain clauses that require the potential payment of specified amounts to such employees upon the occurrence of a defined change in control event. Collective Bargaining Agreements and Multiemployer Pension Plans Certain of Quanta’s operating units are parties to collective bargaining agreements with unions that represent certain of their employees. The collective bargaining agreements expire at various times and have typically been renegotiated and renewed on terms similar to those in the expiring agreements. From time to time, Quanta is a party to grievance and arbitration actions based on claims arising out of the collective bargaining agreements. The agreements require the operating units to pay specified wages, provide certain benefits to union employees and contribute certain amounts to multiemployer pension plans and employee benefit trusts. Quanta’s multiemployer pension plan contribution rates generally are made to the plans on a “pay-as-you-go” basis based on its union employee payrolls. The location and number of union employees that Quanta employs at any given time and the plans in which they may participate vary depending on Quanta’s need for union resources in connection with its ongoing projects. Therefore, Quanta is unable to accurately predict its union employee payroll and the resulting multiemployer pension plan contribution obligations for future periods. The Pension Protection Act of 2006 may require Quanta to make additional contributions to its multiemployer pension plans if they become underfunded, and these additional contributions will be determined based on Quanta’s union employee payrolls. Special funding and operational rules are generally applicable to plan years beginning after 2007 for multiemployer plans that are classified as “endangered,” “seriously endangered” or “critical” status based on multiple factors (including, for example, the plan’s funded percentage, the plan’s cash flow position and whether the plan is projected to experience a minimum funding deficiency). Plans in these classifications must adopt measures to improve their funded status through a funding improvement or rehabilitation plan, as applicable, which may require additional contributions from employers (e.g., a surcharge on benefit contributions) and/or modifications to retiree benefits. Certain plans to which Quanta contributes or may contribute in the future are in “endangered,” “seriously endangered” or “critical” status. The amount, if any, that Quanta may be obligated to contribute to these plans cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainty regarding the amount of future work involving covered union employees, future contribution levels and possible surcharges on plan contributions. Quanta may be subject to additional liabilities imposed by law as a result of its participation in multiemployer defined benefit pension plans. For example, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980, imposes certain liabilities upon an employer who is a contributor to a multiemployer pension plan if the employer withdraws or is deemed to have withdrawn from the plan or the plan is terminated or experiences a mass withdrawal. These liabilities include an allocable share of the unfunded vested benefits in the plan for all plan participants, not merely the benefits payable to a contributing employer’s own retirees. As a result, participating employers may bear a higher proportion of liability for unfunded vested benefits if other participating employers cease to contribute or withdraw, with the reallocation of liability being more acute in cases when a withdrawn employer is insolvent or otherwise fails to pay its withdrawal liability. Quanta is not aware of any material withdrawal liabilities that have been incurred or asserted and that remain outstanding as a result of a withdrawal by Quanta from a multiemployer defined benefit pension plan. However, Quanta’s future contribution obligations and potential withdrawal liability exposure could vary based on the investment and actuarial performance of the multiemployer pension plans to which it contributes and other factors, which could be negatively impacted as a result of the unfavorable and uncertain economic and financial market conditions resulting from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and related issues. Quanta has been subject to significant withdrawal liabilities in the past, including in connection with its withdrawal from the Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Plan. To the extent Quanta is subject to material withdrawal liabilities in the future, such liability could adversely affect its business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Deferred Compensation Plans Quanta maintains certain non-qualified deferred compensation plans as further described in Note 13. Indemnities Quanta generally indemnifies its customers for the services it provides under its contracts and other specified liabilities, which may subject Quanta to indemnity claims and liabilities and related litigation. Additionally, in connection with certain acquisitions and dispositions, Quanta has indemnified various parties against specified liabilities that those parties might incur in the future. The indemnities under acquisition or disposition agreements are usually contingent upon the other party incurring liabilities that reach specified thresholds. Quanta is not aware of any indemnity claims in connection with its indemnity obligations that are material. However, to the extent indemnification is required, the amount could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. In the normal course of Quanta’s acquisition transactions, Quanta obtains rights to indemnification from the sellers or former owners of acquired businesses for certain risks, liabilities and obligations arising from their prior operations, such as performance, operational, safety, workforce or tax issues, some of which Quanta may not have discovered during due diligence. However, the indemnities may not cover all of Quanta’s exposure for such pre-acquisition matters, or the indemnitors may be unwilling or unable to pay amounts owed to Quanta. Accordingly, Quanta may incur expenses for which it is not reimbursed, and such amounts could be material and could have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s business or consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. For example, Quanta has obtained certain indemnification rights from the former owners of Hallen with respect to contingent liabilities that were assumed in connection with the acquisition, as set forth in Legal Proceedings — Hallen Acquisition Assumed Liability above.

