Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies Highway Products Litigation As previously reported, on January 28, 2013, the United States filed a “Notice of Election to Decline Intervention” in a False Claims Act (Qui Tam) complaint filed under seal on March 6, 2012 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division styled Joshua Harman, on behalf of the United States of America, Plaintiff/Relator (“Mr. Harman”) v. Trinity Industries, Inc., Defendant, Case 2:12-cv-00089-JRG. Although the Company did not receive service of process with respect to the Original Complaint, the Company was served with Mr. Harman's Amended Complaint on May 17, 2013. The trial began on July 14, 2014 and ended in a mistrial on July 18, 2014. The case is expected to be retried in the fall of 2014. Mr. Harman alleges the Company knowingly presented or caused to be presented a false or fraudulent claim, record or statement to purchasers of the product in order for such purchasers to obtain payment or approval (eligibility for Federal-aid reimbursement) related to the Company's ET-Plus guardrail end-terminal system. Mr. Harman is seeking damages equaling the amount the United States paid in federal-aid reimbursement for ET-Plus systems from March 6, 2006 to December 31, 2013, less the value of the ET-Plus systems received, trebled, plus civil penalties. Mr. Harman's most recent damage model calculates this amount at approximately $775.7 million exclusive of attorney's fees, costs, and interest. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself against Mr. Harman's allegations which will result in certain legal expenses. Since its introduction in 2000, including all improvement modifications thereafter, the ET-Plus system has satisfied the testing criteria required by the governing National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 350 and the product approval requirements of the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA"). As affirmed in a Memorandum dated June 17, 2014, the FHWA advised its Division Administrators, Directors of Field Services, Federal Lands Division Engineers, and Safety Field that "The Trinity ET-Plus with 4-inch guide channels became eligible for Federal reimbursement under FHWA letter CC-94 on September 2, 2005. In addition, the device is eligible for reimbursement under FHWA letters CC-94A and CC-120. Staff confirmed the reimbursement eligibility of the device at heights from 27 3/4 inches to 31 inches. An unbroken chain of eligibility for Federal-aid reimbursement has existed since September 2, 2005 and the ET-Plus continues to be eligible today." This Memorandum is available on the FHWA's web site at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/policy_guide/road_hardware/memo_etplus_wbeam.cfm Based upon the unbroken chain of eligibility of the ET-Plus system for Federal-aid reimbursement, we do not believe that a loss is probable or that a range of reasonably possible losses exists. Accordingly, no accrual or range of loss has been included in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Train Derailment As previously reported, the Company has been named as a respondent in litigation filed July 15, 2013 in Superior Court, Province of Quebec, District of Saint-Francois, styled Yannick Gagne and Guy Ouellet vs. Rail World, Inc., et al related to the July 2013 crude oil unit train derailment in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec. A partially-owned subsidiary of the Company owned and leased to a third party 13 of the railcars involved in the incident, which lessee is also named as a defendant in the Province of Quebec litigation. As of June 18, 2014, the petitioners in the Quebec litigation have voluntarily desisted with their claims against the Company resulting in the dismissal of the Company without prejudice, however the partially-owned subsidiary remains as a respondent in the litigation. The litigation filed in Quebec is seeking “class” status which, if certified, could lead to multiple individuals and business entities becoming class members. The Company was also named as a defendant in multiple cases filed by the estates of decedents in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois seeking damages for alleged wrongful death and property damage arising from the July 2013 crude oil unit train derailment in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec. The Company’s tank car manufacturing subsidiary manufactured 35 of the 72 tank railcars involved in the derailment. However the Illinois cases have since been ordered transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maine. This transfer prompted plaintiffs to seek dismissal of these actions. Nonetheless, the Maine court has not indicated those dismissals were effectuated and the cases were transferred to federal court in Maine and have been assigned new case numbers. Certain of the plaintiffs in these transferred cases have appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit seeking to overturn the decision to transfer. This appeal has resulted in a stay of all proceedings in the transferred cases pending resolution of the appeal. The Company could be named in similar litigation involving other affected plaintiffs, but the ultimate number of claims and the jurisdiction in which such claims are filed, may vary. We do not believe at this time that a loss is probable nor can a range of losses be determined. Accordingly, no accrual or range of loss has been included in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Railworthiness Directive As previously reported, in 2011 the Company received the approval of the Federal Railroad Administration to implement a voluntary recertification of 948 tank cars owned or managed by the Company’s wholly-owned, railcar leasing subsidiary and used in transporting poison inhalation hazard (“PIH”) materials. The recertification process was performed in conjunction with the normal federally mandated inspection cycle for tank cars in PIH service and is complete as of June 30, 2014. Maintenance costs associated with this recertification process were expensed as incurred. Other Matters As previously reported, Trinity Structural Towers, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, is in litigation with a structural wind towers customer for the customer’s breach of a long-term supply contract for the manufacture of towers. While the customer partially performed the contract, it ultimately defaulted on its purchase obligation and did not remedy such default following written notice. The Company is involved in claims and lawsuits incidental to our business arising from various matters including product warranty, personal injury, environmental issues, workplace laws, and various governmental regulations. The Company evaluates its exposure to such claims and suits periodically and establishes accruals for these contingencies when a range of loss can be reasonably estimated. The range of reasonably possible losses for such matters, taking into consideration our rights in indemnity and recourse to third parties is $8.2 million to $28.4 million. At June 30, 2014, total accruals of $18.1 million, including environmental and workplace matters described below, are included in accrued liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. The Company believes any additional liability would not be material to its financial position or results of operations. Trinity is subject to remedial orders and Federal, state, local, and foreign laws and regulations relating to the environment and the workplace. The Company has reserved $10.1 million to cover our probable and estimable liabilities with respect to the investigations, assessments, and remedial responses to such matters, taking into account currently available information and our contractual rights to indemnification and recourse to third parties. However, estimates of liability arising from future proceedings, assessments, or remediation are inherently imprecise. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will not become involved in future litigation or other proceedings involving the environment and the workplace or, if we are found to be responsible or liable in any such litigation or proceeding, that such costs would not be material to the Company. We believe that we are currently in substantial compliance with environmental and workplace laws and regulations.

