Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies This footnote should be read in conjunction with the complete description under Note 22, Commitments and Contingencies, to the Company's 2017 Form 10-K. Commitments First Lien Structure — NRG has granted first liens to certain counterparties on a substantial portion of the Company's assets, excluding assets acquired in the GenOn and EME (including Midwest Generation) acquisitions, and NRG's assets that have project-level financing, to reduce the amount of cash collateral and letters of credit that it would otherwise be required to post from time to time to support its obligations under out-of-the-money hedge agreements for forward sales of power or MWh equivalents. The Company's lien counterparties may have a claim on NRG's assets to the extent market prices exceed the hedged price. As of September 30, 2018, hedges under the first lien were in-the-money for NRG on a counterparty aggregate basis. Lignite Contract with Texas Westmoreland Coal Co. — The Company's Limestone facility historically blended lignite obtained from the Jewett mine, which was operated by Texas Westmoreland Coal Co, or TWCC, and coal sourced from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming. On August 18, 2016, NRG gave notice to TWCC terminating the active mining of lignite under the contract, effective on December 31, 2016. Under the contract, TWCC continues to be responsible for reclamation activities. NRG is responsible for reclamation costs and has recorded an adequate ARO liability. The Railroad Commission of Texas has imposed a bond obligation of $99 million on TWCC for the reclamation of the mine. Pursuant to the contract with TWCC, NRG supports this obligation through surety bonds. Additionally, NRG is obligated to provide additional performance assurance if required by the Railroad Commission of Texas. On October 9, 2018, TWCC and certain of its affiliates filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code before the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas. TWCC has obtained authorization from the bankruptcy court to continue to perform its obligations under its contract with the Company and to maintain surety bonds programs throughout its operations. In addition, NRG has not received any indication from the Railroad Commission of Texas of an intent to draw on the surety bonds. However, given the uncertainty involved in bankruptcy proceedings, it is uncertain whether and to what extent TWCC’s bankruptcy may in the future impact the reclamation costs incurred by NRG or the surety bonds. Contingencies The Company's material legal proceedings are described below. The Company believes that it has valid defenses to these legal proceedings and intends to defend them vigorously. NRG records reserves for estimated losses from contingencies when information available indicates that a loss is probable and the amount of the loss, or range of loss, can be reasonably estimated. As applicable, the Company has established an adequate reserve for the matters discussed below. In addition, legal costs are expensed as incurred. Management has assessed each of the following matters based on current information and made a judgment concerning its potential outcome, considering the nature of the claim, the amount and nature of damages sought, and the probability of success. Unless specified below, the Company is unable to predict the outcome of these legal proceedings or reasonably estimate the scope or amount of any associated costs and potential liabilities. As additional information becomes available, management adjusts its assessment and estimates of such contingencies accordingly. Because litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings or developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of the Company's liabilities and contingencies could be at amounts that are different from its currently recorded reserves and that such difference could be material. In addition to the legal proceedings noted below, NRG and its subsidiaries are party to other litigation or legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. In management's opinion, the disposition of these ordinary course matters will not materially adversely affect NRG's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Midwest Generation Asbestos Liabilities — The Company, through its subsidiary, Midwest Generation, may be subject to potential asbestos liabilities as a result of its acquisition of EME. The Company is currently analyzing the scope of potential liability as it may relate to Midwest Generation. The Company believes that it has established an adequate reserve for these cases. On March 27, 2018, ComEd filed a Motion to Compel Payments of Claims seeking $61 million related to asbestos liabilities. On April 25, 2018, NRG filed an Omnibus Objection to All Remaining Claims of ComEd and Exelon. A trial before the Bankruptcy Court to determine the amount of ComEd’s claims is currently scheduled for April 10, 2019. Telephone Consumer Protection Act Purported Class Actions — Three purported class action lawsuits have been filed against NRG Residential Solar Solutions, LLC — one in California and two in New Jersey. The