As described in Notes 2 and 11, Quanta holds investments in various entities, including joint venture entities that provide infrastructure-related services under specific customer contracts and partially owned entities that own, operate and/or maintain certain infrastructure assets. Losses incurred by these entities are generally shared ratably based on the percentage ownership of the participants in these structures. However, in Quanta’s joint venture structures that provide infrastructure-related services, each participant is typically jointly and severally liable for all of the obligations of the joint venture entity pursuant to the contract with the customer, as a general partner or through a parent guarantee and, therefore, can be liable for full performance of the contract with the customer. In circumstances where Quanta’s participation in a joint venture qualifies as a general partnership, the joint venture partners are jointly and severally liable for all obligations of the joint venture, including obligations owed to the customer or any other person or entity. Quanta is not aware of circumstances that would lead to future claims against it for material amounts in connection with these joint and several liabilities. Additionally, typically each joint venture participant agrees to indemnify the other participant for any liabilities incurred in excess of what the other participant is obligated to bear under the respective joint venture agreement or in accordance with the scope of work subcontracted to each participant. It is possible, however, that Quanta could be required to pay or perform obligations in excess of its share if another participant is unable or refuses to pay or perform its share of the obligations. Quanta is not aware of circumstances that would lead to future claims against it for material amounts that would not be indemnified. However, to the extent any such claims arise, they could be material and could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

As described in Note 2, Quanta also formed a partnership in 2017 with select investors to invest in certain specified infrastructure projects, and wholly owned subsidiaries of Quanta serve as the general partner of this partnership and as a separately operated registered investment adviser that manages the invested capital. Quanta’s investment balance related to this partnership was $21.4 million as of December 31, 2020. In October 2019, due to certain management changes at the registered investment adviser, the partnership entered into a period during which the investors and Quanta evaluated the partnership, and at the end of such period in April 2020, the investment period for any future investments ended.

Quanta has capital commitments for the expansion of its equipment fleet in order to accommodate manufacturer lead times on certain types of vehicles. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had $69.7 million of production orders with expected delivery dates in 2021. Although Quanta has committed to purchase these vehicles at the time of their delivery, Quanta anticipates that the majority of these orders will be assigned to third-party leasing companies and made available under certain master equipment lease agreements, thereby releasing Quanta from its capital commitments.

Quanta is from time to time party to various lawsuits, claims and other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. These actions typically seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, breach of contract, negligence or gross negligence and/or property damage, environmental liabilities, wage and hour and other employment-related damages, punitive damages, consequential damages, civil penalties or other losses, or injunctive or declaratory relief. With respect to all such lawsuits, claims and proceedings, Quanta records a reserve when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. In addition, Quanta discloses matters for which management believes a material loss is at least reasonably possible. Except as otherwise stated below, none of these proceedings are expected to have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In all instances, management has assessed the matter based on current information and made a judgment concerning its potential outcome, giving due consideration to the nature of the claim, the amount and nature of damages sought and the probability of success. Management’s judgment may prove materially inaccurate, and such judgment is made subject to the known uncertainties of litigation.

