XML 50 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.24.0.1

Commitments and Contingent Liabilities | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2023
Other Commitments [Line Items] |
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities | Commitments and Contingent Liabilities Guaranteed Obligations PSEG Power’s activities primarily involve the purchase and sale of energy and related products under transportation, physical, financial and forward contracts at fixed and variable prices. These transactions are with numerous counterparties and brokers that may require cash, cash-related instruments or guarantees as a form of collateral. PSEG Power has unconditionally guaranteed payments to counterparties on behalf of its subsidiaries in commodity-related transactions in order to •support current exposure, interest and other costs on sums due and payable in the ordinary course of business, and •obtain credit. PSEG Power is subject to •counterparty collateral calls related to commodity contracts of its subsidiaries, and •certain creditworthiness standards as guarantor under performance guarantees of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements, guarantees cover lines of credit between entities and are often reciprocal in nature. The exposure between counterparties can move in either direction. In order for PSEG Power to incur a liability for the face value of the outstanding guarantees, •its subsidiaries would have to fully utilize the credit granted to them by every counterparty to whom PSEG Power has provided a guarantee, and •the net position of the related contracts would have to be “out-of-the-money” (if the contracts are terminated, PSEG Power would owe money to the counterparties). PSEG Power believes the probability of this result is unlikely. For this reason, PSEG Power believes that the current exposure at any point in time is a more meaningful representation of the potential liability under these guarantees. Current exposure consists of the net of accounts receivable and accounts payable and the forward value on open positions, less any collateral posted. Changes in commodity prices can have a material impact on collateral requirements under such contracts, which are posted and received primarily in the form of cash and letters of credit. PSEG Power also routinely enters into futures and options transactions for electricity and natural gas as part of its operations. These futures contracts usually require a cash margin deposit with brokers, which can change based on market movement and in accordance with exchange rules. In addition to the guarantees discussed above, PSEG Power has also provided payment guarantees to third parties and regulatory authorities on behalf of its affiliated companies. These guarantees support various other non-commodity related obligations. The following table shows the face value of PSEG Power’s outstanding guarantees, current exposure and margin positions as of December 31, 2023 and 2022.
|  |  | As of December 31, |
|  |  | 2023 |  | 2022 |
|  |  | Millions |
| Face Value of Outstanding Guarantees |  | $ | 1,381 |  |  | $ | 1,601 |  |
| Exposure under Current Guarantees |  | $ | 118 |  |  | $ | 198 |  |
| Letters of Credit Margin Posted |  | $ | 10 |  |  | $ | 87 |  |
| Letters of Credit Margin Received |  | $ | 91 |  |  | $ | 38 |  |
| Cash Deposited and Received |  |  |  |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Deposited |  | $ | — |  |  | $ | — |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Received |  | $ | (2) |  |  | $ | (1) |  |
| Net Broker Balance Deposited (Received) |  | $ | 115 |  |  | $ | 1,522 |  |
| Additional Amounts Posted |  |  |  |  |
| Other Letters of Credit |  | $ | 180 |  |  | $ | 156 |  |
As part of determining credit exposure, PSEG Power nets receivables and payables with the corresponding net fair values of energy contracts. See Note 16. Financial Risk Management Activities for further discussion. In accordance with PSEG’s accounting policy, where it is applicable, cash (received)/deposited is allocated against derivative asset and liability positions with the same counterparty on the face of the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The remaining balances of net cash (received)/deposited after allocation are generally included in Accounts Payable and Receivable, respectively. In addition to amounts for outstanding guarantees, current exposure and margin positions, PSEG and PSEG Power have posted letters of credit to support PSEG Power’s various other non-energy contractual and environmental obligations. See the preceding table. Environmental Matters Passaic River Lower Passaic River Study Area The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that a 17-mile stretch of the Passaic River (Lower Passaic River Study Area (LPRSA)) in New Jersey is a “Superfund” site under the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). PSE&G and certain of its predecessors conducted operations at properties in this area, including at one site that was transferred to PSEG Power. The EPA has announced two separate cleanup plans for the Lower 8.3 miles and Upper 9 miles of the LPRSA. The EPA’s plan for the Lower 8.3 miles involves dredging and capping sediments at an estimated cost of $2.3 billion, and its plan for the Upper 9 miles involves dredging and capping sediments at an estimated cost of $550 million. Additional cleanup work may be required depending on the results of these initial phases of work. Occidental Chemical Corporation (Occidental) has voluntarily commenced design of the cleanup plan for the Lower 8.3 miles, and has received an EPA Unilateral Administrative Order directing it to design the cleanup plan for the Upper 9 miles. It has filed two lawsuits against PSE&G and others to attempt to recover costs associated with this work and to obtain a declaratory judgement of parties’ shares of any future costs. PSEG cannot predict the outcome of the litigation. The EPA has announced a proposed settlement with 82 parties who have agreed to pay $150 million to resolve their LPRSA CERCLA liability, in whole or in part. It is uncertain whether the settlement will be finalized as currently proposed. PSE&G and PSEG Power are not included in the proposed settlement, but the EPA sent PSE&G, Occidental, and several other Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) a letter in March 2022 inviting them to submit to the EPA individually or jointly an offer to fund or participate in the next stages of the remediation. PSEG submitted a good faith offer to the EPA in June 2022 on behalf of PSE&G and PSEG Power. PSEG understands that the EPA is evaluating its offer. As of December 31, 2023, PSEG has approximately $66 million accrued for this matter. PSE&G has an Environmental Costs Liability of $53 million and a corresponding Regulatory Asset based on its