COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Litigation Various suits and claims arising in the ordinary course of business are pending against us. We conduct business throughout the continental United States and may be subject to jury verdicts or arbitrations that result in outcomes in favor of the plaintiffs. We are also exposed to various claims abroad. We continually assess our contingent liabilities, including potential litigation liabilities, as well as the adequacy of our accruals and our need for the disclosure of these items, if any. We establish a provision for a contingent liability when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount is reasonably estimable. We have $1.5 million of other liabilities related to litigation that is deemed probable and reasonably estimable as of September 30, 2015. We do not believe that the disposition of any of these matters will result in an additional loss materially in excess of amounts that have been recorded. Between May of 2013 and June of 2014, five lawsuits (four class actions and one enforcement action) were filed in California involving alleged violations of California's wage and hour laws. In general, the lawsuits allege failure to pay wages, including overtime and minimum wages, failure to pay final wages upon employment terminations in a timely manner, failure to reimburse reasonable and necessary business expenses, failure to provide wage statements consistent with California law, and violations of the California meal and break period laws, among other claims. Two of the five cases have been consolidated in United States District Court for the Central District of California. A hearing on the class certification motion was held August 10, 2015. As of October 30, 2015, no decision has been made by the court. One of the remaining cases has been stayed pending outcome of the class certification motion. The fourth case is waiting for a decision regarding whether it will move forward in California state court or in federal court. The fifth case is an enforcement action for civil penalties based on California’s Private Attorneys General Act, which is pending in California state court. We have investigated the claims in all five lawsuits, and intend to vigorously defend them. At this time, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss. In January 2014, the SEC advised Key that it is investigating possible violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) involving business activities of Key’s operations in Russia. In April 2014, we became aware of an allegation involving our Mexico operations that, if true, could potentially constitute a violation of certain of our policies, including our Code of Business Conduct, the FCPA and other applicable laws. On May 30, 2014, Key voluntarily disclosed the allegation involving our Mexico operations and certain information from the Company’s initial investigation to both the SEC and Department of Justice (“DOJ”). A Special Committee of our Board of Directors conducted an investigation regarding this allegation as well as possible violations of the FCPA involving business activities of our operations in Russia. The Special Committee’s independent review, which also included a review of certain aspects of the Company’s operations in Colombia, as well as a risk assessment with regard to our other international locations, has been completed. We are continuing to cooperate with the SEC and DOJ. At this time we are unable to predict the ultimate resolution of these matters with these agencies and, accordingly, cannot reasonably estimate any possible loss or range of loss. In August 2014, two class action lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated against the Company and certain officers of the Company, alleging violations of federal securities laws, specifically, violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10(b)-5, Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Those lawsuits were styled as follows: Sean Cady, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Key Energy Services, Inc., Richard J. Alario, and J. Marshall Dodson, No. 4:14-cv-2368, filed on August 15, 2014; and Ian W. Davidson, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Key Energy Services, Inc., Richard J. Alario, and J. Marshall Dodson, No. 4.14-cv-2403, filed on August 21, 2014. On December 11, 2014, the Court entered an order that consolidated the two lawsuits into one action, along with any future filed tag-along actions brought on behalf of purchasers of Key Energy Services, Inc. common stock. The order also appointed Inter-Local Pension Fund as the lead plaintiff in the class action and approved the law firm of Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willis, P.C. as lead counsel for the consolidated class and Kendall Law Group, LLP, as local counsel for the consolidated class. The lead plaintiff filed the consolidated amended complaint on February 13, 2015. Among other changes, the consolidated amended complaint adds Taylor M. Whichard III and Newton W. Wilson III as defendants, and seeks to represent a class of purchasers of the Company's stock between September 4, 2012 and July 17, 2014. Defendants Key Energy Services, Inc., Richard J. Alario, J. Marshall Dodson and Newton W. Wilson III filed a Motion to Dismiss on April 14, 2015. Defendant Taylor M. Whichard III filed a Joinder in Motion and Motion to Dismiss on the same date. Lead plaintiff filed an opposition to that motion, and all defendants filed reply briefs in support of the motion. The court has not ruled upon it. Because this case is in the early stages, we cannot predict the outcome at this time. Accordingly, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss. In addition, in a letter dated September 4, 2014, a purported shareholder of the Company demanded that the Board commence an independent internal investigation into and legal proceedings against each member of the Board, a former member of the Board and certain officers of the Company for alleged violations of Maryland and/or federal law. The letter alleges that the Board and senior officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Company, including the duty of loyalty and due care, by (i) improperly accounting for goodwill, (ii) causing the Company to potentially violate the FCPA, resulting in an investigation by the SEC, (iii) causing the Company to engage in improper conduct related to the Company’s Russia operations; and (iv) making false statements regarding, and failing to properly account for, certain contracts with Pemex. As described in the letter, the purported shareholder believes that the legal proceedings should seek recovery of damages in an unspecified amount allegedly sustained by the Company. The Board of Directors referred the demand letter to the Special Committee. We cannot predict the outcome of this matter. In March 2015, two collective action lawsuits were filed in the Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”). We have answered the lawsuits and asserted affirmative defenses. Because the cases are in the early stages, we cannot predict the outcomes at this time. Accordingly, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss for either case. In May 2015, a class and collective action lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, alleging violations of the FLSA and the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act. We have answered the lawsuit and asserted affirmative defenses. Because the case is in the early stages, we cannot predict the outcome at this time. Accordingly, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss of this case. Self-Insurance Reserves We maintain reserves for workers’ compensation and vehicle liability on our balance sheet based on our judgment and estimates using an actuarial method based on claims incurred. We estimate general liability claims on a case-by-case basis. We maintain insurance policies for workers’ compensation, vehicle liability and general liability claims. These insurance policies carry self-insured retention limits or deductibles on a per occurrence basis. The retention limits or deductibles are accounted for in our accrual process for all workers’ compensation, vehicular liability and general liability claims. As of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, we have recorded $59.3 million and $61.0 million, respectively, of self-insurance reserves related to workers’ compensation, vehicular liabilities and general liability claims. Partially offsetting these liabilities, we had $18.3 million and $18.7 million of insurance receivables as of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively. We believe that the liabilities we have recorded are appropriate based on the known facts and circumstances and do not expect further losses materially in excess of the amounts already accrued for existing claims. Environmental Remediation Liabilities For environmental reserve matters, including remediation efforts for current locations and those relating to previously disposed properties, we record liabilities when our remediation efforts are probable and the costs to conduct such remediation efforts can be reasonably estimated. As of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, we have recorded $5.4 million and $5.7 million, respectively, for our environmental remediation liabilities. We believe that the liabilities we have recorded are appropriate based on the known facts and circumstances and do not expect further losses materially in excess of the amounts already accrued.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation

Various suits and claims arising in the ordinary course of business are pending against us. We conduct business throughout the continental United States and may be subject to jury verdicts or arbitrations that result in outcomes in favor of the plaintiffs. We are also exposed to various claims abroad. We continually assess our contingent liabilities, including potential litigation liabilities, as well as the adequacy of our accruals and our need for the disclosure of these items, if any. We establish a provision for a contingent liability when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount is reasonably estimable. We have $1.5 million of other liabilities related to litigation that is deemed probable and reasonably estimable as of September 30, 2015. We do not believe that the disposition of any of these matters will result in an additional loss materially in excess of amounts that have been recorded.

Between May of 2013 and June of 2014, five lawsuits (four class actions and one enforcement action) were filed in California involving alleged violations of California's wage and hour laws. In general, the lawsuits allege failure to pay wages, including overtime and minimum wages, failure to pay final wages upon employment terminations in a timely manner, failure to reimburse reasonable and necessary business expenses, failure to provide wage statements consistent with California law, and violations of the California meal and break period laws, among other claims. Two of the five cases have been consolidated in United States District Court for the Central District of California. A hearing on the class certification motion was held August 10, 2015. As of October 30, 2015, no decision has been made by the court. One of the remaining cases has been stayed pending outcome of the class certification motion. The fourth case is waiting for a decision regarding whether it will move forward in California state court or in federal court. The fifth case is an enforcement action for civil penalties based on California’s Private Attorneys General Act, which is pending in California state court. We have investigated the claims in all five lawsuits, and intend to vigorously defend them. At this time, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss.

In January 2014, the SEC advised Key that it is investigating possible violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) involving business activities of Key’s operations in Russia. In April 2014, we became aware of an allegation involving our Mexico operations that, if true, could potentially constitute a violation of certain of our policies, including our Code of Business Conduct, the FCPA and other applicable laws. On May 30, 2014, Key voluntarily disclosed the allegation involving our Mexico operations and certain information from the Company’s initial investigation to both the SEC and Department of Justice (“DOJ”). A Special Committee of our Board of Directors conducted an investigation regarding this allegation as well as possible violations of the FCPA involving business activities of our operations in Russia. The Special Committee’s independent review, which also included a review of certain aspects of the Company’s operations in Colombia, as well as a risk assessment with regard to our other international locations, has been completed. We are continuing to cooperate with the SEC and DOJ. At this time we are unable to predict the ultimate resolution of these matters with these agencies and, accordingly, cannot reasonably estimate any possible loss or range of loss.