In 2015, Redes Andinas de Comunicaciones S.R.L. (Redes), a majority-owned subsidiary of Quanta, entered into two separate contracts with an agency of the Peruvian Ministry of Transportation and Communications (MTC), currently Programa Nacional de Telecomunicaciones (PRONATEL), as successor to Fondo de Inversion en Telecomunicaciones (FITEL), pursuant to which Redes would design, construct and operate certain telecommunication networks in rural regions of Peru. The

aggregate consideration provided for in the contracts was approximately $248 million, consisting of approximately $151 million to be paid during the construction period and approximately $97 million to be paid during a 10-year post-construction operation and maintenance period. At the beginning of the project, FITEL made advance payments totaling approximately $87 million to Redes, which were secured by two on-demand advance payment bonds posted by Redes to guarantee proper use of the payments in the execution of the project. Redes also provided two on-demand performance bonds in the aggregate amount of $25 million to secure performance of its obligations under the contracts.

During the construction phase, the project experienced numerous challenges and delays, primarily related to issues which Quanta believes were outside of the control of and not attributable to Redes, including, among others, weather-related issues, local opposition to the project, permitting delays, the inability to acquire clear title to certain required parcels of land and other delays which Quanta believes were attributable to FITEL/PRONATEL. In response to various of these challenges and delays, Redes requested and received multiple extensions to certain contractual deadlines and relief from related liquidated damages. However, in April 2019, PRONATEL provided notice to Redes claiming that Redes was in default under the contracts due to the delays and that PRONATEL would terminate the contracts if the alleged defaults were not cured. Redes responded by claiming that it was not in default, as the delays were due to events not attributable to Redes, and therefore PRONATEL was not entitled to terminate the contracts. PRONATEL subsequently terminated the contracts for alleged cause prior to completion of Redes’ scope of work, exercised the on-demand performance bonds and advance payment bonds against Redes, and indicated its intention to claim damages, including a verbal allegation of approximately $45 million of liquidated damages under the contracts. In August 2020, Redes received a formal claim from PRONATEL for liquidated damages in the amount of approximately $44 million, which represents the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amount asserted based on the December 31, 2020 exchange rate.

In May 2019, Redes filed for arbitration before the Court of International Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) against PRONATEL and the MTC. In the arbitration, Redes claims that PRONATEL: (i) breached and wrongfully terminated the contracts; (ii) wrongfully executed the advance payment bonds and the performance bonds; and (iii) is not entitled to the alleged amount of liquidated damages. In addition, Redes is seeking compensation for all damages arising from PRONATEL’s actions, including but not limited to (i) repayment of the amounts collected by PRONATEL under the advance payment bonds and the performance bonds; (ii) payment of amounts owed for work completed by Redes under the contracts; (iii) lost income in connection with Redes’ future operation and maintenance of the networks; and (iv) other related costs and damages to Redes as a result of the breach and improper termination of the contracts (including construction costs caused by the delays and costs related to the transfer of the networks). The amount claimed by Redes in this arbitration is approximately $190 million. The arbitration hearing on the merits is presently scheduled to take place in November 2021.

As of the date of the contract terminations, Redes had incurred costs of approximately $157 million related to the design and construction of the project and had received approximately $100 million of payments (inclusive of the approximately $87 million advance payments). Furthermore, upon completion of the transfer of the networks (as completed at the time of the contract terminations) to PRONATEL, which was required upon termination of the contracts and was completed in 2020, PRONATEL and the MTC are able to possess the networks, for which PRONATEL has paid approximately $100 million while also collecting approximately $112 million of bond proceeds. Quanta believes that PRONATEL’s actions represent an abuse of power and unfair and inequitable treatment and that PRONATEL and the MTC have been unjustly enriched. Specifically, under the terms of the contracts, the advance payment bonds were to be exercised only if it is determined that Redes did not use the advance payments for their intended purpose, in which case Redes would be obligated to return the portion of the advance payments not properly used. In connection with PRONATEL exercising the bonds, Redes was not afforded the opportunity to provide evidence of its proper use of the advance payments for project expenditures. Redes has incurred substantially more than the advance payment amounts in the execution of the project, and Quanta believes Redes has used the advance payment amounts for their intended purpose.

