XML 35 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.5.0.2

Financing Receivables | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2016
Schedule of Financial Receivables [Line Items] |
Financing Receivables | Financing Receivables PSE&G PSE&G sponsors a solar loan program designed to help finance the installation of solar power systems throughout its electric service area. The loans are generally paid back with solar renewable energy certificates generated from the installed solar electric system. A substantial portion of these amounts are noncurrent and reported in Long-Term Investments on PSEG’s and PSE&G’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following table reflects the outstanding loans by class of customer, none of which are considered “non-performing.”
| Outstanding Loans by Class of Customer |
|  |  | As of |  | As of |
| Consumer Loans |  | September 30, 2016 |  | December 31, 2015 |
|  |  | Millions |
| Commercial/Industrial |  | $ | 165 |  |  | $ | 177 |  |
| Residential |  | 11 |  |  | 12 |  |
| Total |  | $ | 176 |  |  | $ | 189 |  |
Energy Holdings Energy Holdings, through several of its indirect subsidiary companies, has investments in domestic energy and real estate assets subject primarily to leveraged lease accounting. A leveraged lease is typically comprised of an investment by an equity investor and debt provided by a third party debt investor. The debt is recourse only to the assets subject to lease and is not included on PSEG’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As an equity investor, Energy Holdings’ investments in the leases are comprised of the total expected lease receivables on its investments over the lease terms plus the estimated residual values at the end of the lease terms, reduced for any income not yet earned on the leases. This amount is included in Long-Term Investments on PSEG’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The more rapid depreciation of the leased property for tax purposes creates tax cash flow that will be repaid to the taxing authority in later periods. As such, the liability for such taxes due is recorded in Deferred Income Taxes on PSEG’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. During the third quarter of 2016, Energy Holdings completed its annual review of estimated residual values embedded in the NRG REMA, LLC (REMA) leveraged leases. The outcome indicated that the revised residual value estimates were lower than the recorded residual values and the decline was deemed to be other than temporary due to the adverse economic conditions experienced by coal generation in PJM, as discussed in Note 3. Early Plant Retirements, negatively impacting the economic outlook of the leased assets. As a result, a pre-tax write-down of $137 million was reflected in Operating Revenues in the quarter ended September 30, 2016, calculated by comparing the gross investment in the leases before and after the revised residual estimates. The following table shows Energy Holdings’ gross and net lease investment as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.
|  | As of |  | As of |
|  | September 30, 2016 |  | December 31, 2015 |
|  | Millions |
| Lease Receivables (net of Non-Recourse Debt) | $ | 630 |  |  | $ | 631 |  |
| Estimated Residual Value of Leased Assets | 346 |  |  | 519 |  |
| Total Investment in Rental Receivables | 976 |  |  | 1,150 |  |
| Unearned and Deferred Income | (320 | ) |  | (366 | ) |
| Gross Investment in Leases | 656 |  |  | 784 |  |
| Deferred Tax Liabilities | (661 | ) |  | (724 | ) |
| Net Investment in Leases | $ | (5 | ) |  | $ | 60 |  |
The corresponding receivables associated with the lease portfolio are reflected in the following table, net of non-recourse debt. The ratings in the table represent the ratings of the entities providing payment assurance to Energy Holdings.
|  |  | Lease Receivables, Net of Non-Recourse Debt |
| Counterparties’ Credit Rating Standard & Poor’s (S&P) as of September 30, 2016 |  |  |
|  | As of September 30, 2016 |
|  |  | Millions |
| AA |  | $ | 16 |  |
| BBB+ — BBB- |  | 316 |  |
| BB- |  | 134 |  |
| CCC |  | 164 |  |
| Total |  | $ | 630 |  |
The “BB-” and the “CCC” ratings in the preceding table represent lease receivables related to coal-fired assets in Illinois and Pennsylvania, respectively. As of September 30, 2016, the gross investment in the leases of such assets, net of non-recourse debt, was $436 million ($(108) million, net of deferred taxes). A more detailed description of such assets under lease, as of September 30, 2016, is presented in the following table.