continued ability to recover such costs in its rates. PSEG Power has an Environmental Costs Liability of $13 million. The outcome of this matter is uncertain, and until (i) a final remedy for the entire LPRSA is selected and an agreement is reached by the PRPs to fund it, (ii) PSE&G’s and PSEG Power’s respective shares of the costs are determined, and (iii) PSE&G’s ability to recover the costs in its rates is determined, it is not possible to predict this matter’s ultimate impact on PSEG’s financial statements. It is possible that PSE&G and PSEG Power will record additional costs beyond what they have accrued, and that such costs could be material, but PSEG cannot at the current time estimate the amount or range of any additional costs. Newark Bay Study Area The EPA has established the Newark Bay Study Area, which is an extension of the LPRSA and includes Newark Bay and portions of surrounding waterways. The EPA has notified PSEG and 21 other PRPs of their potential liability. PSE&G and PSEG Power are unable to estimate their respective portions of any loss or possible range of loss related to this matter. In December 2018, PSEG Power completed the sale of the site of the Hudson electric generating station. PSEG Power contractually transferred all land rights and structures on the Hudson site to a third-party purchaser, along with the assumption of the environmental liabilities for the site. Natural Resource Damage Claims New Jersey and certain federal regulators have alleged that PSE&G, PSEG Power and 56 other PRPs may be liable for natural resource damages within the LPRSA. In particular, PSE&G, PSEG Power and other PRPs received notice from federal regulators of the regulators’ intent to move forward with a series of studies assessing potential damages to natural resources at the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, which includes the LPRSA and the Newark Bay Study Area. PSE&G and PSEG Power are unable to estimate their respective portions of any possible loss or range of loss related to this matter. Hackensack River In 2022, the EPA announced it had designated approximately 23 river miles of the Lower Hackensack River as a federal Superfund site. PSE&G and certain of its predecessors conducted operations at properties in this area, including at the Hudson, Bergen and Kearny generating stations that were transferred to PSEG Power. PSEG Power subsequently contractually transferred all land rights and structures on the Hudson generating station site to a third-party purchaser, along with the assumption of the environmental liabilities for that site. In 2024, the EPA identified PSE&G and four other parties as PRPs for the site and requested that they voluntarily perform a technical study of a portion of the river designated as “Operable Unit 2.” The EPA estimates that the technical study will cost $55 million to complete. The EPA may take enforcement action against parties that do not cooperate. PSE&G and PSEG Power do not believe participation in the technical study will have a material impact on their results of operations and financial condition based upon EPA’s estimate of the study costs, however, future costs related to this matter could be material. MGP Remediation Program PSE&G is working with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to assess, investigate and remediate environmental conditions at its former MGP sites. To date, 38 sites requiring some level of remedial action have been identified. Based on its current studies, PSE&G has determined that the estimated cost to remediate all MGP sites to completion could range between $199 million and $219 million on an undiscounted basis, including its $53 million share for the Passaic River as discussed above. Since no amount within the range is considered to be most likely, PSE&G has recorded a liability of $199 million as of December 31, 2023. Of this amount, $52 million was recorded in Other Current Liabilities and $147 million was reflected as Environmental Costs in Noncurrent Liabilities. PSE&G has recorded a $199 million Regulatory Asset with respect to these costs. PSE&G periodically updates its studies taking into account any new regulations or new information which could impact future remediation costs and adjusts its recorded liability accordingly. PSE&G completed sampling in the Passaic River in 2020 to delineate coal tar from certain MGP sites that abut the Passaic River Superfund site. PSEG cannot determine at this time the magnitude of any impact on the Passaic River Superfund remedy. Legacy Environmental Obligations at Former Fossil Generating Sites PSEG Power has retained ownership of certain liabilities excluded from the 2022 sale of its fossil generation portfolio. These liabilities primarily relate to obligations under the New Jersey ISRA and the CTA to investigate and remediate PSEG Power’s two formerly owned generating station sites in Connecticut, and six formerly owned generating station sites in New Jersey. In addition, PSEG Power still owns two former generating station sites in New Jersey that triggered ISRA in 2015. PSEG Power is in the process of fulfilling its obligations under ISRA and the CTA to investigate these sites. It will require multiple years and comprehensive environmental sampling to understand the extent of and to carry out the required remediation. At this stage in the remediation process, the full remediation costs are not estimable, but given the number and operating history of the facilities in the portfolio, the full remediation costs will likely be material in the aggregate. The costs could potentially include costs for, among other things, excavating soil, implementation of institutional controls, and the construction, operation and maintenance of engineering controls. Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b) Rule The EPA’s CWA Section 316(b) rule establishes requirements for the design and operation of cooling water intake structures at existing power plants and industrial facilities with a design flow of more than two million gallons of water per day. In June 2016, the NJDEP issued a final New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for Salem. In July 2016, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (Riverkeeper) filed an administrative hearing request challenging certain conditions of the permit, including the NJDEP’s application of the 316(b) rule. If the Riverkeeper’s challenge is successful, PSEG Power may be required to incur additional costs to comply with the CWA. Potential cooling water and/or service water system modification costs could be material and could adversely impact the economic competitiveness of this facility. The NJDEP granted the hearing request and may schedule a hearing after considering dispositive motions. Jersey City, New Jersey Subsurface Feeder Cable Matter In October 2016, a discharge