Quanta believes Redes is entitled to all amounts described in the claims above and intends to vigorously pursue those claims in this pending arbitration proceeding. However, as a result of the contract terminations and the inherent uncertainty involved in arbitration proceedings and recovery of amounts owed, there can be no assurance that Redes will prevail on those claims or in defense of liquidated damages claims or any other claims that may be asserted by PRONATEL. As a result, during the three months ended June 30, 2019, Quanta recorded a charge to earnings of $79.2 million, which included a reduction of previously recognized earnings on the project, a reserve against a portion of the project costs incurred through the project termination date, an accrual for a portion of the alleged liquidated damages, and the estimated costs to complete the project turnover and close out the project. The reduction of previously recognized earnings on the project included $14.5 million related to the correction of prior period errors associated with the determination of total estimated project costs and the resulting revenue recognized. Quanta assessed the materiality of the prior period errors and determined that the errors were immaterial individually and in the aggregate to its previously issued financial statements.

Quanta also reserves the right to seek full compensation for the loss of its investment under other applicable legal regimes, including investment treaties and customary international law, as well as to seek resolution through direct discussions with PRONATEL or the MTC. In connection with these rights, in May 2020 Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary delivered to the Peruvian government an official notice of dispute arising from the termination of the contracts and related acts by PRONATEL (which are attributable to Peru) under the Agreement on the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Peru (Investment Treaty). The Investment Treaty protects Quanta’s subsidiary’s indirect ownership stake in Redes and the project, and provides for rights and remedies distinct from the ICC arbitration. In December 2020, Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary filed a request for the institution of an arbitration proceeding against Peru with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) related to Peru’s breach of the Investment Treaty, which was registered by ICSID in January 2021. In the ICSID arbitration, Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary claims, without limitation, that Peru: (i) treated the subsidiary’s investment in Redes and the project unfairly and inequitably; and (ii) effectively expropriated the subsidiary’s investment in Redes and the project. In addition, Quanta’s Dutch subsidiary is seeking full compensation for all damages arising from Peru’s actions, including but not limited to (i) the fair market value of the investment and/or lost profits; (ii) attorneys’ fees and arbitration costs; (iii) other related costs and damages and (iv) pre- and post-award interest.

If Quanta is not successful in these pending arbitration proceedings, this matter could result in an additional significant loss that could have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s consolidated results of operations and cash flows. However, based on the information currently available and the status of the pending arbitration proceedings, Quanta is not able to determine a range of reasonably possible additional loss, if any, with respect to this matter.

During the third quarter of 2017, Maurepas Pipeline, LLC (Maurepas) notified QPS Engineering, LLC (QPS), a subsidiary of Quanta, of its claim for liquidated damages allegedly arising from delay in mechanical completion of a project in Louisiana. Quanta disputes the claim and believes that QPS is not responsible for liquidated damages under the contract terms, and in June 2019 QPS filed suit against SemGroup Corporation, (now Energy Transfer LP), the parent company of Maurepas, under the parent guarantee issued to secure payment from Maurepas on the project. QPS is seeking to recover $22 million that it believes has been wrongfully withheld, which represents the maximum liability for liquidated damages pursuant to the contract terms. In July and August 2018, QPS also received notice from Maurepas claiming certain warranty defects on the project. In July 2019, Maurepas filed suit against QPS and Quanta, pursuant to a parent guarantee, for damages related to the warranty defects and for a declaratory judgment related to the liquidated damages claim, subsequently claiming approximately $59 million in damages related to a portion of the alleged warranty defects. The lawsuits relating to these claims have been consolidated and are pending in the Tulsa County District Court in Oklahoma. Quanta is continuing to evaluate the claimed warranty defects and, if they exist, the appropriate remedy. At this time, Quanta disputes the extent of the alleged defects or has not been able to substantiate them.

As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had recorded an accrual with respect to this matter based on the current estimated amount of probable loss. However, based on the information currently available, Quanta cannot estimate the range of additional reasonably possible loss in connection with this matter. If, upon final resolution of this matter, Quanta is unsuccessful, any liquidated damages or warranty defect damages in excess of Quanta’s current loss accrual would be recorded as additional costs on the project.

