XML 30 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.25.3

Commitments and Contingent Liabilities | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2025
Loss Contingencies [Line Items] |
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities | Note 8. Co mmitments and Contingent Liabilities Guaranteed Obligations PSEG Power’s activities primarily involve the purchase and/or sale of energy, nuclear fuel and other 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, letters of credit or guarantees as a form of credit support. 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 unsecured credit thresholds from counterparties. PSEG Power is subject to • counterparty collateral calls due to margining provisions included in commodity contracts, and • certain creditworthiness standards as guarantor under performance guarantees of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements, guarantees cover credit extended between entities and is 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 primarily for electricity as part of its operations and for natural gas from time to time. 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 September 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024.
|  |  | As of |  |  | As of |  |
|  |  | September 30, 2025 |  |  | December 31, 2024 |  |
|  |  | Millions |  |
| Face Value of Outstanding Guarantees |  | $ | 1,019 |  |  | $ | 1,272 |  |
| Exposure under Current Guarantees |  | $ | 57 |  |  | $ | 47 |  |
| Letters of Credit - Counterparty Margining Posted |  | $ | 19 |  |  | $ | 4 |  |
| Letters of Credit - Counterparty Margining Received |  | $ | 23 |  |  | $ | 24 |  |
| Cash Deposited and Received |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Deposited |  | $ | — |  |  | $ | — |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Received |  | $ | — |  |  | $ | (1 | ) |
| Net Broker Balance Deposited (Received) |  | $ | 107 |  |  | $ | 245 |  |
| Additional Amounts Posted |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Other Letters of Credit |  | $ | 232 |  |  | $ | 155 |  |
As part of determining credit exposure, PSEG Power nets receivables and payables with the corresponding net fair values of energy contracts. See Note 10. 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 Condensed 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 Other Letters of Credit in 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 completed the 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 judgment of parties’ shares of any future costs. PSEG cannot predict the outcome of the litigation. The EPA finalized and received court approval of a settlement with 82 parties who have agreed to pay $150 million to resolve their LPRSA CERCLA liability, in whole or in part. This settlement is being appealed. PSE&G and PSEG Power are not included in the 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 September 30, 2025, 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 EPA has designated approximately 23 river miles of the Lower Hackensack River as a federal Superfund site. The site runs from the river's confluence with Newark Bay north to the Oradell Dam. 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 Lower Hackensack River designated as “Operable Unit 2.” PSE&G and PSEG Power have agreed to participate in the technical study. 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; however, future costs related to this matter could be material. In September 2025, the EPA identified PSE&G and three other parties as PRPs for a new portion of the Lower Hackensack River. EPA requested the PRPs voluntarily perform a technical study for this incremental portion designated as “Operable Unit 3.” PSE&G and PSEG Power are considering the EPA’s request. We cannot predict the outcome of this matter. 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 $186 million and $203 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 $186 million as of September 30, 2025. Of this amount, $24 million was recorded in Other Current Liabilities and $162 million was reflected as Environmental Costs in Noncurrent Liabilities. PSE&G has recorded a $186 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 Industrial Site Recovery Act (ISRA) and the Connecticut Transfer Act (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 the New Jersey 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. In May 2024, the EPA finalized revisions to the coal combustion residuals rule (CCR Rule) which established new requirements for the investigation and, if necessary, the cleanup of certain types of coal ash placed at certain fossil generation station sites, including certain sites owned or formerly owned by PSEG Power. PSEG is in the process of investigating each of the sites that PSEG Power currently owns that are subject to the CCR Rule, as well as sites that were formerly owned that are subject to the CCR Rule where PSEG Power retained certain environmental obligations to investigate and, if necessary, remediate. PSEG is currently unable to estimate the impact of the CCR Rule, but it could have a material impact on PSEG’s business, results of operations and cash flows. 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. In November 2024, Riverkeeper’s administrative hearing request was denied by an Administrative Law Judge. The NJDEP Commissioner has adopted the Administrative Law Judge’s decision to deny the request. Basic Generation Service (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. As such, prices set through these auctions are impacted by FERC-approved prices set in the PJM capacity auctions, which significantly increased for the 2025/2026 auction year. See Note 2. Revenues for additional information. 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, 2025 is $696.05 per MW-day, replacing the BGS-CIEP auction year price ending May 31, 2025 of $378.21 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 |  |  |
|  |  | 2022 |  |  | 2023 |  |  | 2024 |  |  | 2025 |  |  |
| 36-Month Terms Ending |  | May 2025 |  |  | May 2026 |  |  | May 2027 |  |  | May 2028 |  | (A) |
| Load (MW) |  |  | 2,800 |  |  |  | 2,800 |  |  |  | 2,900 |  |  |  | 2,800 |  |  |
| $ per MWh |  | $ | 76.30 |  |  | $ | 93.11 |  |  | $ | 80.88 |  |  | $ | 107.36 |  |  |