Contingencies

Highway Products Litigation

As previously reported, on January 28, 2013, the United States filed a “Notice of Election to Decline Intervention” in a False Claims Act (Qui Tam) complaint filed under seal on March 6, 2012 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division styled Joshua Harman, on behalf of the United States of America, Plaintiff/Relator (“Mr. Harman”) v. Trinity Industries, Inc., Defendant, Case 2:12-cv-00089-JRG. Although the Company did not receive service of process with respect to the Original Complaint, the Company was served with Mr. Harman's Amended Complaint on May 17, 2013. The trial began on July 14, 2014 and ended in a mistrial on July 18, 2014. The case is expected to be retried in the fall of 2014. Mr. Harman alleges the Company knowingly presented or caused to be presented a false or fraudulent claim, record or statement to purchasers of the product in order for such purchasers to obtain payment or approval (eligibility for Federal-aid reimbursement) related to the Company's ET-Plus guardrail end-terminal system. Mr. Harman is seeking damages equaling the amount the United States paid in federal-aid reimbursement for ET-Plus systems from March 6, 2006 to December 31, 2013, less the value of the ET-Plus systems received, trebled, plus civil penalties. Mr. Harman's most recent damage model calculates this amount at approximately $775.7 million exclusive of attorney's fees, costs, and interest. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself against Mr. Harman's allegations which will result in certain legal expenses.

Since its introduction in 2000, including all improvement modifications thereafter, the ET-Plus system has satisfied the testing criteria required by the governing National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 350 and the product approval requirements of the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA"). As affirmed in a Memorandum dated June 17, 2014, the FHWA advised its Division Administrators, Directors of Field Services, Federal Lands Division Engineers, and Safety Field that "The Trinity ET-Plus with 4-inch guide channels became eligible for Federal reimbursement under FHWA letter CC-94 on September 2, 2005. In addition, the device is eligible for reimbursement under FHWA letters CC-94A and CC-120. Staff confirmed the reimbursement eligibility of the device at heights from 27 3/4 inches to 31 inches. An unbroken chain of eligibility for Federal-aid reimbursement has existed since September 2, 2005 and the ET-Plus continues to be eligible today." This Memorandum is available on the FHWA's web site at:

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/policy_guide/road_hardware/memo_etplus_wbeam.cfm

Based upon the unbroken chain of eligibility of the ET-Plus system for Federal-aid reimbursement, we do not believe that a loss is probable or that a range of reasonably possible losses exists. Accordingly, no accrual or range of loss has been included in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

Train Derailment

As previously reported, the Company has been named as a respondent in litigation filed July 15, 2013 in Superior Court, Province of Quebec, District of Saint-Francois, styled Yannick Gagne and Guy Ouellet vs. Rail World, Inc., et al related to the July 2013 crude oil unit train derailment in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec. A partially-owned subsidiary of the Company owned and leased to a third party 13 of the railcars involved in the incident, which lessee is also named as a defendant in the Province of Quebec litigation. As of June 18, 2014, the petitioners in the Quebec litigation have voluntarily desisted with their claims against the Company resulting in the dismissal of the Company without prejudice, however the partially-owned subsidiary remains as a respondent in the litigation. The litigation filed in Quebec is seeking “class” status which, if certified, could lead to multiple individuals and business entities becoming class members.

The Company was also named as a defendant in multiple cases filed by the estates of decedents in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois seeking damages for alleged wrongful death and property damage arising from the July 2013 crude oil unit train derailment in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec. The Company’s tank car manufacturing subsidiary manufactured 35 of the 72 tank railcars involved in the derailment. However the Illinois cases have since been ordered transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maine. This transfer prompted plaintiffs to seek dismissal of these actions. Nonetheless, the Maine court has not indicated those dismissals were effectuated and the cases were transferred to federal court in Maine and have been assigned new case numbers. Certain of the plaintiffs in these transferred cases have appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit seeking to overturn the decision to transfer. This appeal has resulted in a stay of all proceedings in the transferred cases pending resolution of the appeal. The Company could be named in similar litigation involving other affected plaintiffs, but the ultimate number of claims and the jurisdiction in which such claims are filed, may vary. We do not believe at this time that a loss is probable nor can a range of losses be determined. Accordingly, no accrual or range of loss has been included in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

Railworthiness Directive

As previously reported, in 2011 the Company received the approval of the Federal Railroad Administration to implement a voluntary recertification of 948 tank cars owned or managed by the Company’s wholly-owned, railcar leasing subsidiary and used in transporting poison inhalation hazard (“PIH”) materials. The recertification process was performed in conjunction with the normal federally mandated inspection cycle for tank cars in PIH service and is complete as of June 30, 2014. Maintenance costs associated with this recertification process were expensed as incurred.

Other Matters

As previously reported, Trinity Structural Towers, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, is in litigation with a structural wind towers customer for the customer’s breach of a long-term supply contract for the manufacture of towers. While the customer partially performed the contract, it ultimately defaulted on its purchase obligation and did not remedy such default following written notice.

The Company is involved in claims and lawsuits incidental to our business arising from various matters including product warranty, personal injury, environmental issues, workplace laws, and various governmental regulations. The Company evaluates its exposure to such claims and suits periodically and establishes accruals for these contingencies when a range of loss can be reasonably estimated. The range of reasonably possible losses for such matters, taking into consideration our rights in indemnity and recourse to third parties is $8.2 million to $28.4 million. At June 30, 2014, total accruals of $18.1 million, including environmental and workplace matters described below, are included in accrued liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. The Company believes any additional liability would not be material to its financial position or results of operations.

Trinity is subject to remedial orders and Federal, state, local, and foreign laws and regulations relating to the environment and the workplace. The Company has reserved $10.1 million to cover our probable and estimable liabilities with respect to the investigations, assessments, and remedial responses to such matters, taking into account currently available information and our contractual rights to indemnification and recourse to third parties. However, estimates of liability arising from future proceedings, assessments, or remediation are inherently imprecise. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will not become involved in future litigation or other proceedings involving the environment and the workplace or, if we are found to be responsible or liable in any such litigation or proceeding, that such costs would not be material to the Company. We believe that we are currently in substantial compliance with environmental and workplace laws and regulations.