of dielectric fluid from subsurface feeder cables located in the Hudson River near Jersey City, New Jersey, was identified and reported to the NJDEP. The feeder cables are located within a subsurface easement granted to PSE&G by the property owners, Newport Associates Development Company (NADC) and Newport Associates Phase I Developer Limited Partnership. The feeder cables are subject to agreements between PSE&G and Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (Con Edison) and are jointly owned by PSE&G and Con Edison. The impacted cable was repaired in September 2017. A federal response was initially led by the U.S. Coast Guard. The U.S. Coast Guard transitioned control of the federal response to the EPA, and the EPA ended the federal response to the matter in 2018. The investigation of small amounts of residual dielectric fluid believed to be contained with the marina sediment is ongoing as part of the NJDEP site remediation program. In August 2020, PSE&G finalized a settlement with the federal government regarding the reimbursement of costs associated with the federal response to this matter and payment of civil penalties of an immaterial amount. The lawsuit in federal court to determine ultimate responsibility for the costs to address the leak among PSE&G, Con Edison and NADC has been resolved and is now dismissed. BGS, BGSS and ZECs Each year, PSE&G obtains its electric supply requirements through annual New Jersey BGS auctions for two categories of customers that choose not to purchase electric supply from third-party suppliers. The first category is residential and smaller commercial and industrial customers (BGS-Residential Small Commercial Pricing (RSCP)). The second category is larger customers that exceed a BPU-established load (kW) threshold (BGS-Commercial and Industrial Energy Pricing (CIEP)). Pursuant to applicable BPU rules, PSE&G enters into the Supplier Master Agreements with the winners of these RSCP and CIEP BGS auctions to purchase BGS for PSE&G’s load requirements. The winners of the RSCP and CIEP auctions are responsible for fulfilling all the requirements of a PJM load-serving entity including the provision of capacity, energy, ancillary services and any other services required by PJM. BGS suppliers assume all volume risk and customer migration risk and must satisfy New Jersey’s renewable portfolio standards. The BGS-CIEP auction is for a one-year supply period from June 1 to May 31 with the BGS-CIEP auction price measured in dollars per MW-day for capacity. The final price for the BGS-CIEP auction year commencing June 1, 2024 is $378.21 per MW-day, replacing the BGS-CIEP auction year price ending May 31, 2024 of $330.72 per MW-day. Energy for BGS-CIEP is priced at hourly PJM locational marginal prices for the contract period. PSE&G contracts for its anticipated BGS-RSCP load on a three-year rolling basis, whereby each year one-third of the load is procured for a three-year period. The contract prices in dollars per MWh for the BGS-RSCP supply, as well as the approximate load, are as follows:
|  | Auction Year |  |
|  | 2021 |  | 2022 |  | 2023 |  | 2024 |  |
| 36-Month Terms Ending | May 2024 |  | May 2025 |  | May 2026 |  | May 2027 | (A) |
| Load (MW) | 2,900 |  |  | 2,800 |  |  | 2,800 |  |  | 2,900 |  |  |
| $ per MWh | $64.80 |  | $76.30 |  | $93.11 |  | $80.88 |  |
(A)Prices set in the 2024 BGS auction will become effective on June 1, 2024 when the 2021 BGS auction agreements expire. PSE&G has a full-requirements contract with PSEG Power to meet the gas supply requirements of PSE&G’s gas customers. PSEG Power has entered into hedges for a portion of these anticipated BGSS obligations, as permitted by the BPU. The BPU permits PSE&G to recover the cost of gas hedging up to 115 billion cubic feet or 80% of its residential gas supply annual requirements through the BGSS tariff. Current plans call for PSEG Power to hedge on behalf of PSE&G approximately 70 billion cubic feet or 50% of its residential gas supply annual requirements. For additional information, see Note 24. Related-Party Transactions. Pursuant to a process established by the BPU, New Jersey EDCs, including PSE&G, are required to purchase ZECs from eligible nuclear plants selected by the BPU. In April 2019, PSEG Power’s Salem 1, Salem 2 and Hope Creek nuclear plants were selected to receive ZEC revenue for approximately three years, through May 2022. In April 2021, PSEG Power’s Salem 1, Salem 2 and Hope Creek nuclear plants were awarded ZECs for the three-year eligibility period starting June 2022. PSE&G has implemented a tariff to collect a non-bypassable distribution charge in the amount of $0.004 per KWh from its retail distribution customers to be used to purchase the ZECs from these plants. PSE&G will purchase the ZECs on a monthly basis with payment to be made annually following completion of each energy year. The legislation also requires nuclear plants to reapply for any subsequent three-year periods and allows the BPU to adjust prospective ZEC payments. Minimum Fuel Purchase Requirements PSEG Power’s nuclear fuel strategy is to maintain certain levels of uranium and to make periodic purchases to support such levels. As such, the commitments referred to in the following table may include estimated quantities to be purchased that deviate from contractual nominal quantities. PSEG Power’s minimum nuclear fuel commitments cover approximately 100% of its estimated uranium, enrichment and fabrication requirements through 2026 and a significant portion through 2027 at Salem, Hope Creek and Peach Bottom. PSEG Power has various multi-year contracts for natural gas and firm transportation and storage capacity for natural gas that are primarily used to meet its obligations to PSE&G. As of December 31, 2023, the total minimum purchase requirements included in these commitments were as follows:
| Fuel Type |  | PSEG Power’s Share of Commitments through 2028 |
|  |  | Millions |
| Nuclear Fuel |  |  |
| Uranium |  | $ | 392 |  |
| Enrichment |  | $ | 344 |  |
| Fabrication |  | $ | 185 |  |
| Natural Gas |  | $ | 1,329 |  |