In June 2006, plaintiff Lorenzo Benton filed a class action complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, alleging various wage and hour violations against Telecom Network Specialists (TNS), a former subsidiary of Quanta. Quanta retained liability associated with this matter pursuant to the terms of Quanta’s sale of TNS in December 2012. Benton represents a class of workers that includes all persons who worked on certain TNS projects, including individuals that TNS retained through numerous staffing agencies. The plaintiff class in this matter is seeking damages for unpaid wages, penalties associated with the failure to provide meal and rest periods and overtime wages, interest and attorneys’ fees. In January 2017, the trial court granted a summary judgment motion filed by the plaintiff class and found that TNS was a joint employer of the class members and that it failed to provide adequate meal and rest breaks and failed to pay overtime wages. During 2019 and 2020, the parties filed additional summary judgment and other motions and a bench trial on liability and damages was held. Liability and damages for significantly all claims have been determined by the trial court, subject to issuance of a final order, with the amount of liability for TNS, including interest through the date of the trial court’s orders, expected to be approximately $9.5 million. This amount includes damages and interest, but does not include attorneys’ fees or costs, which are yet to be determined. Quanta believes the court’s decisions on liability and damages are not supported by controlling law and continues to contest its liability and the damage calculation asserted by the plaintiff class in this matter.

Additionally, in November 2007, TNS filed cross complaints for indemnity and breach of contract against the staffing agencies, which employed many of the individuals in question. In December 2012, the trial court heard cross-motions for summary judgment filed by TNS and the staffing agencies pertaining to TNS’s demand for indemnity. The court denied TNS’s motion and granted the motions filed by the staffing agencies; however, the California Appellate Court reversed the trial court’s decision in part and instructed the trial court to reconsider its ruling. In February 2017, the court denied a new motion for summary judgment filed by the staffing companies and has since stated that the staffing companies would be liable to TNS for any damages owed to the class members that the staffing companies employed.

The final amount of liability, if any, payable in connection with this matter remains the subject of pending litigation and will ultimately depend on various factors, including the outcome of Quanta’s appeal of the trial court’s rulings on liability and damages, the final determination with respect to any additional damages owed by Quanta, and the solvency of the staffing agencies. Based on review and analysis of the trial court’s rulings on liability, Quanta does not believe, at this time, that it is probable this matter will result in a material loss. However, if Quanta is unsuccessful in this litigation and the staffing agencies are unable to fund damages owed to class members, Quanta believes the range of reasonably possible loss to Quanta upon final resolution of this matter could be up to approximately $9.5 million, plus attorneys’ fees and expenses of the plaintiff class.

In August 2019, in connection with the acquisition of Hallen, Quanta assumed certain contingent liabilities associated with a March 2014 natural gas-fed explosion and fire in the Manhattan borough of New York City, New York. The incident resulted in, among other things, loss of life, personal injury and the destruction of two buildings and other property damage. After investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board determined that the probable cause of the incident was the failure of certain natural gas infrastructure installed by Consolidated Edison, Inc. (Con Ed) and the failure of certain sewer infrastructure maintained by the City of New York. Pursuant to a contract with Con Ed, Hallen had performed certain work related to such natural gas infrastructure and agreed to indemnify Con Ed for certain claims, liabilities and costs associated with its work. Numerous lawsuits are pending in New York state courts related to the incident, which generally name Con Ed, the City of New York and Hallen as defendants. These lawsuits are at various preliminary stages and generally seek unspecified damages and, in some cases, punitive damages, for wrongful death, personal injury, property damage and business interruption.