(A) Prices set in the 2025 BGS auction became effective on June 1, 2025 when the 2022 BGS auction agreements expired. 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 17. Related-Party Transactions. Pursuant to a process established by the BPU, New Jersey EDCs, including PSE&G, were required to purchase ZECs from eligible nuclear plants selected by the BPU. In April 2021, PSEG Power’s Salem 1, Salem 2 and Hope Creek nuclear plants were awarded ZECs for the three-year eligibility period from June 2022 through May 2025. PSE&G purchased the ZECs on a monthly basis with payment to be made annually following completion of each energy year. The ZEC program ended effective June 1, 2025, and the final ZEC payment from PSE&G to PSEG Power settled in August 2025. FERC Matters FERC has completed a non-public investigation of the Roseland-Pleasant Valley (RPV) transmission project. In December 2024, FERC approved an agreement between PSE&G and FERC Enforcement Staff resolving its investigation. The agreement included a $6.6 million civil penalty and the implementation of certain compliance requirements, in addition to the process improvements that PSE&G has already implemented. It also included a statement that nothing in the agreement reflected a challenge by FERC Enforcement to the end-of-life determination relative to the project and that no disgorgement had been sought. In a December 2024 proceeding related to PJM’s annual cost allocation filing, an intervenor raised an objection related to the recovery of costs for the RPV project. FERC issued an order declining to take action with respect to the intervenor’s objection. In June 2025, this intervenor again raised the same objection relating to the recovery of costs for the RPV project in connection with PSE&G’s true-up filing for rate year 2024. PSEG cannot predict the outcome of this matter. 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 sought 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. At this time, PSEG Power cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Sherman Act Antitrust Matter In July 2025, a putative class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland against 26 nuclear generation power companies, including PSEG, and two consulting companies. The plaintiffs allege defendants violated federal antitrust laws by conspiring to fix the compensation and exchange information regarding compensation for nuclear generation workers. The alleged class includes all persons employed in nuclear power generation by the defendants and their subsidiaries from 2003 until the present, and the relief sought includes treble damages. PSEG 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.
Public Service Electric and Gas Company [Member] |
Loss Contingencies [Line Items] |
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities | Note 8. Co mmitments and Contingent Liabilities Guaranteed Obligations PSEG Power’s activities primarily involve the purchase and/or sale of energy, nuclear fuel and other 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, letters of credit or guarantees as a form of credit support. 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 unsecured credit thresholds from counterparties. PSEG Power is subject to • counterparty collateral calls due to margining provisions included in commodity contracts, and • certain creditworthiness standards as guarantor under performance guarantees of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements, guarantees cover credit extended between entities and is 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 primarily for electricity as part of its operations and for natural gas from time to time. 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 September 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024.
|  |  | As of |  |  | As of |  |
|  |  | September 30, 2025 |  |  | December 31, 2024 |  |
|  |  | Millions |  |
| Face Value of Outstanding Guarantees |  | $ | 1,019 |  |  | $ | 1,272 |  |
| Exposure under Current Guarantees |  | $ | 57 |  |  | $ | 47 |  |
| Letters of Credit - Counterparty Margining Posted |  | $ | 19 |  |  | $ | 4 |  |
| Letters of Credit - Counterparty Margining Received |  | $ | 23 |  |  | $ | 24 |  |
| Cash Deposited and Received |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Deposited |  | $ | — |  |  | $ | — |  |
| Counterparty Cash Collateral Received |  | $ | — |  |  | $ | (1 | ) |
| Net Broker Balance Deposited (Received) |  | $ | 107 |  |  | $ | 245 |  |
| Additional Amounts Posted |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Other Letters of Credit |  | $ | 232 |  |  | $ | 155 |  |
As part of determining credit exposure, PSEG Power nets receivables and payables with the corresponding net fair values of energy contracts. See Note 10. 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 Condensed 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 Other Letters of Credit in 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 completed the 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 judgment of parties’ shares of any future costs. PSEG cannot predict the outcome of the litigation. The EPA finalized and received court approval of a settlement with 82 parties who have agreed to pay $150 million to resolve their LPRSA CERCLA liability, in whole or in part. This settlement is being appealed. PSE&G and PSEG Power are not included in the 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 September 30, 2025, 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 EPA has designated approximately 23 river miles of the Lower Hackensack River as a federal Superfund site. The site runs from the river's confluence with Newark Bay north to the Oradell Dam. 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 Lower Hackensack River designated as “Operable Unit 2.” PSE&G and PSEG Power have agreed to participate in the technical study. 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; however, future costs related to this matter could be material. In September 2025, the EPA identified PSE&G and three other parties as PRPs for a new portion of the Lower Hackensack River. EPA requested the PRPs voluntarily perform a technical study for this incremental portion designated as “Operable Unit 3.” PSE&G and PSEG Power are considering the EPA’s request. We cannot predict the outcome of this matter. 