COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2019
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Reclamation Deposits and Surety Bonds—As of December 31, 2019, and 2018, we had $22.3 million and $19.0 million, respectively, of security placed principally with the State of Utah and the Bureau of Land Management for eventual reclamation of its various facilities. Of this total requirement, as of December 31, 2019, and 2018, $0.5 million consisted of long-term restricted cash deposits reflected in "Other" long-term assets on the balance sheet, and $21.8 million and $18.5 million, respectively, was secured by surety bonds issued by an insurer. The surety bonds are held in place by an annual fee paid to the issuer. We may be required to post additional security to fund future reclamation obligations as reclamation plans are updated or as governmental entities change requirements. Legal—In February 2015, Mosaic Potash Carlsbad Inc. (“Mosaic”) filed a complaint and application for preliminary injunction and permanent injunction against Steve Gamble and us in the Fifth Judicial District Court for the County of Eddy in the State of New Mexico. Mr. Gamble is a former employee of Intrepid and Mosaic. In August 2015, the court denied Mosaic’s application for preliminary injunction. In July 2016, Mosaic filed a second complaint against Mr. Gamble and us in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. In January 2018, the two lawsuits were consolidated into one lawsuit pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. Mosaic alleges against us violations of the New Mexico Uniform Trade Secrets Act, tortious interference with contract relating to Mr. Gamble’s separation of employment from Mosaic, violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, conversion, and civil conspiracy relating to the alleged misappropriation of Mosaic’s confidential information and related actions. Mosaic seeks $23 million to $28 million in compensatory damages, $28 million to $37 million in exemplary damages, and attorneys' fees, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and future royalty damages in unspecified amounts. A settlement conference is scheduled for March 25, 2020 and a trial date has been set for April 27, 2020 through May 8, 2020. The lawsuit has progressed through discovery with many pending motions and additions concerning both the facts and confidentiality procedures concerning trade secrets. We believe that we have defenses against the claims asserted and we are vigorously defending against the lawsuit. We have recorded no loss contingency in our statements of operations related to this legal matter. In February 2019, Pecos Valley Artesian Conservancy District, Carlsbad Irrigation District, and Otis Mutual Domestic Water Consumers & Sewage Works Association (together, the "Protestants") filed an expedited inter se proceeding against us, Henry McDonald, Select Energy Services, LLC d/b/a Gregory Rockhouse Ranch, and Vision Resources, Inc. in the Fifth Judicial District Court for the County of Chaves in the State of New Mexico. This court serves as the adjudication court for the Pecos Stream System, which includes the Pecos River. The Protestants challenge the validity of our Pecos River water rights, representing approximately 20,000 acre feet per year. In August 2019, the parties stipulated to the jurisdiction of the adjudication court. To promote settlement, the adjudication court established a settlement schedule and ordered a trial date in August 2020 if the parties have not reached a settlement by that time. We are currently allowed to sell water associated with 5,700 acre feet per year of these water rights under preliminary authorizations issued in 2017 and 2018 by the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer ("OSE"). The preliminary authorizations allowed for water sales to begin immediately, subject to repayment if the underlying water rights are ultimately found to be invalid. Separate from the adjudication proceeding, the Protestants have protested these preliminary authorizations before the OSE. Although the OSE is required to hold a hearing relating to the protests, it has temporarily stayed the hearing process until the adjudication process is complete. In the adjudication proceeding, the court is expected to make a determination as to the size of our Pecos River water rights. In addition, the Protestants are asking for unspecified monetary and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys' fees and costs, relating to our sale of water under these water rights and breach of contract claims. We believe that our legal position with respect to the validity of our water rights is solid, and we are vigorously defending against this matter. We have not recorded a loss contingency in our condensed consolidated statements of operations relating to this matter. We are subject to other claims and legal actions in the ordinary course of business. Legal costs are expensed as incurred. While there are uncertainties in predicting the outcome of any claim or legal action, we believe that the ultimate resolution of these other claims or actions is not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Reclamation Deposits and Surety Bonds—As of December 31, 2019, and 2018, we had $22.3 million and $19.0 million, respectively, of security placed principally with the State of Utah and the Bureau of Land Management for eventual reclamation of its various facilities. Of this total requirement, as of December 31, 2019, and 2018, $0.5 million consisted of long-term restricted cash deposits reflected in "Other" long-term assets on the balance sheet, and $21.8 million and $18.5 million, respectively, was secured by surety bonds issued by an insurer. The surety bonds are held in place by an annual fee paid to the issuer.