plaintiffs generally allege misrepresentation by the call agents and violations of the TCPA, claiming that the defendants engaged in a telemarketing campaign placing unsolicited calls to individuals on the “Do Not Call List.” The plaintiffs seek statutory damages of up to $1,500 per plaintiff, actual damages and equitable relief. On June 22, 2017, plaintiffs in the California case filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint to substitute new plaintiffs. Defendants filed an opposition to this motion on June 26, 2017. The court granted plaintiffs' motion to substitute new plaintiffs and on August 1, 2017, defendants filed an answer to the second amended complaint. On August 31, 2017, the court in the California case agreed that the litigation should be stayed pending final court approval of the New Jersey settlement. On July 12, 2017, the parties in one of the New Jersey actions reached an agreement in principle to resolve the class allegations which was confirmed by a term sheet signed by the parties on July 28, 2017. On September 27, 2017, plaintiffs in one of the New Jersey cases filed their motion for preliminary approval of the class settlement which was approved by the court on November 17, 2017. On May 14, 2018, the court entered a final order approving the class action settlement and dismissing the lawsuit, thereby ending the New Jersey lawsuits. On July 2, 2018, the court in the California case entered an order dismissing the lawsuit. California Department of Water Resources and San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Sunrise Power Company LLC — On January 29, 2016, CDWR and SDG&E filed a lawsuit against Sunrise Power Company, along with NRG and Chevron Power Corporation. In June 2001, CDWR and Sunrise entered into a 10-year PPA under which Sunrise would construct and operate a generating facility and provide power to CDWR. At the time the PPA was entered into, Sunrise had a transportation services agreement, or TSA, to purchase natural gas from Kern River through April 30, 2018. In August 2003, CDWR entered into an agreement with Sunrise and Kern River in which CDWR accepted assignment of the TSA through the term of the PPA. After the PPA expired, Kern River demanded that any reassignment be to a party which met certain creditworthiness standards which Sunrise did not. As such, the plaintiffs brought this lawsuit against the defendants alleging breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing and improper distributions. Plaintiffs generally claim damages of $1.2 million per month for the remaining 70 months of the TSA. On April 20, 2016, the defendants filed objections in response to the plaintiffs' complaint. The objections were granted on June 14, 2016; however, the plaintiffs were allowed to file amended complaints on July 1, 2016. On July 27, 2016, defendants filed objections to the amended complaints. On November 18, 2016, the court sustained the objections and allowed plaintiffs another opportunity to file a second amended lawsuit which they did on January 13, 2017. On April 21, 2017, the court issued an order sustaining the objections without leave to amend. On July 14, 2017, CDWR filed a notice of appeal. On January 10, 2018, CDWR filed its appellate brief. Defendants filed their opposition brief on April 10, 2018. On May 30, 2018, CDWR filed their reply brief. Griffoul v. NRG Residential Solar Solutions — On February 28, 2017, plaintiffs, consisting of New Jersey residential solar customers, filed a purported class action lawsuit in New Jersey state court. Plaintiffs allege violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Action and Truth-in-Consumer Contracts, Warranty and Notice Act with regard to certain provisions of their residential solar contracts. The plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief as to the proper allocation of the solar renewable energy credits. On June 6, 2017, the defendants filed a motion to compel arbitration or dismiss the lawsuit. Plaintiffs filed their opposition on June 29, 2017. On July 14, 2017, the court denied NRG's motion to compel arbitration or dismiss the case. On July 25, 2017, NRG filed a motion for reconsideration of the appeal, which was denied. On August 22, 2017, NRG filed a notice of appeal. After oral argument on April 24, 2018, the Appellate Division reversed the lower court on May 4, 2018, and ordered that the plaintiff must arbitrate their claims against NRG. On May 23, 2018, the plaintiff filed a petition for certification with the Supreme Court of New Jersey seeking to overturn the Appellate Division ruling. The petition and objection are fully briefed. Rice v. NRG — On April 14, 2017, plaintiffs filed a purported class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania against NRG, First Energy Corporation and Matt Canastrale Contracting, Inc. Plaintiffs generally claim personal injury, trespass, nuisance and property damage related to the disposal of coal ash from GenOn's Elrama Power Plant and First Energy’s Mitchell and Hatfield Power Plants. Plaintiffs generally seek monetary damages, medical monitoring and remediation of their property. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 14, 2017. On October 20, 2017, NRG filed its answers and affirmative defenses. On July 6, 2018, NRG filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs filed their opposition to the motion for summary judgment on July 29, 2018. On September 7, 2018, the court granted NRG’s motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, NRG is no longer a party. Washington-St. Tammany and Claiborne Electric Cooperative v. LaGen — On June 28, 2017, plaintiffs Washington-St. Tammany Electric Cooperative, Inc. and Claiborne Electric Cooperative, Inc. filed a lawsuit against Louisiana Generating, L.L.C., or LaGen, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. The plaintiffs claim breach of contract against LaGen for allegedly improperly charging the plaintiffs for costs related to the installation and maintenance of certain pollution control technology. Plaintiffs seek damages for the alleged improper charges and a declaration as to which charges are proper under the contract. On September 14, 2017, the court issued a scheduling order setting this case for trial on October 21, 2019. LaGen filed its answer and affirmative defenses on November 17, 2017. GenOn Chapter 11 Cases — On June 14, 2017, the GenOn Entities filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. On December 12, 2017, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming GenOn’s Chapter 11 plan, which provides for, among other things, GenOn’s transition to a standalone enterprise. GenOn’s Chapter 11 plan has not yet become effective and there can be no assurance that the effective date will occur. However, the NRG Settlement was approved by the Bankruptcy Court on December 12, 2017, and was consummated on July 16, 2018, resulting in the exchange of broad, mutual releases among the GenOn Entities, NRG and certain of their respective related parties. Upon the occurrence of the effective date of GenOn’s Chapter 11 plan, additional releases in favor of NRG will become operative and the GenOn Entities will no longer be subsidiaries of NRG. See Note 3, Acquisitions, Discontinued Operations and Dispositions, for additional information related to the Chapter 11 Cases. BTEC v. NRG Texas Power — On July 18, 2017, BTEC New Albany LLC, or BTEC, filed a lawsuit against NRG Texas Power LLC, or NRG Texas Power, in the Harris County District Court in Texas. On January 15, 2013, the parties entered into a Membership Interest and Purchase Agreement, or MIPA, whereby BTEC agreed to dismantle, transport and rebuild an electric power generation facility at the former P.H. Robinson Electric Generating Station in Bacliff, Texas. The MIPA required BTEC to meet a Guaranteed Commercial Completion Date of May 31, 2016. Because BTEC had not satisfied all of the contractually-required acceptance criteria by the MIPA expiration date, NRG elected to terminate the contract in June 2017. BTEC claimed that NRG Texas Power breached the MIPA by improperly terminating it, and sought a declaratory judgment as to the rights and obligations of the parties as well as damages, interest and attorney’s fees. On September 7, 2017, NRG Texas Power filed a counterclaim seeking damages in excess of $48 million. On June 7, 2018, the parties resolved all claims and counterclaims in the lawsuit and a dismissal order was subsequently entered by the court on July 12, 2018. GenOn Related Contingencies Natural Gas Litigation — GenOn has been a party to several lawsuits, certain of which are class action lawsuits, in state and federal courts, of which four remain pending involving plaintiffs in Kansas, Missouri and Wisconsin. These lawsuits were filed in the aftermath of the California energy crisis in 2000 and 2001 and the resulting FERC investigations and relate to alleged conduct to increase natural gas prices in violation of state antitrust law and similar laws. The lawsuits seek treble or punitive damages, restitution and/or expenses. The lawsuits also name as parties a number of energy companies unaffiliated with NRG. In July 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, which was handling four of the five cases, granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims against GenOn in those cases. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, or the Ninth Circuit, which reversed the decision of the District Court. GenOn along with the other defendants in the lawsuit filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the Ninth Circuit's decision and the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition. On April 21, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s holding that plaintiffs’ state antitrust law claims are not field-preempted by the federal Natural Gas Act and the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court left open whether the claims were preempted on the basis of conflict preemption. The U.S. Supreme Court directed that the case be remanded to the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada for further proceedings. On March 7, 2016, class plaintiffs filed their motions for class certification. On March 30, 2017, the court denied the plaintiffs' motions for class certification, which the plaintiffs appealed to. The plaintiffs petitioned the Ninth Circuit for interlocutory