Environmental Matters (Notes)	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2016
Environmental Matters Disclosure [Abstract]
Environmental Matters	Environmental Matters NRG is subject to a wide range of environmental laws in the development, construction, ownership and operation of projects. These laws generally require that governmental permits and approvals be obtained before construction and during operation of power plants. NRG is also subject to laws regarding the protection of wildlife, including migratory birds, eagles and threatened and endangered species. The electric generation industry is facing new requirements regarding GHGs, combustion byproducts, water discharge and use, and threatened and endangered species have been put in place in recent years. In general, future laws are expected to require the addition of emissions controls or other environmental controls or to impose certain restrictions on the operations of the Company's facilities, which could have a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Federal and state environmental laws generally have become more stringent over time, although this trend could change in the near term with respect to federal laws under the new U.S. presidential administration. The EPA finalized CSAPR in 2011, which was intended to replace CAIR in January 2012, to address certain states' obligations to reduce emissions so that downwind states can achieve federal air quality standards. In December 2011, the D.C. Circuit stayed the implementation of CSAPR and then vacated CSAPR in August 2012 but kept CAIR in place until the EPA could replace it. In April 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded the D.C. Circuit's decision. In October 2014, the D.C. Circuit lifted the stay of CSAPR. In response, the EPA in November 2014 amended the CSAPR compliance dates. Accordingly, CSAPR replaced CAIR on January 1, 2015. On July 28, 2015, the D.C. Circuit held that the EPA had exceeded its authority by requiring certain reductions that were not necessary for downwind states to achieve federal standards. Although the D.C. Circuit kept the rule in place, the court ordered the EPA to revise the Phase 2 (or 2017) (i) SO2 budgets for four states including Texas and (ii) ozone-season NOx budgets for 11 states including Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. On October 26, 2016, the EPA finalized the CSAPR Update Rule, which reduces future NOx allocations and discounts the current banked allowances to account for the more stringent 2008 Ozone NAAQS and to address the D.C. Circuit's July 2015 decision. This rule has been challenged in the D.C. Circuit. The Company believes its investment in pollution controls and cleaner technologies leave the fleet well-positioned for compliance. In February 2012, the EPA promulgated standards (the MATS rule) to control emissions of HAPs from coal and oil-fired electric generating units. The rule established limits for mercury, non-mercury metals, certain organics and acid gases, which had to be met beginning in April 2015 (with some units getting a 1-year extension). In June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Michigan v. EPA, and held that the EPA unreasonably refused to consider costs when it determined that it was "appropriate and necessary" to regulate HAPs emitted by electric generating units. The U.S. Supreme Court did not vacate the MATS rule but rather remanded it to the D.C. Circuit for further proceedings. In December 2015, the D.C. Circuit remanded the MATS rule to the EPA without vacatur. On April 25, 2016, the EPA released a supplemental finding that the benefits of this regulation outweigh the costs to address the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that the EPA had not properly considered costs. This finding has been challenged in the D.C. Circuit. While NRG cannot predict the final outcome of this rulemaking, NRG believes that because it has already invested in pollution controls and cleaner technologies, the fleet is well-positioned to comply with the MATS rule. Water In August 2014, the EPA finalized the regulation regarding the use of water for once through cooling at existing facilities to address impingement and entrainment concerns. NRG anticipates that more stringent requirements will be incorporated into some of its water discharge permits over the next several years as NPDES permits are renewed. Byproducts, Wastes, Hazardous Materials and Contamination In April 2015, the EPA finalized the rule regulating byproducts of coal combustion (e.g., ash and gypsum) as solid wastes under the RCRA. The Company has evaluated the impact of the new rule on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows and has accrued its environmental and asset retirement obligations under the rule based on current estimates as of December 31, 2016. East Region New Source Review — The EPA and various states are investigating compliance of electric generating facilities with the pre-construction permitting requirements of the CAA known as “new source review,” or NSR. In 2007, Midwest Generation received an NOV from the EPA alleging that past work at Crawford, Fisk, Joliet, Powerton, Waukegan and Will County generating stations violated NSR and other regulations. These alleged violations are the subject of the litigation described in Item 15 — Note 22, Commitments and Contingencies. In January 2009, GenOn received an NOV from the EPA alleging that past work at Keystone, Portland and Shawville generating stations violated regulations regarding NSR. In June 2011, GenOn received an NOV from the EPA alleging that past work at Avon Lake and Niles generating stations violated NSR. In December 2007, the NJDEP filed suit alleging that NSR violations occurred at the Portland generating station, which suit was resolved pursuant to a July 2013 consent decree. Additionally, in April 2013, the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection issued four NOVs alleging that past work at oil-fired combustion turbines at the Torrington Terminal, Franklin, Branford and Middletown generation stations violated regulations regarding NSR. Burton Island Old Ash Landfill — In January 2006, NRG's Indian River Power LLC was notified that it may be a potentially responsible party with respect to Burton Island Old Ash Landfill, a historic captive landfill located at the Indian River facility. On October 1, 2007, NRG signed an agreement with DNREC to investigate the site through the Voluntary Clean-up Program, or the VCP. On February 4, 2008, DNREC issued findings that no further action was required in relation to surface water and that a previously planned shoreline stabilization project would satisfactorily address shoreline erosion. The landfill itself required a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study to determine the type and scope of any additional required work. DNREC approved the Feasibility Study in December 2012. In January 2013, DNREC proposed a remediation plan based on the Feasibility Study. The remediation plan was approved in October 2013. In December 2015, DNREC approved the Company's remediation design and the Company's Long Term Stewardship Plan. The cost of completing the work required by the approved remediation plan is consistent with amounts budgeted in early 2016 and on track for completion in 2017. The estimated cost to comply with the Long-Term Stewardship Plan was added to the liability in December 2016. In addition to the VCP, on May 29, 2008, DNREC requested that NRG's Indian River Power LLC participate in the development and performance of a Natural Resource Damage Assessment at the Burton Island Old Ash Landfill. NRG is currently working with DNREC and other trustees to close out the assessment process. For further discussion of these matters, refer to Note 22, Commitments and Contingencies.