Pending FERC Matters FERC has been conducting a non-public investigation of the Roseland-Pleasant Valley transmission project. In November 2021, FERC staff presented PSE&G with its non-public preliminary findings, alleging that PSE&G violated a FERC regulation. PSE&G disagrees with FERC staff’s allegations and believes it has factual and legal defenses that refute these allegations. PSE&G has the opportunity to respond to these preliminary findings. The matter is pending and the investigation is ongoing. PSE&G is unable to predict the outcome or estimate the range of possible loss related to this matter; however, depending on the success of PSE&G’s factual and legal arguments, the potential financial and other penalties that PSE&G may incur could be material to PSEG’s and PSE&G’s results of operations and financial condition. BPU Audit of PSE&G In 2020, the BPU ordered the commencement of a comprehensive affiliate and management audit of PSE&G. It has been more than ten years since the BPU last conducted a management and affiliate audit of this kind of PSE&G, which is initiated periodically as required by New Jersey statutes/regulations. Phase 1 of the audit reviews affiliate relations and cost allocation between PSE&G and its affiliates, including an analysis of the relationship between PSE&G and PSEG Energy Resources & Trade, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of PSEG Power over the past ten years, and between PSE&G and PSEG LI. Phase 2 is a comprehensive management audit, which addresses, among other things, executive management, corporate governance, system operations, human resources, cyber security, compliance with customer protection requirements and customer safety. The audit officially began in late May 2021. The BPU Audit Staff submitted the final audit report to the BPU in June 2023. The BPU is currently considering public comments on the audit report and has not yet determined which audit recommendations it will require PSE&G to implement. It is not possible at this time to predict the outcome of this matter. Litigation Sewaren 7 Construction In June 2018, a complaint was filed in federal court in Newark, New Jersey against PSEG Fossil LLC, which at the time was a wholly owned subsidiary of PSEG Power, regarding an ongoing dispute with Durr Mechanical Construction, Inc. (Durr), a contractor on the Sewaren 7 project. Among other things, Durr seeks damages of $93 million and alleges that PSEG Power withheld money owed to Durr and that PSEG Power’s intentional conduct led to the inability of Durr to obtain prospective contracts. PSEG Power intends to vigorously defend against these allegations. In January 2021, the court partially granted PSEG Power’s motion to dismiss certain claims, reducing the amount claimed to $68 million. In December 2018, Durr filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the federal court in the Southern District of New York (SDNY). The SDNY bankruptcy court has allowed the New Jersey litigation to proceed. PSEG Power has accrued an amount related to outstanding invoices which does not reflect an assessment of claims and potential counterclaims in this matter. Due to its preliminary nature, PSEG Power cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Other Litigation and Legal Proceedings PSEG and its subsidiaries are party to various lawsuits in the ordinary course of business. In view of the inherent difficulty in predicting the outcome of such matters, PSEG and PSE&G generally cannot predict the eventual outcome of the pending matters, the timing of the ultimate resolution of these matters, or the eventual loss, fines or penalties related to each pending matter. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, a liability is accrued when those matters present loss contingencies that are both probable and reasonably estimable. In such cases, there may be an exposure to loss in excess of any amounts accrued. PSEG will continue to monitor the matter for further developments that could affect the amount of the accrued liability that has been previously established. Based on current knowledge, management does not believe that loss contingencies arising from pending matters, other than the matters described herein, could have a material adverse effect on PSEG’s or PSE&G’s consolidated financial position or liquidity. However, in light of the inherent uncertainties involved in these matters, some of which are beyond PSEG’s control, and the large or indeterminate damages sought in some of these matters, an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be material to PSEG’s or PSE&G’s results of operations or liquidity for any particular reporting period. Nuclear Insurance Coverages and Assessments PSEG Power is a member of the joint underwriting association, American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), which provides nuclear liability insurance coverage at the Salem and Hope Creek site and the Peach Bottom site. The ANI policies are designed to satisfy the financial protection requirements outlined in the Price-Anderson Act, which sets the limit of liability for claims that could arise from an incident involving any licensed nuclear facility in the United States. The limit of liability per incident per site is composed of primary and excess layers. As of December 31, 2023, nuclear sites were required to purchase $450 million of primary liability coverage for each site through ANI. This coverage increased to $500 million effective January 1, 2024. The primary layer is supplemented by an excess layer, which is an industry self-insurance pool. In the event a nuclear site, which is part of the industry self-insurance pool, has a claim that exceeds the primary layer, each licensee would be assessed a prorated share of the excess layer. The excess layer limit is $15.8 billion. PSEG Power’s maximum aggregate assessment per incident is $522 million based on PSEG Power’s ownership interests in Salem, Hope Creek and Peach Bottom and its maximum aggregate annual assessment per incident is $78 million. If the damages exceed the limit of liability, Congress could impose further revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay claims. Further, a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, not involving PSEG Power, held that the Price-Anderson Act did not preclude punitive damage awards based on state law claims. PSEG Power is also a member of an industry mutual insurance company, Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), which provides the property, decontamination and decommissioning liability insurance at the Salem and Hope Creek site and the Peach Bottom site. NEIL also provides replacement power coverage through its accidental outage policy. NEIL policies may make retrospective premium assessments in the case of adverse loss experience. The current maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for PSEG Power is approximately $48 million. NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance. Certain provisions in the NEIL policies provide that the insurer may suspend coverage with respect to all nuclear units on a site without notice if the NRC suspends or revokes the operating license for any unit on that site, issues a shutdown order with respect to such unit or issues a confirmatory order keeping such unit down. The ANI and NEIL policies all include coverage for claims arising out of acts of terrorism. However, NEIL policies are subject to an industry aggregate limit of $3.24 billion plus such additional amounts as NEIL recovers for such losses from reinsurance, indemnity and any other source applicable to such losses.