review. On July 12, 2018, the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments and the case is under submission pending a decision. On February 26, 2018, GenOn filed objections to the proofs of claim filed in the Chapter 11 Cases by all of the plaintiffs in each of the four cases. GenOn filed that same day a motion asking the Bankruptcy Court to estimate all of the proofs of claim at zero dollars, to which the plaintiffs objected. The Bankruptcy Court denied the plaintiffs' objection, ruling that it had the authority to consider GenOn's objections to the proofs of claim and to estimate the claims, but has certified its decision for review by either the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals or the District Court. In June 2018, GenOn reached a settlement with plaintiffs in three of the four remaining suits, which leaves only the one purported class action involving plaintiffs in Wisconsin. CenterPoint Energy Services is a defendant in that case, and GenOn has agreed to indemnify CenterPoint against certain losses relating to the lawsuit. The Nevada District Judge granted summary judgment in favor of CenterPoint in that lawsuit and the plaintiffs appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit. The appeal was argued on February 16, 2018, and the case is under submission pending a decision. Potomac River Environmental Investigation — In March 2013, NRG Potomac River LLC, a subsidiary of GenOn, received notice that the District of Columbia Department of Environment (now renamed the Department of Energy and Environment, or DOEE) was investigating potential discharges to the Potomac River originating from the Potomac River Generating facility site, a site where the generation facility is no longer in operation. In connection with that investigation, DOEE served a civil subpoena on NRG Potomac River LLC requesting information related to the site and potential discharges occurring from the site. NRG Potomac River LLC provided various responsive materials. In January 2016, DOEE advised NRG Potomac River LLC that DOEE believed various environmental violations had occurred as a result of discharges DOEE believes occurred to the Potomac River from the Potomac River Generating facility site and as a result of associated failures to accurately or sufficiently report such discharges. DOEE has indicated it believes that penalties are appropriate in light of the violations. NRG Potomac River LLC is currently reviewing the information provided by DOEE. Natixis v. GenOn Mid-Atlantic — On February 16, 2018, Natixis Funding Corp. and Natixis, New York Branch filed a complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York against GenOn Mid-Atlantic, the owner lessors under GenOn Mid-Atlantic’s operating leases of the Dickerson and Morgantown coal generation units, and the lease indenture trustee under those leases. The plaintiffs’ allegations against GenOn Mid-Atlantic relate to a payment agreement between GenOn Mid-Atlantic and Natixis Funding Corp. to procure credit support for the payment of certain lease payments owed pursuant to the GenOn Mid-Atlantic operating leases for Morgantown and Dickerson. The plaintiffs seek approximately $34 million in damages arising from GenOn Mid-Atlantic’s purported breach of certain warranties in the payment agreement. On April 2, 2018, GenOn Mid-Atlantic removed the allegations against it to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. On April 11, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a briefing schedule on a forthcoming motion to remand by Natixis Funding Corp. and a forthcoming motion to transfer by GenOn Mid-Atlantic. On April 26, 2018, Natixis Funding Corp. filed its motion to remand. On May 31, 2018, GenOn Mid-Atlantic opposed the motion to remand and filed a cross-motion to transfer. The parties completed briefing on the motions to remand and transfer on July 9, 2018, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held an oral argument on July 18, 2018 and continued the motions to a subsequent conference scheduled for September 26, 2018. In the state court action, the court has scheduled oral argument for September 25, 2018, on the owner lessors' dispositive motions. Cheswick NPDES Permit Appeal — On September 24, 2018, Sierra Club and Three Rivers Waterkeeper filed an appeal challenging the NPDES permit that was issued to GenOn’s Cheswick power plant in July 2018. The appeal seeks, among other remedies, a hearing, a declaration that the permit is unlawful and inappropriate, and for an order remanding the permit to Pennsylvania’s Department of Environment to modify the permit to remedy the flaws about which the appellants complain. The parties are discussing a hearing scheduling order. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Notice of Violation — On May 31, 2018, REMA (as successor-in-interest to Reliant Energy NJ Holdings) was issued a notice of violation by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection for alleged violations of the New Jersey Spill Compensation and Control Act (N.J.S.A. 58: 10-23 et seq.) at the Atlantic Substation property in Colts Neck Township, New Jersey. These alleged violations remain under review by REMA.