Environmental Matters

NRG is subject to a wide range of environmental laws in the development, construction, ownership and operation of projects. These laws generally require that governmental permits and approvals be obtained before construction and during operation of power plants. NRG is also subject to laws regarding the protection of wildlife, including migratory birds, eagles and threatened and endangered species. The electric generation industry is facing new requirements regarding GHGs, combustion byproducts, water discharge and use, and threatened and endangered species have been put in place in recent years. In general, future laws are expected to require the addition of emissions controls or other environmental controls or to impose certain restrictions on the operations of the Company's facilities, which could have a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Federal and state environmental laws generally have become more stringent over time, although this trend could change in the near term with respect to federal laws under the new U.S. presidential administration.

The EPA finalized CSAPR in 2011, which was intended to replace CAIR in January 2012, to address certain states' obligations to reduce emissions so that downwind states can achieve federal air quality standards. In December 2011, the D.C. Circuit stayed the implementation of CSAPR and then vacated CSAPR in August 2012 but kept CAIR in place until the EPA could replace it. In April 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded the D.C. Circuit's decision. In October 2014, the D.C. Circuit lifted the stay of CSAPR. In response, the EPA in November 2014 amended the CSAPR compliance dates. Accordingly, CSAPR replaced CAIR on January 1, 2015. On July 28, 2015, the D.C. Circuit held that the EPA had exceeded its authority by requiring certain reductions that were not necessary for downwind states to achieve federal standards. Although the D.C. Circuit kept the rule in place, the court ordered the EPA to revise the Phase 2 (or 2017) (i) SO2 budgets for four states including Texas and (ii) ozone-season NOx budgets for 11 states including Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. On October 26, 2016, the EPA finalized the CSAPR Update Rule, which reduces future NOx allocations and discounts the current banked allowances to account for the more stringent 2008 Ozone NAAQS and to address the D.C. Circuit's July 2015 decision. This rule has been challenged in the D.C. Circuit. The Company believes its investment in pollution controls and cleaner technologies leave the fleet well-positioned for compliance.