Public Service Electric and Gas Company |
Other Commitments [Line Items] |
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities | Commitments and Contingent Liabilities Guaranteed Obligations PSEG Power’s activities primarily involve the purchase and sale of energy and related products under transportation, physical, financial and forward contracts at fixed and variable prices. These transactions are with numerous counterparties and brokers that may require cash, cash-related instruments or guarantees as a form of collateral. PSEG Power has unconditionally guaranteed payments to counterparties on behalf of its subsidiaries in commodity-related transactions in order to •support current exposure, interest and other costs on sums due and payable in the ordinary course of business, and •obtain credit. PSEG Power is subject to •counterparty collateral calls related to commodity contracts of its subsidiaries, and •certain creditworthiness standards as guarantor under performance guarantees of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements, guarantees cover lines of credit between entities and are often reciprocal in nature. The exposure between counterparties can move in either direction. In order for PSEG Power to incur a liability for the face value of the outstanding guarantees, •its subsidiaries would have to fully utilize the credit granted to them by every counterparty to whom PSEG Power has provided a guarantee, and •the net position of the related contracts would have to be “out-of-the-money” (if the contracts are terminated, PSEG Power would owe money to the counterparties). PSEG Power believes the probability of this result is unlikely. For this reason, PSEG Power believes that the current exposure at any point in time is a more meaningful representation of the potential liability under these guarantees. Current exposure consists of the net of accounts receivable and accounts payable and the forward value on open positions, less any collateral posted. Changes in commodity prices can have a material impact on collateral requirements under such contracts, which are posted and received primarily in the form of cash and letters of credit. PSEG Power also routinely enters into futures and options transactions for electricity and natural gas as part of its operations. These futures contracts usually require a cash margin deposit with brokers, which can change based on market movement and in accordance with exchange rules. In addition to the guarantees discussed above, PSEG Power has also provided payment guarantees to third parties and regulatory authorities on behalf of its affiliated companies. These guarantees support various other non-commodity related obligations. The following table shows the face value of PSEG Power’s outstanding guarantees, current exposure and margin positions as of December 31, 2023 and 2022.
|  |  | As of December 31, |
|  |  | 2023 |  | 2022 |
|  |  | Millions |
| Face Value of Outstanding Guarantees |  | $ | 1,381 |  |  | $ | 1,601 |  |
| Exposure under Current Guarantees |  | $ | 118 |  |  | $ | 198 |  |
| Letters of Credit Margin Posted |  | $ | 10 |  |  | $ | 87 |  |
| Letters of Credit Margin Received |  | $ | 91 |  |  | $ | 38 |  |
| Cash Deposited and Received |  |  |  |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Deposited |  | $ | — |  |  | $ | — |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Received |  | $ | (2) |  |  | $ | (1) |  |
| Net Broker Balance Deposited (Received) |  | $ | 115 |  |  | $ | 1,522 |  |
| Additional Amounts Posted |  |  |  |  |
| Other Letters of Credit |  | $ | 180 |  |  | $ | 156 |  |
As part of determining credit exposure, PSEG Power nets receivables and payables with the corresponding net fair values of energy contracts. See Note 16. Financial Risk Management Activities for further discussion. In accordance with PSEG’s accounting policy, where it is applicable, cash (received)/deposited is allocated against derivative asset and liability positions with the same counterparty on the face of the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The remaining balances of net cash (received)/deposited after allocation are generally included in Accounts Payable and Receivable, respectively. In addition to amounts for outstanding guarantees, current exposure and margin positions, PSEG and PSEG Power have posted letters of credit to support PSEG Power’s various other non-energy contractual and environmental obligations. See the preceding table. Environmental Matters Passaic River Lower Passaic River Study Area The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that a 17-mile stretch of the Passaic River (Lower Passaic River Study Area (LPRSA)) in New Jersey is a “Superfund” site under the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). PSE&G and certain of its predecessors conducted operations at properties in this area, including at one site that was transferred to PSEG Power. The EPA has announced two separate cleanup plans for the Lower 8.3 miles and Upper 9 miles of the LPRSA. The EPA’s plan for the Lower 8.3 miles involves dredging and capping sediments at an estimated cost of $2.3 billion, and its plan for the Upper 9 miles involves dredging and capping sediments at an estimated cost of $550 million. Additional cleanup work may be required depending on the results of these initial phases of work. Occidental Chemical Corporation (Occidental) has voluntarily commenced design of the cleanup plan for the Lower 8.3 miles, and has received an EPA Unilateral Administrative Order directing it to design the cleanup plan for the Upper 9 miles. It has filed two lawsuits against PSE&G and others to attempt to recover costs associated with this work and to obtain a declaratory judgement of parties’ shares of any future costs. PSEG cannot predict the outcome of the litigation. The EPA has announced a proposed settlement with 82 parties who have agreed to pay $150 million to resolve their LPRSA CERCLA liability, in whole or in part. It is uncertain whether the settlement will be finalized as currently proposed. PSE&G and PSEG Power are not included in the proposed settlement, but the EPA sent PSE&G, Occidental, and several other Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) a letter in March 2022 inviting them to submit to the EPA individually or jointly an offer to fund or participate in the next stages of the remediation. PSEG submitted a good faith offer to the EPA in June 2022 on behalf of PSE&G and PSEG Power. PSEG understands that the EPA is evaluating its offer. As of December 31, 2023, PSEG has approximately $66 million accrued for this matter. PSE&G has an Environmental Costs Liability of $53 million and a corresponding Regulatory Asset based on its continued ability to recover such costs in its rates. PSEG Power has an Environmental Costs Liability of $13 million. The outcome of this matter is uncertain, and until (i) a final remedy for the entire LPRSA is selected and an agreement is reached by the