Hallen’s liabilities associated with this matter are expected to be covered under applicable insurance policies or contractual remedies negotiated by Quanta with the former owners of Hallen. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had not recorded an accrual for any probable and estimable loss related to this matter. However, the ultimate amount of liability in connection with this matter remains subject to uncertainties associated with pending litigation, including, among other things, the apportionment of liability among the defendants and other responsible parties and the likelihood and amount of potential damages claims. As a result, this matter could result in a loss that is in excess of, or not covered by, such insurance or contractual remedies, which could have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Quanta is subject to concentrations of credit risk related primarily to its cash and cash equivalents and its net receivable position with customers, which includes amounts related to billed and unbilled accounts receivable and contract assets net of advanced billings with the same customer. Substantially all of Quanta’s cash and cash equivalents are managed by what it believes to be high credit quality financial institutions. In accordance with Quanta’s investment policies, these institutions are authorized to invest cash and cash equivalents in a diversified portfolio of what Quanta believes to be high quality cash and cash equivalent investments, which consist primarily of interest-bearing demand deposits, money market investments and money market mutual funds. Although Quanta does not currently believe the principal amount of these cash and cash equivalents is subject to any material risk of loss, changes in economic conditions could impact the interest income Quanta receives from these investments. In addition, Quanta grants credit under normal payment terms, generally without collateral, to its customers, which include electric power and energy companies, governmental entities, general contractors, and builders, owners and managers of commercial and industrial properties located primarily in the United States, Canada and Australia. While Quanta generally has certain statutory lien rights with respect to services provided, Quanta is subject to potential credit risk related to business, economic and financial market conditions that affect these customers and locations, which has been heightened as a result of the unfavorable and uncertain economic and financial market conditions resulting from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the significant decline in commodity prices and volatility in commodity production volumes. Some of Quanta’s customers have experienced significant financial difficulties (including bankruptcy), and customers may experience financial difficulties in the future. These difficulties expose Quanta to increased risk related to collectability of billed and unbilled receivables and contract assets for services Quanta has performed.

receivables. During the bankruptcy case, the bankruptcy court approved the early assumption by PG&E of certain contracts with subsidiaries of Quanta, and PG&E subsequently assumed its remaining contracts with Quanta’s subsidiaries as part of its Chapter 11 plan of reorganization, which was confirmed by the bankruptcy court in June 2020. As of December 31, 2020, substantially all of Quanta’s pre-petition receivables had been paid. Additionally, a customer within Quanta’s Underground Utility and Infrastructure Solutions segment encountered financial difficulties during 2020 that resulted in nonpayment of certain receivables owed, and as a result of which Quanta decided to foreclose the liens on the pipeline asset in order to recover the outstanding amounts.

As discussed in Note 2, Quanta carries various insurance policies. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the gross amount accrued for employer’s liability, workers’ compensation, auto liability, general liability and group health claims totaled $319.5 million and $287.6 million, with $238.0 million and $212.9 million considered to be long term and included in “Insurance and other non-current liabilities.” Related insurance recoveries/receivables as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 were $35.6 million and $35.1 million, of which $0.4 million and $0.3 million are included in “Prepaid expenses and other current assets” and $35.2 million and $34.8 million are included in “Other assets, net.”

Quanta renews its insurance policies on an annual basis, and therefore deductibles and levels of insurance coverage may change in future periods. In addition, insurers may cancel Quanta’s coverage or determine to exclude certain items from coverage, or Quanta may elect not to obtain certain types or incremental levels of insurance based on the potential benefits considered relative to the cost of such insurance, or coverage may not be available at reasonable and competitive rates. In any such event, Quanta’s overall risk exposure would increase, which could negatively affect its results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. For example, due to the increased occurrence and future risk of wildfires in California and other areas in the western United States, Australia and other locations, insurers have reduced coverage availability and increased the cost of insurance coverage for such events in recent years. As a result, Quanta’s level of insurance coverage for wildfire events decreased, including in connection with annual insurance renewals in the spring of 2020 and 2019, and the levels of coverage may not be sufficient to cover potential losses. Quanta’s third-party insurers could also decide to further reduce or exclude coverage for wildfires or other events in connection with its insurance renewal in the spring of 2021 and/or in the future. In any such event, Quanta’s overall risk exposure would increase, which could negatively affect its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Certain of Quanta’s vendors require letters of credit to ensure reimbursement for amounts they are disbursing on Quanta’s behalf, such as to beneficiaries under its insurance programs. In addition, from time to time, certain customers require Quanta to post letters of credit to ensure payment of subcontractors and vendors and guarantee performance under contracts. Such letters of credit are generally issued by a bank or similar financial institution, typically pursuant to Quanta’s senior credit facility. Each letter of credit commits the issuer to pay specified amounts to the holder of the letter of credit if the holder claims that Quanta has failed to perform specified actions. If this were to occur, Quanta would be required to reimburse the issuer of the letter of credit. Depending on the circumstances of such a reimbursement, Quanta may also be required to record a charge to earnings for the reimbursement.