In February 2012, the EPA promulgated standards (the MATS rule) to control emissions of HAPs from coal and oil-fired electric generating units. The rule established limits for mercury, non-mercury metals, certain organics and acid gases, which had to be met beginning in April 2015 (with some units getting a 1-year extension). In June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Michigan v. EPA, and held that the EPA unreasonably refused to consider costs when it determined that it was "appropriate and necessary" to regulate HAPs emitted by electric generating units. The U.S. Supreme Court did not vacate the MATS rule but rather remanded it to the D.C. Circuit for further proceedings. In December 2015, the D.C. Circuit remanded the MATS rule to the EPA without vacatur. On April 25, 2016, the EPA released a supplemental finding that the benefits of this regulation outweigh the costs to address the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that the EPA had not properly considered costs. This finding has been challenged in the D.C. Circuit. While NRG cannot predict the final outcome of this rulemaking, NRG believes that because it has already invested in pollution controls and cleaner technologies, the fleet is well-positioned to comply with the MATS rule.

Water

In August 2014, the EPA finalized the regulation regarding the use of water for once through cooling at existing facilities to address impingement and entrainment concerns. NRG anticipates that more stringent requirements will be incorporated into some of its water discharge permits over the next several years as NPDES permits are renewed.

Byproducts, Wastes, Hazardous Materials and Contamination

In April 2015, the EPA finalized the rule regulating byproducts of coal combustion (e.g., ash and gypsum) as solid wastes under the RCRA. The Company has evaluated the impact of the new rule on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows and has accrued its environmental and asset retirement obligations under the rule based on current estimates as of December 31, 2016.

East Region

New Source Review — The EPA and various states are investigating compliance of electric generating facilities with the pre-construction permitting requirements of the CAA known as “new source review,” or NSR. In 2007, Midwest Generation received an NOV from the EPA alleging that past work at Crawford, Fisk, Joliet, Powerton, Waukegan and Will County generating stations violated NSR and other regulations. These alleged violations are the subject of the litigation described in Item 15 — Note 22, Commitments and Contingencies. In January 2009, GenOn received an NOV from the EPA alleging that past work at Keystone, Portland and Shawville generating stations violated regulations regarding NSR. In June 2011, GenOn received an NOV from the EPA alleging that past work at Avon Lake and Niles generating stations violated NSR. In December 2007, the NJDEP filed suit alleging that NSR violations occurred at the Portland generating station, which suit was resolved pursuant to a July 2013 consent decree. Additionally, in April 2013, the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection issued four NOVs alleging that past work at oil-fired combustion turbines at the Torrington Terminal, Franklin, Branford and Middletown generation stations violated regulations regarding NSR.

Burton Island Old Ash Landfill — In January 2006, NRG's Indian River Power LLC was notified that it may be a potentially responsible party with respect to Burton Island Old Ash Landfill, a historic captive landfill located at the Indian River facility. On October 1, 2007, NRG signed an agreement with DNREC to investigate the site through the Voluntary Clean-up Program, or the VCP. On February 4, 2008, DNREC issued findings that no further action was required in relation to surface water and that a previously planned shoreline stabilization project would satisfactorily address shoreline erosion. The landfill itself required a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study to determine the type and scope of any additional required work. DNREC approved the Feasibility Study in December 2012. In January 2013, DNREC proposed a remediation plan based on the Feasibility Study. The remediation plan was approved in October 2013. In December 2015, DNREC approved the Company's remediation design and the Company's Long Term Stewardship Plan. The cost of completing the work required by the approved remediation plan is consistent with amounts budgeted in early 2016 and on track for completion in 2017. The estimated cost to comply with the Long-Term Stewardship Plan was added to the liability in December 2016.

In addition to the VCP, on May 29, 2008, DNREC requested that NRG's Indian River Power LLC participate in the development and performance of a Natural Resource Damage Assessment at the Burton Island Old Ash Landfill. NRG is currently working with DNREC and other trustees to close out the assessment process.

For further discussion of these matters, refer to Note 22, Commitments and Contingencies.