Commitments and Contingencies

This footnote should be read in conjunction with the complete description under Note 22, Commitments and Contingencies, to the Company's 2017 Form 10-K.

Commitments

First Lien Structure — NRG has granted first liens to certain counterparties on a substantial portion of the Company's assets, excluding assets acquired in the GenOn and EME (including Midwest Generation) acquisitions, and NRG's assets that have project-level financing, to reduce the amount of cash collateral and letters of credit that it would otherwise be required to post from time to time to support its obligations under out-of-the-money hedge agreements for forward sales of power or MWh equivalents. The Company's lien counterparties may have a claim on NRG's assets to the extent market prices exceed the hedged price. As of September 30, 2018, hedges under the first lien were in-the-money for NRG on a counterparty aggregate basis.

Lignite Contract with Texas Westmoreland Coal Co. — The Company's Limestone facility historically blended lignite obtained from the Jewett mine, which was operated by Texas Westmoreland Coal Co, or TWCC, and coal sourced from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming. On August 18, 2016, NRG gave notice to TWCC terminating the active mining of lignite under the contract, effective on December 31, 2016. Under the contract, TWCC continues to be responsible for reclamation activities. NRG is responsible for reclamation costs and has recorded an adequate ARO liability. The Railroad Commission of Texas has imposed a bond obligation of $99 million on TWCC for the reclamation of the mine. Pursuant to the contract with TWCC, NRG supports this obligation through surety bonds. Additionally, NRG is obligated to provide additional performance assurance if required by the Railroad Commission of Texas.

On October 9, 2018, TWCC and certain of its affiliates filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code before the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas. TWCC has obtained authorization from the bankruptcy court to continue to perform its obligations under its contract with the Company and to maintain surety bonds programs throughout its operations. In addition, NRG has not received any indication from the Railroad Commission of Texas of an intent to draw on the surety bonds. However, given the uncertainty involved in bankruptcy proceedings, it is uncertain whether and to what extent TWCC’s bankruptcy may in the future impact the reclamation costs incurred by NRG or the surety bonds.

Contingencies

The Company's material legal proceedings are described below. The Company believes that it has valid defenses to these legal proceedings and intends to defend them vigorously. NRG records reserves for estimated losses from contingencies when information available indicates that a loss is probable and the amount of the loss, or range of loss, can be reasonably estimated. As applicable, the Company has established an adequate reserve for the matters discussed below. In addition, legal costs are expensed as incurred. Management has assessed each of the following matters based on current information and made a judgment concerning its potential outcome, considering the nature of the claim, the amount and nature of damages sought, and the probability of success. Unless specified below, the Company is unable to predict the outcome of these legal proceedings or reasonably estimate the scope or amount of any associated costs and potential liabilities. As additional information becomes available, management adjusts its assessment and estimates of such contingencies accordingly. Because litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings or developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of the Company's liabilities and contingencies could be at amounts that are different from its currently recorded reserves and that such difference could be material.

In addition to the legal proceedings noted below, NRG and its subsidiaries are party to other litigation or legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. In management's opinion, the disposition of these ordinary course matters will not materially adversely affect NRG's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Midwest Generation Asbestos Liabilities — The Company, through its subsidiary, Midwest Generation, may be subject to potential asbestos liabilities as a result of its acquisition of EME. The Company is currently analyzing the scope of potential liability as it may relate to Midwest Generation. The Company believes that it has established an adequate reserve for these cases. On March 27, 2018, ComEd filed a Motion to Compel Payments of Claims seeking $61 million related to asbestos liabilities. On April 25, 2018, NRG filed an Omnibus Objection to All Remaining Claims of ComEd and Exelon. A trial before the Bankruptcy Court to determine the amount of ComEd’s claims is currently scheduled for April 10, 2019.