| Asset |  | Location |  | Gross Investment |  | % Owned |  | Total MW |  | Fuel Type |  | Counterparties’ S&P Credit Ratings |  | Counterparty |
|  |  |  |  | Millions |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Powerton Station Units 5 and 6 |  | IL |  | $ | 134 |  |  | 64 | % |  | 1,538 |  |  | Coal |  | BB- |  | NRG Energy, Inc. |
| Joliet Station Units 7 and 8 |  | IL |  | $ | 83 |  |  | 64 | % |  | 1,044 |  |  | Gas |  | BB- |  | NRG Energy, Inc. |
| Keystone Station Units 1 and 2 |  | PA |  | $ | 55 |  |  | 17 | % |  | 1,711 |  |  | Coal |  | CCC (B) |  | REMA |
| Conemaugh Station Units 1 and 2 |  | PA |  | $ | 55 |  |  | 17 | % |  | 1,711 |  |  | Coal |  | CCC (B) |  | REMA |
| Shawville Station Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 |  | PA |  | $ | 109 |  |  | 100 | % |  | 603 |  |  | Coal (A) |  | CCC (B) |  | REMA |
(A) | REMA notified PJM that it deactivated the coal-fired units at the Shawville generating facility in June 2015 and has disclosed that it expects to return the Shawville units to service in the late fall of 2016 with the ability to use natural gas.
(B) | On May 24, 2016, S&P lowered its corporate credit rating on REMA’s parent company, GenOn Energy Inc. (GenOn) and affiliates (including REMA) to “CCC” from “CCC+” due to a weaker forward power curve, milder weather patterns and weakening financial measures. On October 7, 2016, Moody’s downgraded the GenOn Corporate Family Rating to Caa3 to reflect its high debt burden relative to cash flow. GenOn reported in August 2016 that it did not expect to have sufficient liquidity to repay the senior unsecured notes due in June 2017.
The credit exposure for lessors is partially mitigated through various credit enhancement mechanisms within the lease transactions. These credit enhancement features vary from lease to lease and may include letters of credit or affiliate guarantees. Upon the occurrence of certain defaults, indirect subsidiary companies of Energy Holdings would exercise their rights and attempt to seek recovery of their investment, potentially including stepping into the lease directly to protect their investments. While these actions could ultimately protect or mitigate the loss of value, they could require the use of significant capital investments and trigger certain material tax obligations which could be mitigated by tax indemnification claims with the counterparty. A bankruptcy of a lessee would likely delay and potentially limit any efforts on the part of the lessors to assert their rights upon default and could delay the monetization of claims. Failure to recover adequate value could ultimately lead to a foreclosure on the assets under lease by the lenders. Although all lease payments are current, PSEG cannot predict the outcome of GenOn’s efforts to restructure its portfolio and improve its liquidity and the possible related impact on REMA. PSEG continues to monitor any changes to REMA’s and GenOn’s status and potential impacts on Energy Holdings’ lease investments. If foreclosures were to occur, Energy Holdings could potentially record a pre-tax write-off up to its gross investment in these facilities and may also be required to pay significant cash tax liabilities to the Internal Revenue Service. Although all lease payments are current, no assurances can be given that future payments in accordance with the lease contracts will continue. Factors which may impact future lease cash flows include, but are not limited to, new environmental legislation and regulation regarding air quality, water and other discharges in the process of generating electricity, market prices for fuel, electricity and capacity, overall financial condition of lease counterparties and their affiliates and the quality and condition of assets under lease.