We may be required to post additional security to fund future reclamation obligations as reclamation plans are updated or as governmental entities change requirements.

Legal—In February 2015, Mosaic Potash Carlsbad Inc. (“Mosaic”) filed a complaint and application for preliminary injunction and permanent injunction against Steve Gamble and us in the Fifth Judicial District Court for the County of Eddy in the State of New Mexico. Mr. Gamble is a former employee of Intrepid and Mosaic. In August 2015, the court denied Mosaic’s application for preliminary injunction. In July 2016, Mosaic filed a second complaint against Mr. Gamble and us in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. In January 2018, the two lawsuits were consolidated into one lawsuit pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. Mosaic alleges against us violations of the New Mexico Uniform Trade Secrets Act, tortious interference with contract relating to Mr. Gamble’s separation of employment from Mosaic, violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, conversion, and civil conspiracy relating to the alleged misappropriation of Mosaic’s confidential information and related actions. Mosaic seeks $23 million to $28 million in compensatory damages, $28 million to $37 million in exemplary damages, and attorneys' fees, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and future royalty damages in unspecified amounts. A settlement conference is scheduled for March 25, 2020 and a trial date has been set for April 27, 2020 through May 8, 2020. The lawsuit has progressed through discovery with many pending motions and additions concerning both the facts and confidentiality procedures concerning trade secrets. We believe that we have defenses against the claims asserted and we are vigorously defending against the lawsuit.

We have recorded no loss contingency in our statements of operations related to this legal matter.

In February 2019, Pecos Valley Artesian Conservancy District, Carlsbad Irrigation District, and Otis Mutual Domestic Water Consumers & Sewage Works Association (together, the "Protestants") filed an expedited inter se proceeding against us, Henry McDonald, Select Energy Services, LLC d/b/a Gregory Rockhouse Ranch, and Vision Resources, Inc. in the Fifth Judicial District Court for the County of Chaves in the State of New Mexico. This court serves as the adjudication court for the Pecos Stream System, which includes the Pecos River. The Protestants challenge the validity of our Pecos River water rights, representing approximately 20,000 acre feet per year. In August 2019, the parties stipulated to the jurisdiction of the adjudication court. To promote settlement, the adjudication court established a settlement schedule and ordered a trial date in August 2020 if the parties have not reached a settlement by that time. We are currently allowed to sell water associated with 5,700 acre feet per year of these water rights under preliminary authorizations issued in 2017 and 2018 by the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer ("OSE"). The preliminary authorizations allowed for water sales to begin immediately, subject to repayment if the underlying water rights are ultimately found to be invalid. Separate from the adjudication proceeding, the Protestants have protested these preliminary authorizations before the OSE. Although the OSE is required to hold a hearing relating to the protests, it has temporarily stayed the hearing process until the adjudication process is complete. In the adjudication proceeding, the court is expected to make a determination as to the size of our Pecos River water rights. In addition, the Protestants are asking for unspecified monetary and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys' fees and costs, relating to our sale of water under these water rights and breach of contract claims. We believe that our legal position with respect to the validity of our water rights is solid, and we are vigorously defending against this matter. We have not recorded a loss contingency in our condensed consolidated statements of operations relating to this matter.

We are subject to other claims and legal actions in the ordinary course of business. Legal costs are expensed as incurred. While there are uncertainties in predicting the outcome of any claim or legal action, we believe that the ultimate resolution of these other claims or actions is not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.