Telephone Consumer Protection Act Purported Class Actions — Three purported class action lawsuits have been filed against NRG Residential Solar Solutions, LLC — one in California and two in New Jersey. The plaintiffs generally allege misrepresentation by the call agents and violations of the TCPA, claiming that the defendants engaged in a telemarketing campaign placing unsolicited calls to individuals on the “Do Not Call List.” The plaintiffs seek statutory damages of up to $1,500 per plaintiff, actual damages and equitable relief. On June 22, 2017, plaintiffs in the California case filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint to substitute new plaintiffs. Defendants filed an opposition to this motion on June 26, 2017. The court granted plaintiffs' motion to substitute new plaintiffs and on August 1, 2017, defendants filed an answer to the second amended complaint. On August 31, 2017, the court in the California case agreed that the litigation should be stayed pending final court approval of the New Jersey settlement. On July 12, 2017, the parties in one of the New Jersey actions reached an agreement in principle to resolve the class allegations which was confirmed by a term sheet signed by the parties on July 28, 2017. On September 27, 2017, plaintiffs in one of the New Jersey cases filed their motion for preliminary approval of the class settlement which was approved by the court on November 17, 2017. On May 14, 2018, the court entered a final order approving the class action settlement and dismissing the lawsuit, thereby ending the New Jersey lawsuits. On July 2, 2018, the court in the California case entered an order dismissing the lawsuit.

California Department of Water Resources and San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Sunrise Power Company LLC — On January 29, 2016, CDWR and SDG&E filed a lawsuit against Sunrise Power Company, along with NRG and Chevron Power Corporation. In June 2001, CDWR and Sunrise entered into a 10-year PPA under which Sunrise would construct and operate a generating facility and provide power to CDWR. At the time the PPA was entered into, Sunrise had a transportation services agreement, or TSA, to purchase natural gas from Kern River through April 30, 2018. In August 2003, CDWR entered into an agreement with Sunrise and Kern River in which CDWR accepted assignment of the TSA through the term of the PPA. After the PPA expired, Kern River demanded that any reassignment be to a party which met certain creditworthiness standards which Sunrise did not. As such, the plaintiffs brought this lawsuit against the defendants alleging breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing and improper distributions. Plaintiffs generally claim damages of $1.2 million per month for the remaining 70 months of the TSA. On April 20, 2016, the defendants filed objections in response to the plaintiffs' complaint. The objections were granted on June 14, 2016; however, the plaintiffs were allowed to file amended complaints on July 1, 2016. On July 27, 2016, defendants filed objections to the amended complaints. On November 18, 2016, the court sustained the objections and allowed plaintiffs another opportunity to file a second amended lawsuit which they did on January 13, 2017. On April 21, 2017, the court issued an order sustaining the objections without leave to amend. On July 14, 2017, CDWR filed a notice of appeal. On January 10, 2018, CDWR filed its appellate brief. Defendants filed their opposition brief on April 10, 2018. On May 30, 2018, CDWR filed their reply brief.

Griffoul v. NRG Residential Solar Solutions — On February 28, 2017, plaintiffs, consisting of New Jersey residential solar customers, filed a purported class action lawsuit in New Jersey state court. Plaintiffs allege violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Action and Truth-in-Consumer Contracts, Warranty and Notice Act with regard to certain provisions of their residential solar contracts. The plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief as to the proper allocation of the solar renewable energy credits. On June 6, 2017, the defendants filed a motion to compel arbitration or dismiss the lawsuit. Plaintiffs filed their opposition on June 29, 2017. On July 14, 2017, the court denied NRG's motion to compel arbitration or dismiss the case. On July 25, 2017, NRG filed a motion for reconsideration of the appeal, which was denied. On August 22, 2017, NRG filed a notice of appeal. After oral argument on April 24, 2018, the Appellate Division reversed the lower court on May 4, 2018, and ordered that the plaintiff must arbitrate their claims against NRG. On May 23, 2018, the plaintiff filed a petition for certification with the Supreme Court of New Jersey seeking to overturn the Appellate Division ruling. The petition and objection are fully briefed.

Rice v. NRG — On April 14, 2017, plaintiffs filed a purported class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania against NRG, First Energy Corporation and Matt Canastrale Contracting, Inc. Plaintiffs generally claim personal injury, trespass, nuisance and property damage related to the disposal of coal ash from GenOn's Elrama Power Plant and First Energy’s Mitchell and Hatfield Power Plants. Plaintiffs generally seek monetary damages, medical monitoring and remediation of their property. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 14, 2017. On October 20, 2017, NRG filed its answers and affirmative defenses. On July 6, 2018, NRG filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs filed their opposition to the motion for summary judgment on July 29, 2018. On September 7, 2018, the court granted NRG’s motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, NRG is no longer a party.