PSE And G [Member] |
Schedule of Financial Receivables [Line Items] |
Financing Receivables | Financing Receivables PSE&G PSE&G sponsors a solar loan program designed to help finance the installation of solar power systems throughout its electric service area. The loans are generally paid back with solar renewable energy certificates generated from the installed solar electric system. A substantial portion of these amounts are noncurrent and reported in Long-Term Investments on PSEG’s and PSE&G’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following table reflects the outstanding loans by class of customer, none of which are considered “non-performing.”
| Outstanding Loans by Class of Customer |
|  |  | As of |  | As of |
| Consumer Loans |  | September 30, 2016 |  | December 31, 2015 |
|  |  | Millions |
| Commercial/Industrial |  | $ | 165 |  |  | $ | 177 |  |
| Residential |  | 11 |  |  | 12 |  |
| Total |  | $ | 176 |  |  | $ | 189 |  |
Energy Holdings Energy Holdings, through several of its indirect subsidiary companies, has investments in domestic energy and real estate assets subject primarily to leveraged lease accounting. A leveraged lease is typically comprised of an investment by an equity investor and debt provided by a third party debt investor. The debt is recourse only to the assets subject to lease and is not included on PSEG’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As an equity investor, Energy Holdings’ investments in the leases are comprised of the total expected lease receivables on its investments over the lease terms plus the estimated residual values at the end of the lease terms, reduced for any income not yet earned on the leases. This amount is included in Long-Term Investments on PSEG’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The more rapid depreciation of the leased property for tax purposes creates tax cash flow that will be repaid to the taxing authority in later periods. As such, the liability for such taxes due is recorded in Deferred Income Taxes on PSEG’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. During the third quarter of 2016, Energy Holdings completed its annual review of estimated residual values embedded in the NRG REMA, LLC (REMA) leveraged leases. The outcome indicated that the revised residual value estimates were lower than the recorded residual values and the decline was deemed to be other than temporary due to the adverse economic conditions experienced by coal generation in PJM, as discussed in Note 3. Early Plant Retirements, negatively impacting the economic outlook of the leased assets. As a result, a pre-tax write-down of $137 million was reflected in Operating Revenues in the quarter ended September 30, 2016, calculated by comparing the gross investment in the leases before and after the revised residual estimates. The following table shows Energy Holdings’ gross and net lease investment as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.
|  | As of |  | As of |
|  | September 30, 2016 |  | December 31, 2015 |
|  | Millions |
| Lease Receivables (net of Non-Recourse Debt) | $ | 630 |  |  | $ | 631 |  |
| Estimated Residual Value of Leased Assets | 346 |  |  | 519 |  |
| Total Investment in Rental Receivables | 976 |  |  | 1,150 |  |
| Unearned and Deferred Income | (320 | ) |  | (366 | ) |
| Gross Investment in Leases | 656 |  |  | 784 |  |
| Deferred Tax Liabilities | (661 | ) |  | (724 | ) |
| Net Investment in Leases | $ | (5 | ) |  | $ | 60 |  |
The corresponding receivables associated with the lease portfolio are reflected in the following table, net of non-recourse debt. The ratings in the table represent the ratings of the entities providing payment assurance to Energy Holdings.
|  |  | Lease Receivables, Net of Non-Recourse Debt |
| Counterparties’ Credit Rating Standard & Poor’s (S&P) as of September 30, 2016 |  |  |
|  | As of September 30, 2016 |
|  |  | Millions |
| AA |  | $ | 16 |  |
| BBB+ — BBB- |  | 316 |  |
| BB- |  | 134 |  |
| CCC |  | 164 |  |
| Total |  | $ | 630 |  |
The “BB-” and the “CCC” ratings in the preceding table represent lease receivables related to coal-fired assets in Illinois and Pennsylvania, respectively. As of September 30, 2016, the gross investment in the leases of such assets, net of non-recourse debt, was $436 million ($(108) million, net of deferred taxes). A more detailed description of such assets under lease, as of September 30, 2016, is presented in the following table.