PRPs to fund it, (ii) PSE&G’s and PSEG Power’s respective shares of the costs are determined, and (iii) PSE&G’s ability to recover the costs in its rates is determined, it is not possible to predict this matter’s ultimate impact on PSEG’s financial statements. It is possible that PSE&G and PSEG Power will record additional costs beyond what they have accrued, and that such costs could be material, but PSEG cannot at the current time estimate the amount or range of any additional costs. Newark Bay Study Area The EPA has established the Newark Bay Study Area, which is an extension of the LPRSA and includes Newark Bay and portions of surrounding waterways. The EPA has notified PSEG and 21 other PRPs of their potential liability. PSE&G and PSEG Power are unable to estimate their respective portions of any loss or possible range of loss related to this matter. In December 2018, PSEG Power completed the sale of the site of the Hudson electric generating station. PSEG Power contractually transferred all land rights and structures on the Hudson site to a third-party purchaser, along with the assumption of the environmental liabilities for the site. Natural Resource Damage Claims New Jersey and certain federal regulators have alleged that PSE&G, PSEG Power and 56 other PRPs may be liable for natural resource damages within the LPRSA. In particular, PSE&G, PSEG Power and other PRPs received notice from federal regulators of the regulators’ intent to move forward with a series of studies assessing potential damages to natural resources at the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, which includes the LPRSA and the Newark Bay Study Area. PSE&G and PSEG Power are unable to estimate their respective portions of any possible loss or range of loss related to this matter. Hackensack River In 2022, the EPA announced it had designated approximately 23 river miles of the Lower Hackensack River as a federal Superfund site. PSE&G and certain of its predecessors conducted operations at properties in this area, including at the Hudson, Bergen and Kearny generating stations that were transferred to PSEG Power. PSEG Power subsequently contractually transferred all land rights and structures on the Hudson generating station site to a third-party purchaser, along with the assumption of the environmental liabilities for that site. In 2024, the EPA identified PSE&G and four other parties as PRPs for the site and requested that they voluntarily perform a technical study of a portion of the river designated as “Operable Unit 2.” The EPA estimates that the technical study will cost $55 million to complete. The EPA may take enforcement action against parties that do not cooperate. PSE&G and PSEG Power do not believe participation in the technical study will have a material impact on their results of operations and financial condition based upon EPA’s estimate of the study costs, however, future costs related to this matter could be material. MGP Remediation Program PSE&G is working with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to assess, investigate and remediate environmental conditions at its former MGP sites. To date, 38 sites requiring some level of remedial action have been identified. Based on its current studies, PSE&G has determined that the estimated cost to remediate all MGP sites to completion could range between $199 million and $219 million on an undiscounted basis, including its $53 million share for the Passaic River as discussed above. Since no amount within the range is considered to be most likely, PSE&G has recorded a liability of $199 million as of December 31, 2023. Of this amount, $52 million was recorded in Other Current Liabilities and $147 million was reflected as Environmental Costs in Noncurrent Liabilities. PSE&G has recorded a $199 million Regulatory Asset with respect to these costs. PSE&G periodically updates its studies taking into account any new regulations or new information which could impact future remediation costs and adjusts its recorded liability accordingly. PSE&G completed sampling in the Passaic River in 2020 to delineate coal tar from certain MGP sites that abut the Passaic River Superfund site. PSEG cannot determine at this time the magnitude of any impact on the Passaic River Superfund remedy. Legacy Environmental Obligations at Former Fossil Generating Sites PSEG Power has retained ownership of certain liabilities excluded from the 2022 sale of its fossil generation portfolio. These liabilities primarily relate to obligations under the New Jersey ISRA and the CTA to investigate and remediate PSEG Power’s two formerly owned generating station sites in Connecticut, and six formerly owned generating station sites in New Jersey. In addition, PSEG Power still owns two former generating station sites in New Jersey that triggered ISRA in 2015. PSEG Power is in the process of fulfilling its obligations under ISRA and the CTA to investigate these sites. It will require multiple years and comprehensive environmental sampling to understand the extent of and to carry out the required remediation. At this stage in the remediation process, the full remediation costs are not estimable, but given the number and operating history of the facilities in the portfolio, the full remediation costs will likely be material in the aggregate. The costs could potentially include costs for, among other things, excavating soil, implementation of institutional controls, and the construction, operation and maintenance of engineering controls. Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b) Rule The EPA’s CWA Section 316(b) rule establishes requirements for the design and operation of cooling water intake structures at existing power plants and industrial facilities with a design flow of more than two million gallons of water per day. In June 2016, the NJDEP issued a final New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for Salem. In July 2016, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (Riverkeeper) filed an administrative hearing request challenging certain conditions of the permit, including the NJDEP’s application of the 316(b) rule. If the Riverkeeper’s challenge is successful, PSEG Power may be required to incur additional costs to comply with the CWA. Potential cooling water and/or service water system modification costs could be material and could adversely impact the economic competitiveness of this facility. The NJDEP granted the hearing request and may schedule a hearing after considering dispositive motions. Jersey City, New Jersey Subsurface Feeder Cable Matter In October 2016, a discharge of dielectric fluid from subsurface feeder cables located in the Hudson River near Jersey City, New Jersey, was identified and reported to the NJDEP. The feeder cables are located within a subsurface easement granted to PSE&G by the property owners, Newport Associates Development Company (NADC) and Newport Associates Phase I Developer Limited Partnership. The feeder cables are subject