Washington-St. Tammany and Claiborne Electric Cooperative v. LaGen — On June 28, 2017, plaintiffs Washington-St. Tammany Electric Cooperative, Inc. and Claiborne Electric Cooperative, Inc. filed a lawsuit against Louisiana Generating, L.L.C., or LaGen, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. The plaintiffs claim breach of contract against LaGen for allegedly improperly charging the plaintiffs for costs related to the installation and maintenance of certain pollution control technology. Plaintiffs seek damages for the alleged improper charges and a declaration as to which charges are proper under the contract. On September 14, 2017, the court issued a scheduling order setting this case for trial on October 21, 2019. LaGen filed its answer and affirmative defenses on November 17, 2017.

GenOn Chapter 11 Cases — On June 14, 2017, the GenOn Entities filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. On December 12, 2017, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming GenOn’s Chapter 11 plan, which provides for, among other things, GenOn’s transition to a standalone enterprise. GenOn’s Chapter 11 plan has not yet become effective and there can be no assurance that the effective date will occur. However, the NRG Settlement was approved by the Bankruptcy Court on December 12, 2017, and was consummated on July 16, 2018, resulting in the exchange of broad, mutual releases among the GenOn Entities, NRG and certain of their respective related parties. Upon the occurrence of the effective date of GenOn’s Chapter 11 plan, additional releases in favor of NRG will become operative and the GenOn Entities will no longer be subsidiaries of NRG. See Note 3, Acquisitions, Discontinued Operations and Dispositions, for additional information related to the Chapter 11 Cases.

BTEC v. NRG Texas Power — On July 18, 2017, BTEC New Albany LLC, or BTEC, filed a lawsuit against NRG Texas Power LLC, or NRG Texas Power, in the Harris County District Court in Texas. On January 15, 2013, the parties entered into a Membership Interest and Purchase Agreement, or MIPA, whereby BTEC agreed to dismantle, transport and rebuild an electric power generation facility at the former P.H. Robinson Electric Generating Station in Bacliff, Texas. The MIPA required BTEC to meet a Guaranteed Commercial Completion Date of May 31, 2016. Because BTEC had not satisfied all of the contractually-required acceptance criteria by the MIPA expiration date, NRG elected to terminate the contract in June 2017. BTEC claimed that NRG Texas Power breached the MIPA by improperly terminating it, and sought a declaratory judgment as to the rights and obligations of the parties as well as damages, interest and attorney’s fees. On September 7, 2017, NRG Texas Power filed a counterclaim seeking damages in excess of $48 million. On June 7, 2018, the parties resolved all claims and counterclaims in the lawsuit and a dismissal order was subsequently entered by the court on July 12, 2018.

GenOn Related Contingencies

Natural Gas Litigation — GenOn has been a party to several lawsuits, certain of which are class action lawsuits, in state and federal courts, of which four remain pending involving plaintiffs in Kansas, Missouri and Wisconsin. These lawsuits were filed in the aftermath of the California energy crisis in 2000 and 2001 and the resulting FERC investigations and relate to alleged conduct to increase natural gas prices in violation of state antitrust law and similar laws. The lawsuits seek treble or punitive damages, restitution and/or expenses. The lawsuits also name as parties a number of energy companies unaffiliated with NRG. In July 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, which was handling four of the five cases, granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims against GenOn in those cases. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, or the Ninth Circuit, which reversed the decision of the District Court. GenOn along with the other defendants in the lawsuit filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the Ninth Circuit's decision and the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition. On April 21, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s holding that plaintiffs’ state antitrust law claims are not field-preempted by the federal Natural Gas Act and the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court left open whether the claims were preempted on the basis of conflict preemption. The U.S. Supreme Court directed that the case be remanded to the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada for further proceedings.

On March 7, 2016, class plaintiffs filed their motions for class certification. On March 30, 2017, the court denied the plaintiffs' motions for class certification, which the plaintiffs appealed to. The plaintiffs petitioned the Ninth Circuit for interlocutory review. On July 12, 2018, the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments and the case is under submission pending a decision.