As of December 31, 2020, Quanta had $348.3 million in outstanding letters of credit under its senior credit facility securing its casualty insurance program and various contractual commitments. These are irrevocable stand-by letters of credit with maturities generally expiring at various times throughout 2021. Quanta expects to renew the majority of the letters of credit related to the casualty insurance program for subsequent one-year periods upon maturity. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta also had $18.2 million of letters of credit issued by a financial institution that ceased to be a lender under the senior credit facility subsequent to the September 2020 amendment to the credit agreement, and such letters of credit are collateralized by a $19.1 million letter of credit issued by a lender in the senior credit facility. Quanta is not aware of any claims currently asserted or threatened under any of these letters of credit that are material, individually or in the aggregate. However, to the extent payment is required for any such claims, the amount paid could be material and could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

and Quanta must reimburse the surety for any expenses or outlays it incurs. Quanta may also be required to post letters of credit in favor of the sureties, which would reduce the borrowing availability under its senior credit facility. Under Quanta’s underwriting, continuing indemnity and security agreement with its sureties, Quanta had also granted security interests in certain of its assets as collateral for its obligations to the sureties. However, in connection with the September 2020 amendment to the credit agreement, these security interests were automatically released. On September 22, 2020, Quanta also entered into an amendment to the underwriting, continuing indemnity and security agreement that further documented this release and removed the collateral reinstatement provision in the agreement that would have applied in the event Quanta’s corporate credit rating from either of Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. or Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC were to fall below an investment grade rating.

Quanta has not been required to make any material reimbursements to its sureties for bond-related costs except related to the exercise of approximately $112 million advance payment and performance bonds in 2019 in connection with the terminated telecommunications project in Peru, as set forth in Legal Proceedings – Peru Project Dispute above. However, to the extent further reimbursements are required, the amounts could be material and could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. As of December 31, 2020, Quanta is not aware of any outstanding material obligations for payments related to bond obligations.

Performance bonds expire at various times ranging from mechanical completion of a project to a period extending beyond contract completion in certain circumstances, and as such a determination of maximum potential amounts outstanding requires the use of certain estimates and assumptions. Such amounts can also fluctuate from period to period based upon the mix and level of Quanta’s bonded operating activity. As of December 31, 2020, the total amount of the outstanding performance bonds was estimated to be approximately $3.7 billion. Quanta’s estimated maximum exposure as it relates to the value of the performance bonds outstanding is lowered on each bonded project as the cost to complete is reduced, and each commitment under a performance bond generally extinguishes concurrently with the expiration of its related contractual obligation. The estimated cost to complete these bonded projects was approximately $1.4 billion as of December 31, 2020.

Additionally, from time to time, Quanta guarantees certain obligations and liabilities of its subsidiaries that may arise in connection with, among other things, contracts with customers, equipment lease obligations, joint venture arrangements and contractor licenses. These guarantees may cover all of the subsidiary’s unperformed, undischarged and unreleased obligations and liabilities under or in connection with the relevant agreement. For example, with respect to customer contracts, a guarantee may cover a variety of obligations and liabilities arising during the ordinary course of the subsidiary’s business or operations, including, among other things, warranty and breach of contract claims, third party and environmental liabilities arising from the subsidiary’s work and for which it is responsible, liquidated damages, or indemnity claims. Quanta is not aware of any claims under any of these guarantees that are material, except as set forth in Legal Proceedings – Maurepas Project Dispute above. To the extent a subsidiary incurs a material obligation or liability and Quanta has guaranteed the performance or payment of such liability, the recovery by a customer or other counterparty or a third party will not be limited to the assets of the subsidiary. As a result, responsibility under the guarantee could exceed the amount recoverable from the subsidiary alone and could materially and adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Certain of Quanta’s operating units are parties to collective bargaining agreements with unions that represent certain of their employees. The collective bargaining agreements expire at various times and have typically been renegotiated and renewed on terms similar to those in the expiring agreements. From time to time, Quanta is a party to grievance and arbitration actions based on claims arising out of the collective bargaining agreements. The agreements require the operating units to pay specified wages, provide certain benefits to union employees and contribute certain amounts to multiemployer pension plans and employee benefit trusts. Quanta’s multiemployer pension plan contribution rates generally are made to the plans on a “pay-as-you-go” basis based on its union employee payrolls. The location and number of union employees that Quanta employs at any given time and the plans in which they may participate vary depending on Quanta’s need for union resources in connection with its ongoing projects. Therefore, Quanta is unable to accurately predict its union employee payroll and the resulting multiemployer pension plan contribution obligations for future periods.