to agreements between PSE&G and Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (Con Edison) and are jointly owned by PSE&G and Con Edison. The impacted cable was repaired in September 2017. A federal response was initially led by the U.S. Coast Guard. The U.S. Coast Guard transitioned control of the federal response to the EPA, and the EPA ended the federal response to the matter in 2018. The investigation of small amounts of residual dielectric fluid believed to be contained with the marina sediment is ongoing as part of the NJDEP site remediation program. In August 2020, PSE&G finalized a settlement with the federal government regarding the reimbursement of costs associated with the federal response to this matter and payment of civil penalties of an immaterial amount. The lawsuit in federal court to determine ultimate responsibility for the costs to address the leak among PSE&G, Con Edison and NADC has been resolved and is now dismissed. BGS, BGSS and ZECs Each year, PSE&G obtains its electric supply requirements through annual New Jersey BGS auctions for two categories of customers that choose not to purchase electric supply from third-party suppliers. The first category is residential and smaller commercial and industrial customers (BGS-Residential Small Commercial Pricing (RSCP)). The second category is larger customers that exceed a BPU-established load (kW) threshold (BGS-Commercial and Industrial Energy Pricing (CIEP)). Pursuant to applicable BPU rules, PSE&G enters into the Supplier Master Agreements with the winners of these RSCP and CIEP BGS auctions to purchase BGS for PSE&G’s load requirements. The winners of the RSCP and CIEP auctions are responsible for fulfilling all the requirements of a PJM load-serving entity including the provision of capacity, energy, ancillary services and any other services required by PJM. BGS suppliers assume all volume risk and customer migration risk and must satisfy New Jersey’s renewable portfolio standards. The BGS-CIEP auction is for a one-year supply period from June 1 to May 31 with the BGS-CIEP auction price measured in dollars per MW-day for capacity. The final price for the BGS-CIEP auction year commencing June 1, 2024 is $378.21 per MW-day, replacing the BGS-CIEP auction year price ending May 31, 2024 of $330.72 per MW-day. Energy for BGS-CIEP is priced at hourly PJM locational marginal prices for the contract period. PSE&G contracts for its anticipated BGS-RSCP load on a three-year rolling basis, whereby each year one-third of the load is procured for a three-year period. The contract prices in dollars per MWh for the BGS-RSCP supply, as well as the approximate load, are as follows:
|  | Auction Year |  |
|  | 2021 |  | 2022 |  | 2023 |  | 2024 |  |
| 36-Month Terms Ending | May 2024 |  | May 2025 |  | May 2026 |  | May 2027 | (A) |
| Load (MW) | 2,900 |  |  | 2,800 |  |  | 2,800 |  |  | 2,900 |  |  |
| $ per MWh | $64.80 |  | $76.30 |  | $93.11 |  | $80.88 |  |
(A)Prices set in the 2024 BGS auction will become effective on June 1, 2024 when the 2021 BGS auction agreements expire. PSE&G has a full-requirements contract with PSEG Power to meet the gas supply requirements of PSE&G’s gas customers. PSEG Power has entered into hedges for a portion of these anticipated BGSS obligations, as permitted by the BPU. The BPU permits PSE&G to recover the cost of gas hedging up to 115 billion cubic feet or 80% of its residential gas supply annual requirements through the BGSS tariff. Current plans call for PSEG Power to hedge on behalf of PSE&G approximately 70 billion cubic feet or 50% of its residential gas supply annual requirements. For additional information, see Note 24. Related-Party Transactions. Pursuant to a process established by the BPU, New Jersey EDCs, including PSE&G, are required to purchase ZECs from eligible nuclear plants selected by the BPU. In April 2019, PSEG Power’s Salem 1, Salem 2 and Hope Creek nuclear plants were selected to receive ZEC revenue for approximately three years, through May 2022. In April 2021, PSEG Power’s Salem 1, Salem 2 and Hope Creek nuclear plants were awarded ZECs for the three-year eligibility period starting June 2022. PSE&G has implemented a tariff to collect a non-bypassable distribution charge in the amount of $0.004 per KWh from its retail distribution customers to be used to purchase the ZECs from these plants. PSE&G will purchase the ZECs on a monthly basis with payment to be made annually following completion of each energy year. The legislation also requires nuclear plants to reapply for any subsequent three-year periods and allows the BPU to adjust prospective ZEC payments. Minimum Fuel Purchase Requirements PSEG Power’s nuclear fuel strategy is to maintain certain levels of uranium and to make periodic purchases to support such levels. As such, the commitments referred to in the following table may include estimated quantities to be purchased that deviate from contractual nominal quantities. PSEG Power’s minimum nuclear fuel commitments cover approximately 100% of its estimated uranium, enrichment and fabrication requirements through 2026 and a significant portion through 2027 at Salem, Hope Creek and Peach Bottom. PSEG Power has various multi-year contracts for natural gas and firm transportation and storage capacity for natural gas that are primarily used to meet its obligations to PSE&G. As of December 31, 2023, the total minimum purchase requirements included in these commitments were as follows:
| Fuel Type |  | PSEG Power’s Share of Commitments through 2028 |
|  |  | Millions |
| Nuclear Fuel |  |  |
| Uranium |  | $ | 392 |  |
| Enrichment |  | $ | 344 |  |
| Fabrication |  | $ | 185 |  |
| Natural Gas |  | $ | 1,329 |  |
Pending FERC Matters FERC has been conducting a non-public investigation of the Roseland-Pleasant Valley transmission project. In November 2021, FERC staff presented PSE&G with its non-public preliminary findings, alleging that PSE&G violated a FERC regulation. PSE&G disagrees with FERC staff’s allegations and believes it has factual and legal defenses that refute these allegations. PSE&G has the opportunity to respond to these preliminary findings. The matter is pending and the investigation is ongoing. PSE&G is unable to predict the outcome or estimate the range of possible loss related to this matter; however, depending on the success of PSE&G’s factual and legal arguments, the potential financial and other penalties that PSE&G may incur could be material to PSEG’s and PSE&G’s results of operations and financial condition. BPU Audit of PSE&G In 2020, the BPU ordered the commencement of a comprehensive affiliate and management audit of PSE&G. It has been more than ten years since the BPU last conducted a management and affiliate audit of this kind of PSE&G, which is initiated periodically as required by New Jersey statutes/regulations. Phase 1 of the audit reviews affiliate relations and cost allocation between PSE&G and its affiliates, including an analysis of the relationship between