On February 26, 2018, GenOn filed objections to the proofs of claim filed in the Chapter 11 Cases by all of the plaintiffs in each of the four cases. GenOn filed that same day a motion asking the Bankruptcy Court to estimate all of the proofs of claim at zero dollars, to which the plaintiffs objected. The Bankruptcy Court denied the plaintiffs' objection, ruling that it had the authority to consider GenOn's objections to the proofs of claim and to estimate the claims, but has certified its decision for review by either the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals or the District Court.

In June 2018, GenOn reached a settlement with plaintiffs in three of the four remaining suits, which leaves only the one purported class action involving plaintiffs in Wisconsin. CenterPoint Energy Services is a defendant in that case, and GenOn has agreed to indemnify CenterPoint against certain losses relating to the lawsuit. The Nevada District Judge granted summary judgment in favor of CenterPoint in that lawsuit and the plaintiffs appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit. The appeal was argued on February 16, 2018, and the case is under submission pending a decision.

Potomac River Environmental Investigation — In March 2013, NRG Potomac River LLC, a subsidiary of GenOn, received notice that the District of Columbia Department of Environment (now renamed the Department of Energy and Environment, or DOEE) was investigating potential discharges to the Potomac River originating from the Potomac River Generating facility site, a site where the generation facility is no longer in operation. In connection with that investigation, DOEE served a civil subpoena on NRG Potomac River LLC requesting information related to the site and potential discharges occurring from the site. NRG Potomac River LLC provided various responsive materials. In January 2016, DOEE advised NRG Potomac River LLC that DOEE believed various environmental violations had occurred as a result of discharges DOEE believes occurred to the Potomac River from the Potomac River Generating facility site and as a result of associated failures to accurately or sufficiently report such discharges. DOEE has indicated it believes that penalties are appropriate in light of the violations. NRG Potomac River LLC is currently reviewing the information provided by DOEE.

Natixis v. GenOn Mid-Atlantic — On February 16, 2018, Natixis Funding Corp. and Natixis, New York Branch filed a complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York against GenOn Mid-Atlantic, the owner lessors under GenOn Mid-Atlantic’s operating leases of the Dickerson and Morgantown coal generation units, and the lease indenture trustee under those leases. The plaintiffs’ allegations against GenOn Mid-Atlantic relate to a payment agreement between GenOn Mid-Atlantic and Natixis Funding Corp. to procure credit support for the payment of certain lease payments owed pursuant to the GenOn Mid-Atlantic operating leases for Morgantown and Dickerson. The plaintiffs seek approximately $34 million in damages arising from GenOn Mid-Atlantic’s purported breach of certain warranties in the payment agreement. On April 2, 2018, GenOn Mid-Atlantic removed the allegations against it to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. On April 11, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a briefing schedule on a forthcoming motion to remand by Natixis Funding Corp. and a forthcoming motion to transfer by GenOn Mid-Atlantic. On April 26, 2018, Natixis Funding Corp. filed its motion to remand. On May 31, 2018, GenOn Mid-Atlantic opposed the motion to remand and filed a cross-motion to transfer. The parties completed briefing on the motions to remand and transfer on July 9, 2018, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held an oral argument on July 18, 2018 and continued the motions to a subsequent conference scheduled for September 26, 2018. In the state court action, the court has scheduled oral argument for September 25, 2018, on the owner lessors' dispositive motions.

Cheswick NPDES Permit Appeal — On September 24, 2018, Sierra Club and Three Rivers Waterkeeper filed an appeal challenging the NPDES permit that was issued to GenOn’s Cheswick power plant in July 2018. The appeal seeks, among other remedies, a hearing, a declaration that the permit is unlawful and inappropriate, and for an order remanding the permit to Pennsylvania’s Department of Environment to modify the permit to remedy the flaws about which the appellants complain. The parties are discussing a hearing scheduling order.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Notice of Violation — On May 31, 2018, REMA (as successor-in-interest to Reliant Energy NJ Holdings) was issued a notice of violation by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection for alleged violations of the New Jersey Spill Compensation and Control Act (N.J.S.A. 58: 10-23 et seq.) at the Atlantic Substation property in Colts Neck Township, New Jersey. These alleged violations remain under review by REMA.