Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2020
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	7. Commitments and Contingencies *Security Deposits* The Partnership has various performance obligations that are secured with short-term security deposits (reflected as restricted cash equivalents in our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows) totaling $0.6 million at March 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. These amounts are included in prepaid expenses and other on the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. *Compliance Audit Contingencies* Certain customer master service agreements (“MSAs”) offer our customers the right to perform periodic compliance audits, which include the examination of the accuracy of our invoices. Should our invoices be determined to be inconsistent with the MSA, or inaccurate, the MSAs may provide the customer the right to receive a credit or refund for any overcharges identified. At any given time, we may have multiple audits ongoing. As of March 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, we established a reserve of $0.2 million as an estimate of potential liabilities related to these compliance audit contingencies. *Legal Proceedings* Fithian v. TIR LLC On October 5, 2017, a former inspector for TIR LLC and Cypress Environmental Management – TIR, LLC (“CEM TIR”) filed a putative collective action lawsuit alleging that TIR LLC, CEM TIR and Cypress Energy Partners – Texas, LLC failed to pay a class of workers overtime in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) titled James Fithian, et al v. TIR LLC, et al in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Midland Division. The plaintiff subsequently withdrew his action and filed a similar action in Oklahoma State Court, District of Tulsa County. The plaintiff alleged he was a non-exempt employee of CEM TIR and that he and other potential class members were not paid overtime in compliance with the FLSA. The plaintiff sought to proceed as a collective action and to receive unpaid overtime and other monetary damages, including attorney’s fees. The Partnership, TIR LLC, CEM TIR and Cypress Energy Partners – Texas, LLC denied the claims. On March 28, 2018, the court granted a joint stipulation of dismissal without prejudice in regard to TIR LLC and Cypress Energy Partners – Texas, LLC, as neither of those parties were employers of the plaintiff or the putative class members during the time period that is the subject of the lawsuit. On July 26, 2018, the plaintiff filed a motion for conditional class certification. CEM TIR subsequently filed pleadings opposing the motion. On January 25, 2019, the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for conditional class certification. On June 10, 2019, the court entered a scheduling order that proscribed, among other things, August 1, 2019 as the deadline for additional parties to join the lawsuit, and that the parties participate in a settlement conference or mediation no later than September 1, 2019. After the deadline, plaintiff’s counsel submitted consents for five additional inspectors to join the lawsuit, to which CEM TIR objected. On August 28, 2019, the parties participated in a settlement conference in which no settlement was reached. Subsequent to the settlement conference, CEM TIR submitted offers of judgment in immaterial amounts to the named plaintiff and the two opt-in plaintiffs. The Court entered the agreed judgment on February 25, 2020. Diaz v. CEM TIR On December 12, 2019, three of the former inspectors who unsuccessfully attempted to join the Fithian lawsuit after the deadline set by the court filed a putative collective action lawsuit alleging that TIR LLC and CEM TIR failed to pay a class of workers overtime in compliance with the FLSA titled Francisco Diaz, et al v. CEM TIR, et al in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. TIR LLC and CEM TIR deny the claims. CEM TIR and TIR LLC filed a motion to dismiss one of the plaintiffs for bringing the lawsuit in a venue that was inconsistent with the forum selection clause in his employment agreement mandating suit exclusively in the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. CEM TIR and TIR LLC also filed a motion to compel arbitration for the other two plaintiffs to enforce the binding arbitration clauses in their employment agreements. The Court has not yet ruled on either motion. The two plaintiffs with the binding arbitration clauses in their employment agreements subsequently initiated arbitration proceedings. Other We have been and may in the future be subject to litigation involving allegations of violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws. In addition, we generally indemnify our customers for claims related to the services we provide and actions we take under our contracts, including claims regarding the Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws, and, in some instances, we may be allocated risk through our contract terms for actions by our customers or other third parties. Claims related to the Fair Labor Standards Act are generally not covered by insurance. From time to time, we are subject to various claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings brought or threatened against us in the ordinary course of our business. These actions and proceedings may seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, workers’ compensation, employment discrimination and other employment-related damages, breach of contract, property damage, environmental liabilities, multiemployer pension plan withdrawal liabilities, punitive damages and civil penalties or other losses, liquidated damages, consequential damages, or injunctive or declaratory relief.

Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2020

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

7. Commitments and Contingencies

Security Deposits

The Partnership has various performance obligations that are secured with short-term security deposits (reflected as restricted cash equivalents in our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows) totaling $0.6 million at March 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. These amounts are included in prepaid expenses and other on the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Compliance Audit Contingencies

Certain customer master service agreements (“MSAs”) offer our customers the right to perform periodic compliance audits, which include the examination of the accuracy of our invoices. Should our invoices be determined to be inconsistent with the MSA, or inaccurate, the MSAs may provide the customer the right to receive a credit or refund for any overcharges identified. At any given time, we may have multiple audits ongoing. As of March 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, we established a reserve of $0.2 million as an estimate of potential liabilities related to these compliance audit contingencies.

Legal Proceedings

Fithian v. TIR LLC

On October 5, 2017, a former inspector for TIR LLC and Cypress Environmental Management – TIR, LLC (“CEM TIR”) filed a putative collective action lawsuit alleging that TIR LLC, CEM TIR and Cypress Energy Partners – Texas, LLC failed to pay a class of workers overtime in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) titled James Fithian, et al v. TIR LLC, et al in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Midland Division. The plaintiff subsequently withdrew his action and filed a similar action in Oklahoma State Court, District of Tulsa County. The plaintiff alleged he was a non-exempt employee of CEM TIR and that he and other potential class members were not paid overtime in compliance with the FLSA. The plaintiff sought to proceed as a collective action and to receive unpaid overtime and other monetary damages, including attorney’s fees. The Partnership, TIR LLC, CEM TIR and Cypress Energy Partners – Texas, LLC denied the claims.

On March 28, 2018, the court granted a joint stipulation of dismissal without prejudice in regard to TIR LLC and Cypress Energy Partners – Texas, LLC, as neither of those parties were employers of the plaintiff or the putative class members during the time period that is the subject of the lawsuit. On July 26, 2018, the plaintiff filed a motion for conditional class certification. CEM TIR subsequently filed pleadings opposing the motion. On January 25, 2019, the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for conditional class certification. On June 10, 2019, the court entered a scheduling order that proscribed, among other things, August 1, 2019 as the deadline for additional parties to join the lawsuit, and that the parties participate in a settlement conference or mediation no later than September 1, 2019. After the deadline, plaintiff’s counsel submitted consents for five additional inspectors to join the lawsuit, to which CEM TIR objected. On August 28, 2019, the parties participated in a settlement conference in which no settlement was reached. Subsequent to the settlement conference, CEM TIR submitted offers of judgment in immaterial amounts to the named plaintiff and the two opt-in plaintiffs. The Court entered the agreed judgment on February 25, 2020.

Diaz v. CEM TIR

On December 12, 2019, three of the former inspectors who unsuccessfully attempted to join the Fithian lawsuit after the deadline set by the court filed a putative collective action lawsuit alleging that TIR LLC and CEM TIR failed to pay a class of workers overtime in compliance with the FLSA titled Francisco Diaz, et al v. CEM TIR, et al in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. TIR LLC and CEM TIR deny the claims. CEM TIR and TIR LLC filed a motion to dismiss one of the plaintiffs for bringing the lawsuit in a venue that was inconsistent with the forum selection clause in his employment agreement mandating suit exclusively in the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. CEM TIR and TIR LLC also filed a motion to compel arbitration for the other two plaintiffs to enforce the binding arbitration clauses in their employment agreements. The Court has not yet ruled on either motion. The two plaintiffs with the binding arbitration clauses in their employment agreements subsequently initiated arbitration proceedings.

Other

We have been and may in the future be subject to litigation involving allegations of violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws. In addition, we generally indemnify our customers for claims related to the services we provide and actions we take under our contracts, including claims regarding the Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws, and, in some instances, we may be allocated risk through our contract terms for actions by our customers or other third parties. Claims related to the Fair Labor Standards Act are generally not covered by insurance. From time to time, we are subject to various claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings brought or threatened against us in the ordinary course of our business. These actions and proceedings may seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, workers’ compensation, employment discrimination and other employment-related damages, breach of contract, property damage, environmental liabilities, multiemployer pension plan withdrawal liabilities, punitive damages and civil penalties or other losses, liquidated damages, consequential damages, or injunctive or declaratory relief.