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 $186 million and $203 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 $186 million as of September 30, 2025. Of this amount, $24 million was recorded in Other Current Liabilities and $162 million was reflected as Environmental Costs in Noncurrent Liabilities. PSE&G has recorded a $186 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 Industrial Site Recovery Act (ISRA) and the Connecticut Transfer Act (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 the New Jersey 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. In May 2024, the EPA finalized revisions to the coal combustion residuals rule (CCR Rule) which established new requirements for the investigation and, if necessary, the cleanup of certain types of coal ash placed at certain fossil generation station sites, including certain sites owned or formerly owned by PSEG Power. PSEG is in the process of investigating each of the sites that PSEG Power currently owns that are subject to the CCR Rule, as well as sites that were formerly owned that are subject to the CCR Rule where PSEG Power retained certain environmental obligations to investigate and, if necessary, remediate. PSEG is currently unable to estimate the impact of the CCR Rule, but it could have a material impact on PSEG’s business, results of operations and cash flows. 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. In November 2024, Riverkeeper’s administrative hearing request was denied by an Administrative Law Judge. The NJDEP Commissioner has adopted the Administrative Law Judge’s decision to deny the request. Basic Generation Service (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. As such, prices set through these auctions are impacted by FERC-approved prices set in the PJM capacity auctions, which significantly increased for the 2025/2026 auction year. See Note 2. Revenues for additional information. 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, 2025 is $696.05 per MW-day, replacing the BGS-CIEP auction year price ending May 31, 2025 of $378.21 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 |  |  |
|  |  | 2022 |  |  | 2023 |  |  | 2024 |  |  | 2025 |  |  |
| 36-Month Terms Ending |  | May 2025 |  |  | May 2026 |  |  | May 2027 |  |  | May 2028 |  | (A) |
| Load (MW) |  |  | 2,800 |  |  |  | 2,800 |  |  |  | 2,900 |  |  |  | 2,800 |  |  |
| $ per MWh |  | $ | 76.30 |  |  | $ | 93.11 |  |  | $ | 80.88 |  |  | $ | 107.36 |  |  |
(A) Prices set in the 2025 BGS auction became effective on June 1, 2025 when the 2022 BGS auction agreements expired. 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 17. Related-Party Transactions. Pursuant to a process established by the BPU, New Jersey EDCs, including PSE&G, were required to purchase ZECs from eligible nuclear plants selected by the BPU. In April 2021, PSEG Power’s Salem 1, Salem 2 and Hope Creek nuclear plants were awarded ZECs for the three-year eligibility period from June 2022 through May 2025. PSE&G purchased the ZECs on a monthly basis with payment to be made annually following completion of each energy year. The ZEC program ended effective June 1, 2025, and the final ZEC payment from PSE&G to PSEG Power settled in August 2025. FERC Matters FERC has completed a non-public investigation of the Roseland-Pleasant Valley (RPV) transmission project. In December 2024, FERC approved an agreement between PSE&G and FERC Enforcement Staff resolving its investigation. The agreement included a $6.6 million civil penalty and the implementation of certain compliance requirements, in addition to the process improvements that PSE&G has already implemented. It also included a statement that nothing in the agreement reflected a challenge by FERC Enforcement to the end-of-life determination relative to the project and that no disgorgement had been sought. In a December 2024 proceeding related to PJM’s annual cost allocation filing, an intervenor raised an objection related to the recovery of costs for the RPV project. FERC issued an order declining to take action with respect to the intervenor’s objection. In June 2025, this intervenor again raised the same objection relating to the recovery of costs for the RPV project in connection with PSE&G’s true-up filing for rate year 2024. PSEG cannot predict the outcome of this matter. 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 sought 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. At this time, PSEG Power cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Sherman Act Antitrust Matter In July 2025, a putative class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland against 26 nuclear generation power companies, including PSEG, and two consulting companies. The plaintiffs allege defendants violated federal antitrust laws by conspiring to fix the compensation and exchange information regarding compensation for nuclear generation workers. The alleged class includes all persons employed in nuclear power generation by the defendants and their subsidiaries from 2003 until the present, and the relief sought includes treble damages. PSEG 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.

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 405 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/405-30/tableOfContent Reference 2: 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 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 4: 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/1943274/2147478522/954-440-50-1 Reference 5: 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 6: 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 Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 275 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 9 -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482861/275-10-50-9 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-4 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 9 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-9 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 720 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147483359/720-20-50-1 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/exampleRef -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 55 -Paragraph 27 -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482395/460-10-55-27 Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 9 -Subparagraph (b) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-9 Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (b) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-4 Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 3 -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482425/460-10-50-3 Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-1 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_LossContingenciesLineItems
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

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