In August 2014, two class action lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated against the Company and certain officers of the Company, alleging violations of federal securities laws, specifically, violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10(b)-5, Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Those lawsuits were styled as follows: Sean Cady, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Key Energy Services, Inc., Richard J. Alario, and J. Marshall Dodson, No. 4:14-cv-2368, filed on August 15, 2014; and Ian W. Davidson, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Key Energy Services, Inc., Richard J. Alario, and J. Marshall Dodson, No. 4.14-cv-2403, filed on August 21, 2014. On December 11, 2014, the Court entered an order that consolidated the two lawsuits into one action, along with any future filed tag-along actions brought on behalf of purchasers of Key Energy Services, Inc. common stock. The order also appointed Inter-Local Pension Fund as the lead plaintiff in the class action and approved the law firm of Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willis, P.C. as lead counsel for the consolidated class and Kendall Law Group, LLP, as local counsel for the consolidated class. The lead plaintiff filed the consolidated amended complaint on February 13, 2015. Among other changes, the consolidated amended complaint adds Taylor M. Whichard III and Newton W. Wilson III as defendants, and seeks to represent a class of purchasers of the Company's stock between September 4, 2012 and July 17, 2014. Defendants Key Energy Services, Inc., Richard J. Alario, J. Marshall Dodson and Newton W. Wilson III filed a Motion to Dismiss on April 14, 2015. Defendant Taylor M. Whichard III filed a Joinder in Motion and Motion to Dismiss on the same date. Lead plaintiff filed an opposition to that motion, and all defendants filed reply briefs in support of the motion. The court has not ruled upon it. Because this case is in the early stages, we cannot predict the outcome at this time. Accordingly, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss.

In addition, in a letter dated September 4, 2014, a purported shareholder of the Company demanded that the Board commence an independent internal investigation into and legal proceedings against each member of the Board, a former member of the Board and certain officers of the Company for alleged violations of Maryland and/or federal law. The letter alleges that the Board and senior officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Company, including the duty of loyalty and due care, by (i) improperly accounting for goodwill, (ii) causing the Company to potentially violate the FCPA, resulting in an investigation by the SEC, (iii) causing the Company to engage in improper conduct related to the Company’s Russia operations; and (iv) making false statements regarding, and failing to properly account for, certain contracts with Pemex. As described in the letter, the purported shareholder believes that the legal proceedings should seek recovery of damages in an unspecified amount allegedly sustained by the Company. The Board of Directors referred the demand letter to the Special Committee. We cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

In March 2015, two collective action lawsuits were filed in the Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”). We have answered the lawsuits and asserted affirmative defenses. Because the cases are in the early stages, we cannot predict the outcomes at this time. Accordingly, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss for either case.

In May 2015, a class and collective action lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, alleging violations of the FLSA and the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act. We have answered the lawsuit and asserted affirmative defenses. Because the case is in the early stages, we cannot predict the outcome at this time. Accordingly, we cannot estimate any possible loss or range of loss of this case.

Self-Insurance Reserves

We maintain reserves for workers’ compensation and vehicle liability on our balance sheet based on our judgment and estimates using an actuarial method based on claims incurred. We estimate general liability claims on a case-by-case basis. We maintain insurance policies for workers’ compensation, vehicle liability and general liability claims. These insurance policies carry self-insured retention limits or deductibles on a per occurrence basis. The retention limits or deductibles are accounted for in our accrual process for all workers’ compensation, vehicular liability and general liability claims. As of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, we have recorded $59.3 million and $61.0 million, respectively, of self-insurance reserves related to workers’ compensation, vehicular liabilities and general liability claims. Partially offsetting these liabilities, we had $18.3 million and $18.7 million of insurance receivables as of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively. We believe that the liabilities we have recorded are appropriate based on the known facts and circumstances and do not expect further losses materially in excess of the amounts already accrued for existing claims.

Environmental Remediation Liabilities

For environmental reserve matters, including remediation efforts for current locations and those relating to previously disposed properties, we record liabilities when our remediation efforts are probable and the costs to conduct such remediation efforts can be reasonably estimated. As of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, we have recorded $5.4 million and $5.7 million, respectively, for our environmental remediation liabilities. We believe that the liabilities we have recorded are appropriate based on the known facts and circumstances and do not expect further losses materially in excess of the amounts already accrued.