PSE&G and PSEG Energy Resources & Trade, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of PSEG Power over the past ten years, and between PSE&G and PSEG LI. Phase 2 is a comprehensive management audit, which addresses, among other things, executive management, corporate governance, system operations, human resources, cyber security, compliance with customer protection requirements and customer safety. The audit officially began in late May 2021. The BPU Audit Staff submitted the final audit report to the BPU in June 2023. The BPU is currently considering public comments on the audit report and has not yet determined which audit recommendations it will require PSE&G to implement. It is not possible at this time to predict the outcome of this matter. Litigation Sewaren 7 Construction In June 2018, a complaint was filed in federal court in Newark, New Jersey against PSEG Fossil LLC, which at the time was a wholly owned subsidiary of PSEG Power, regarding an ongoing dispute with Durr Mechanical Construction, Inc. (Durr), a contractor on the Sewaren 7 project. Among other things, Durr seeks damages of $93 million and alleges that PSEG Power withheld money owed to Durr and that PSEG Power’s intentional conduct led to the inability of Durr to obtain prospective contracts. PSEG Power intends to vigorously defend against these allegations. In January 2021, the court partially granted PSEG Power’s motion to dismiss certain claims, reducing the amount claimed to $68 million. In December 2018, Durr filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the federal court in the Southern District of New York (SDNY). The SDNY bankruptcy court has allowed the New Jersey litigation to proceed. PSEG Power has accrued an amount related to outstanding invoices which does not reflect an assessment of claims and potential counterclaims in this matter. Due to its preliminary nature, PSEG Power cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Other Litigation and Legal Proceedings PSEG and its subsidiaries are party to various lawsuits in the ordinary course of business. In view of the inherent difficulty in predicting the outcome of such matters, PSEG and PSE&G generally cannot predict the eventual outcome of the pending matters, the timing of the ultimate resolution of these matters, or the eventual loss, fines or penalties related to each pending matter. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, a liability is accrued when those matters present loss contingencies that are both probable and reasonably estimable. In such cases, there may be an exposure to loss in excess of any amounts accrued. PSEG will continue to monitor the matter for further developments that could affect the amount of the accrued liability that has been previously established. Based on current knowledge, management does not believe that loss contingencies arising from pending matters, other than the matters described herein, could have a material adverse effect on PSEG’s or PSE&G’s consolidated financial position or liquidity. However, in light of the inherent uncertainties involved in these matters, some of which are beyond PSEG’s control, and the large or indeterminate damages sought in some of these matters, an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be material to PSEG’s or PSE&G’s results of operations or liquidity for any particular reporting period. Nuclear Insurance Coverages and Assessments PSEG Power is a member of the joint underwriting association, American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), which provides nuclear liability insurance coverage at the Salem and Hope Creek site and the Peach Bottom site. The ANI policies are designed to satisfy the financial protection requirements outlined in the Price-Anderson Act, which sets the limit of liability for claims that could arise from an incident involving any licensed nuclear facility in the United States. The limit of liability per incident per site is composed of primary and excess layers. As of December 31, 2023, nuclear sites were required to purchase $450 million of primary liability coverage for each site through ANI. This coverage increased to $500 million effective January 1, 2024. The primary layer is supplemented by an excess layer, which is an industry self-insurance pool. In the event a nuclear site, which is part of the industry self-insurance pool, has a claim that exceeds the primary layer, each licensee would be assessed a prorated share of the excess layer. The excess layer limit is $15.8 billion. PSEG Power’s maximum aggregate assessment per incident is $522 million based on PSEG Power’s ownership interests in Salem, Hope Creek and Peach Bottom and its maximum aggregate annual assessment per incident is $78 million. If the damages exceed the limit of liability, Congress could impose further revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay claims. Further, a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, not involving PSEG Power, held that the Price-Anderson Act did not preclude punitive damage awards based on state law claims. PSEG Power is also a member of an industry mutual insurance company, Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), which provides the property, decontamination and decommissioning liability insurance at the Salem and Hope Creek site and the Peach Bottom site. NEIL also provides replacement power coverage through its accidental outage policy. NEIL policies may make retrospective premium assessments in the case of adverse loss experience. The current maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for PSEG Power is approximately $48 million. NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance. Certain provisions in the NEIL policies provide that the insurer may suspend coverage with respect to all nuclear units on a site without notice if the NRC suspends or revokes the operating license for any unit on that site, issues a shutdown order with respect to such unit or issues a confirmatory order keeping such unit down. The ANI and NEIL policies all include coverage for claims arising out of acts of terrorism. However, NEIL policies are subject to an industry aggregate limit of $3.24 billion plus such additional amounts as NEIL recovers for such losses from reinsurance, indemnity and any other source applicable to such losses.

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//450/tableOfContent Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147480327/954-440-50-1 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 5: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition Line items represent financial concepts included in a table. These concepts are used to disclose reportable information associated with domain members defined in one or many axes to the table. + References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_OtherCommitmentsLineItems
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

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