| Asset |  | Location |  | Gross Investment |  | % Owned |  | Total MW |  | Fuel Type |  | Counterparties’ S&P Credit Ratings |  | Counterparty |
|  |  |  |  | Millions |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Powerton Station Units 5 and 6 |  | IL |  | $ | 134 |  |  | 64 | % |  | 1,538 |  |  | Coal |  | BB- |  | NRG Energy, Inc. |
| Joliet Station Units 7 and 8 |  | IL |  | $ | 83 |  |  | 64 | % |  | 1,044 |  |  | Gas |  | BB- |  | NRG Energy, Inc. |
| Keystone Station Units 1 and 2 |  | PA |  | $ | 55 |  |  | 17 | % |  | 1,711 |  |  | Coal |  | CCC (B) |  | REMA |
| Conemaugh Station Units 1 and 2 |  | PA |  | $ | 55 |  |  | 17 | % |  | 1,711 |  |  | Coal |  | CCC (B) |  | REMA |
| Shawville Station Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 |  | PA |  | $ | 109 |  |  | 100 | % |  | 603 |  |  | Coal (A) |  | CCC (B) |  | REMA |
(A) | REMA notified PJM that it deactivated the coal-fired units at the Shawville generating facility in June 2015 and has disclosed that it expects to return the Shawville units to service in the late fall of 2016 with the ability to use natural gas.
(B) | On May 24, 2016, S&P lowered its corporate credit rating on REMA’s parent company, GenOn Energy Inc. (GenOn) and affiliates (including REMA) to “CCC” from “CCC+” due to a weaker forward power curve, milder weather patterns and weakening financial measures. On October 7, 2016, Moody’s downgraded the GenOn Corporate Family Rating to Caa3 to reflect its high debt burden relative to cash flow. GenOn reported in August 2016 that it did not expect to have sufficient liquidity to repay the senior unsecured notes due in June 2017.
The credit exposure for lessors is partially mitigated through various credit enhancement mechanisms within the lease transactions. These credit enhancement features vary from lease to lease and may include letters of credit or affiliate guarantees. Upon the occurrence of certain defaults, indirect subsidiary companies of Energy Holdings would exercise their rights and attempt to seek recovery of their investment, potentially including stepping into the lease directly to protect their investments. While these actions could ultimately protect or mitigate the loss of value, they could require the use of significant capital investments and trigger certain material tax obligations which could be mitigated by tax indemnification claims with the counterparty. A bankruptcy of a lessee would likely delay and potentially limit any efforts on the part of the lessors to assert their rights upon default and could delay the monetization of claims. Failure to recover adequate value could ultimately lead to a foreclosure on the assets under lease by the lenders. Although all lease payments are current, PSEG cannot predict the outcome of GenOn’s efforts to restructure its portfolio and improve its liquidity and the possible related impact on REMA. PSEG continues to monitor any changes to REMA’s and GenOn’s status and potential impacts on Energy Holdings’ lease investments. If foreclosures were to occur, Energy Holdings could potentially record a pre-tax write-off up to its gross investment in these facilities and may also be required to pay significant cash tax liabilities to the Internal Revenue Service. Although all lease payments are current, no assurances can be given that future payments in accordance with the lease contracts will continue. Factors which may impact future lease cash flows include, but are not limited to, new environmental legislation and regulation regarding air quality, water and other discharges in the process of generating electricity, market prices for fuel, electricity and capacity, overall financial condition of lease counterparties and their affiliates and the quality and condition of assets under lease.

X
- Definition Schedule of Financial Receivables [Line Items] + References No definition available. + Details
Name: | pseg_ScheduleofFinancialReceivablesLineItems
Namespace Prefix: | pseg_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for financing receivables. Examples of financing receivables include, but are not limited to, loans, trade accounts receivables, notes receivable, credit cards, and receivables relating to a lessor's right(s) to payment(s) from a lease other than an operating lease that is recognized as assets. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 310 -SubTopic 10 -Section 55 -Paragraph 14 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=32702940&loc=SL6953791-111525 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 310 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=49124121&loc=d3e4975-111524 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_FinancingReceivablesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Details
Name: | dei_LegalEntityAxis=pseg_PseAndGMember
Namespace Prefix: |
Data Type: | na
Balance Type: |
Period Type: |