plans that are classified as “endangered,” “seriously endangered” or “critical” status based on multiple factors (including, for example, the plan’s funded percentage, the plan’s cash flow position and whether the plan is projected to experience a minimum funding deficiency). Plans in these classifications must adopt measures to improve their funded status through a funding improvement or rehabilitation plan, as applicable, which may require additional contributions from employers (e.g., a surcharge on benefit contributions) and/or modifications to retiree benefits. Certain plans to which Quanta contributes or may contribute in the future are in “endangered,” “seriously endangered” or “critical” status. The amount, if any, that Quanta may be obligated to contribute to these plans cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainty regarding the amount of future work involving covered union employees, future contribution levels and possible surcharges on plan contributions.

Quanta may be subject to additional liabilities imposed by law as a result of its participation in multiemployer defined benefit pension plans. For example, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980, imposes certain liabilities upon an employer who is a contributor to a multiemployer pension plan if the employer withdraws or is deemed to have withdrawn from the plan or the plan is terminated or experiences a mass withdrawal. These liabilities include an allocable share of the unfunded vested benefits in the plan for all plan participants, not merely the benefits payable to a contributing employer’s own retirees. As a result, participating employers may bear a higher proportion of liability for unfunded vested benefits if other participating employers cease to contribute or withdraw, with the reallocation of liability being more acute in cases when a withdrawn employer is insolvent or otherwise fails to pay its withdrawal liability. Quanta is not aware of any material withdrawal liabilities that have been incurred or asserted and that remain outstanding as a result of a withdrawal by Quanta from a multiemployer defined benefit pension plan. However, Quanta’s future contribution obligations and potential withdrawal liability exposure could vary based on the investment and actuarial performance of the multiemployer pension plans to which it contributes and other factors, which could be negatively impacted as a result of the unfavorable and uncertain economic and financial market conditions resulting from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and related issues. Quanta has been subject to significant withdrawal liabilities in the past, including in connection with its withdrawal from the Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Plan. To the extent Quanta is subject to material withdrawal liabilities in the future, such liability could adversely affect its business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Quanta generally indemnifies its customers for the services it provides under its contracts and other specified liabilities, which may subject Quanta to indemnity claims and liabilities and related litigation. Additionally, in connection with certain acquisitions and dispositions, Quanta has indemnified various parties against specified liabilities that those parties might incur in the future. The indemnities under acquisition or disposition agreements are usually contingent upon the other party incurring liabilities that reach specified thresholds. Quanta is not aware of any indemnity claims in connection with its indemnity obligations that are material. However, to the extent indemnification is required, the amount could adversely affect Quanta’s consolidated business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

In the normal course of Quanta’s acquisition transactions, Quanta obtains rights to indemnification from the sellers or former owners of acquired businesses for certain risks, liabilities and obligations arising from their prior operations, such as performance, operational, safety, workforce or tax issues, some of which Quanta may not have discovered during due diligence. However, the indemnities may not cover all of Quanta’s exposure for such pre-acquisition matters, or the indemnitors may be unwilling or unable to pay amounts owed to Quanta. Accordingly, Quanta may incur expenses for which it is not reimbursed, and such amounts could be material and could have a material adverse effect on Quanta’s business or consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. For example, Quanta has obtained certain indemnification rights from the former owners of Hallen with respect to contingent liabilities that were assumed in connection with the acquisition, as set forth in Legal Proceedings — Hallen Acquisition Assumed Liability above.