Contingencies and Commitments	12 Months Ended
Contingencies and Commitments	Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies and Commitments	Contingencies and Commitments We and certain of our subsidiaries are subject to litigation, claims and other commitments and contingencies, including matters arising in the ordinary course of business, of which the asserted value may be significant. We record accruals in the financial statements for pending legal matters when we determine that an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. While it is reasonably possible that a loss may be incurred in any of the matters identified below, including a loss in excess of amounts accrued, management is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss or has determined such amounts to be immaterial. At present, except as set forth below, we do not expect that the ultimate resolution of any open matters will have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations. However, legal proceedings and regulatory and governmental matters are subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings or other events could occur. Unfavorable outcomes could involve substantial monetary damages, fines, penalties, and other expenditures. An unfavorable outcome might result in a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations or financial position. We might also enter into an agreement to settle one or more such matters if we determine such settlement is in the best interests of our stockholders, employees, and customers, and any such settlement could include substantial payments. Beginning in May 2018, purported shareholders filed various complaints against Fluor and certain of its current and former executives in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiffs purported to represent a class of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired Fluor common stock from August 14, 2013 through February 14, 2020, and sought to recover damages arising from alleged violations of federal securities laws. These claims were based on statements concerning Fluor’s internal and disclosure controls, risk management, revenue recognition, and Fluor’s gas-fired power contracts, which plaintiffs asserted were materially misleading. In May 2020, these complaints were consolidated into one matter. Our motion to dismiss was granted in part on May 5, 2021, and as a result the Court dismissed with prejudice all allegations except those related to a single statement made in 2015 about one gas-fired power contract. During 2021, we recorded a liability for the estimated resolution of the matter and we also recognized the effects of expected insurance coverage. In the first quarter 2022, we reached a proposed settlement with the plaintiffs. The proposed settlement was finally approved by the Court in November 2022 and we consider the matter closed. Since September 2018, eleven separate purported shareholders' derivative actions were filed against current and former members of the Board of Directors, as well as certain of Fluor’s current and former executives. Fluor is named as a nominal defendant in the actions. These derivative actions purport to assert claims on behalf of Fluor and make substantially the same factual allegations as the securities class action matter discussed above and seek various forms of monetary and injunctive relief. These actions are pending in Texas state court (District Court for Dallas County), the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. Certain of these actions were consolidated, and all of these matters are currently stayed. Fluor Australia Ltd., our wholly-owned subsidiary (“Fluor Australia”), completed a cost reimbursable engineering, procurement and construction management services project for Santos Ltd. (“Santos”) involving a large network of natural gas gathering and processing facilities in Queensland, Australia. On December 13, 2016, Santos filed an action in Queensland Supreme Court against Fluor Australia, asserting various causes of action and seeking damages and/or a refund of contract proceeds paid of AUD $1.47 billion. Santos has joined Fluor to the matter on the basis of a parent company guarantee issued for the project. Fluor Limited, our wholly-owned subsidiary (“Fluor Limited”), and Fluor Arabia Limited, a partially-owned subsidiary (“Fluor Arabia”), completed cost reimbursable engineering, procurement and construction management services for Sadara Chemical Company (“Sadara”) involving a large petrochemical facility in Jubail, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. On August 23, 2019, Fluor Limited and Fluor Arabia Limited commenced arbitration proceedings against Sadara after it refused to pay invoices totaling approximately $100 million due under the contracts. As part of the arbitration proceedings, Sadara has asserted various counterclaims for damages and/or a refund of contract proceeds paid totaling $574 million against Fluor Limited and Fluor Arabia Limited. Various wholly-owned subsidiaries of Fluor, in conjunction with a partner, TECHINT, (“Fluor/TECHINT”) performed engineering, procurement and construction management services on a cost reimbursable basis for Barrick Gold Corporation involving a gold mine and ore processing facility on a site straddling the border between Argentina and Chile. In 2013 Barrick terminated the Fluor/TECHINT agreements for convenience and not due to the performance of Fluor/TECHINT. On August 12, 2016, Barrick filed a notice of arbitration against Fluor/TECHINT, demanding damages and/or a refund of contract proceeds paid of not less than $250 million under various claims relating to Fluor/TECHINT’s alleged performance. Proceedings were suspended while the parties explored a possible settlement. In August 2019, Barrick drew down $36 million of letters of credit from Fluor/TECHINT ($24 million from Fluor and $12 million from TECHINT). Thereafter, Barrick proceeded to reactivate the arbitration. Barrick and Fluor/TECHINT exchanged detailed statements of claim and counterclaim pursuant to which Barrick's claim against Fluor/TECHINT totaled $364 million net of amounts acknowledged to be due to Fluor/TECHINT. Fluor Enterprises Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary, (“Fluor”) in conjunction with a partner, Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc., (“Balfour”) formed a joint venture known as Prairie Link Constructors JV (“PLC”) and, through it, contracted with the North Texas Tollway Authority (“NTTA”) to provide design and build services in relation to the extension of the NTTA’s President George Bush Turnpike highway (“Project”). PLC completed the Project in 2012. In October 2022, the NTTA served PLC, Fluor and Balfour with a petition, filed at Dallas County Court, demanding damages of an unquantified amount under various claims relating to alleged breaches of contract and or negligence. In its initial disclosures as part of the litigation, the NTTA stated that its damages are expected to exceed $100 million and that damages will be calculated by experts and provided in the normal course of the litigation. We have answered the petition and asserted claims for, among other things, indemnity from subcontractors. Other MattersIn February 2020, we announced that the SEC is conducting an investigation and requested documents and information related to projects for which we recorded charges in the second quarter of 2019. In April 2020 and January 2022, Fluor received subpoenas from the U.S. DOJ seeking documents and information related to the second quarter 2019 charges; certain of the projects associated with those charges; and certain project accounting, financial reporting and governance matters. These matters remain unresolved, and we have continued to cooperate and engage with the SEC and DOJ regarding these investigations including discussions with the SEC regarding the potential resolution of its investigation. Based upon our current assessment, we recorded an accrual in the fourth quarter of 2022 related to this matter, although no assurance can be given as to the ultimate outcome of these matters, and we are not able to predict whether any legal, regulatory or reputational impacts of any allegations or resolution of these matters will have a material impact on our results.