Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2015
Long-term Purchase Commitment [Line Items]
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]	Commitments and Contingencies Except as set forth below, in Note 13 and under "Environmental Laws and Regulations" in Item 2 of Part I and in Item 1 of Part II of this Form 10-Q, the circumstances set forth in Notes 14 and 15 to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company's 2014 Form 10-K appropriately represent, in all material respects, the current status of the Company's material commitments and contingent liabilities. Environmental Laws and Regulations Federal Clean Air Act New Source Review Litigation As previously reported, in July 2008, OG&E received a request for information from the EPA regarding Federal Clean Air Act compliance at OG&E's Muskogee and Sooner generating plants. On July 8, 2013, the Department of Justice, filed a complaint against OG&E in United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma alleging that OG&E did not follow the Federal Clean Air Act procedures for projecting emission increases attributable to eight projects that occurred between 2003 and 2006. The Sierra Club intervened in this proceeding. On September 6, 2013, OG&E filed a Motion to Dismiss the case. On January 15, 2015, U.S. District Judge Timothy DeGuisti dismissed the complaints filed by EPA and Sierra Club. The Court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims because Plaintiffs failed to present an actual “case or controversy” as required by Article III of the Constitution. The court also ruled in the alternative that, even if Plaintiffs had presented a case or controversy, it would have nonetheless “decline[d] to exercise jurisdiction.” EPA and the Sierra Club did not file an appeal of the Court’s ruling. On August 12, 2013, the Sierra Club filed a separate complaint against OG&E in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma alleging that OG&E projects at Muskogee Unit 6 in 2008, were made without obtaining a prevention of significant deterioration permit and that the plant had exceeded emissions limits for opacity and particulate matter. The Sierra Club seeks a permanent injunction preventing OG&E from operating the Muskogee generating plant. On March 4, 2014, the Eastern District dismissed the prevention of significant deterioration permit claim based on the statute of limitations, but allowed the opacity and particulate matter claims to proceed. To obtain the right to appeal this decision, the Sierra Club subsequently withdrew a Notice of Intent to Sue for additional Clean Air Act violations and asked the Eastern District to dismiss its remaining claims with prejudice. On August 27, 2014, the Eastern District granted the Sierra Club's request. The Sierra Club has filed a Notice of Appeal with the 10th Circuit where oral argument was held on March 18, 2015. At this time, OG&E continues to believe that it has acted in compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act, and OG&E expects to vigorously defend against the claims that have been asserted. If OG&E does not prevail in the remainder of the proceedings, the EPA and the Sierra Club could seek to require OG&E to install additional pollution control equipment, including scrubbers, baghouses and selective catalytic reduction systems with capital costs in excess of $1.1 billion and pay fines and significant penalties as a result of the allegations in the notice of violation. Section 113 of the Federal Clean Air Act (along with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1996) provides for civil penalties as much as $37,500 per day for each violation. Due to the uncertain and preliminary nature of this litigation, OG&E cannot provide a range of reasonably possible loss in this case. Other In the normal course of business, the Company is confronted with issues or events that may result in a contingent liability. These generally relate to lawsuits or claims made by third parties, including governmental agencies. When appropriate, management consults with legal counsel and other appropriate experts to assess the claim. If, in management's opinion, the Company has incurred a probable loss as set forth by GAAP, an estimate is made of the loss and the appropriate accounting entries are reflected in the Company's Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. At the present time, based on currently available information, the Company believes that any reasonably possible losses in excess of accrued amounts arising out of pending or threatened lawsuits or claims would not be quantitatively material to its financial statements and would not have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Commitments and Contingencies

Except as set forth below, in Note 13 and under "Environmental Laws and Regulations" in Item 2 of Part I and in Item 1 of Part II of this Form 10-Q, the circumstances set forth in Notes 14 and 15 to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company's 2014 Form 10-K appropriately represent, in all material respects, the current status of the Company's material commitments and contingent liabilities.

Environmental Laws and Regulations

Federal Clean Air Act New Source Review Litigation

As previously reported, in July 2008, OG&E received a request for information from the EPA regarding Federal Clean Air Act compliance at OG&E's Muskogee and Sooner generating plants.

On July 8, 2013, the Department of Justice, filed a complaint against OG&E in United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma alleging that OG&E did not follow the Federal Clean Air Act procedures for projecting emission increases attributable to eight projects that occurred between 2003 and 2006. The Sierra Club intervened in this proceeding. On September 6, 2013, OG&E filed a Motion to Dismiss the case. On January 15, 2015, U.S. District Judge Timothy DeGuisti dismissed the complaints filed by EPA and Sierra Club. The Court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims because Plaintiffs failed to present an actual “case or controversy” as required by Article III of the Constitution. The court also ruled in the alternative that, even if Plaintiffs had presented a case or controversy, it would have nonetheless “decline[d] to exercise jurisdiction.” EPA and the Sierra Club did not file an appeal of the Court’s ruling.

On August 12, 2013, the Sierra Club filed a separate complaint against OG&E in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma alleging that OG&E projects at Muskogee Unit 6 in 2008, were made without obtaining a prevention of significant deterioration permit and that the plant had exceeded emissions limits for opacity and particulate matter. The Sierra Club seeks a permanent injunction preventing OG&E from operating the Muskogee generating plant. On March 4, 2014, the Eastern District dismissed the prevention of significant deterioration permit claim based on the statute of limitations, but allowed the opacity and particulate matter claims to proceed. To obtain the right to appeal this decision, the Sierra Club subsequently withdrew a Notice of Intent to Sue for additional Clean Air Act violations and asked the Eastern District to dismiss its remaining claims with prejudice. On August 27, 2014, the Eastern District granted the Sierra Club's request. The Sierra Club has filed a Notice of Appeal with the 10th Circuit where oral argument was held on March 18, 2015.

At this time, OG&E continues to believe that it has acted in compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act, and OG&E expects to vigorously defend against the claims that have been asserted. If OG&E does not prevail in the remainder of the proceedings, the EPA and the Sierra Club could seek to require OG&E to install additional pollution control equipment, including scrubbers, baghouses and selective catalytic reduction systems with capital costs in excess of $1.1 billion and pay fines and significant penalties as a result of the allegations in the notice of violation. Section 113 of the Federal Clean Air Act (along with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1996) provides for civil penalties as much as $37,500 per day for each violation. Due to the uncertain and preliminary nature of this litigation, OG&E cannot provide a range of reasonably possible loss in this case.

Other

In the normal course of business, the Company is confronted with issues or events that may result in a contingent liability. These generally relate to lawsuits or claims made by third parties, including governmental agencies. When appropriate, management consults with legal counsel and other appropriate experts to assess the claim. If, in management's opinion, the Company has incurred a probable loss as set forth by GAAP, an estimate is made of the loss and the appropriate accounting entries are reflected in the Company's Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. At the present time, based on currently available information, the Company believes that any reasonably possible losses in excess of accrued amounts arising out of pending or threatened lawsuits or claims would not be quantitatively material to its financial statements and would not have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.