Commitments and Contingencies (GenOn, GenOn Americas Generation and GenOn Mid-Atlantic)	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies (GenOn, GenOn Americas Generation and GenOn Mid-Atlantic)	Commitments and Contingencies (GenOn, GenOn Americas Generation and GenOn Mid-Atlantic) This footnote should be read in conjunction with the complete description under Note 14, Commitment and Contingencies, to the Registrants' 2016 Form 10-K. Contingencies The Registrants’ material legal proceedings are described below. The Registrants believe that they have valid defenses to these legal proceedings and intend to defend them vigorously. The Registrants record 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 Registrants believe they have 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 Registrants are 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 Registrants’ liabilities and contingencies could be at amounts that are different from their currently recorded reserves and that such difference could be material. In addition to the legal proceedings noted below, the Registrants are parties 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 the Registrants’ respective consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. GenOn Chapter 11 Cases (GenOn and GenOn Americas Generation) — On the Petition Date, the GenOn Entities filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. As a result of such bankruptcy filings, substantially all proceedings pending against the GenOn Entities have been stayed by operation of Section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. Under the Restructuring Support Agreement to which the GenOn Entities, NRG and certain of GenOn's and GenOn Americas Generation's senior unsecured noteholders are parties, each of them has agreed to support Bankruptcy Court approval of the Plan. GenOn has a customary "fiduciary out" under the Restructuring Support Agreement. Moreover, the Bankruptcy Court may not approve the Plan. If the Plan is not approved and consummated, GenOn may not be entitled to the benefits of the Settlement Agreement provided under the Restructuring Support Agreement and it will remain subject to any claims of NRG and the noteholders, including claims relating to or arising out of any shared services and any other relationships or transactions between the companies. See Note 3, Chapter 11 Cases, for additional information. The GenOn Entities are in the process of evaluating claims submitted in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases to determine the validity of such claims but has not yet finished their assessment of valid claims and are currently unable to determine the amount of such claims. Actions Pursued by MC Asset Recovery (GenOn) — With Mirant Corporation's emergence from bankruptcy protection in 2006, certain actions filed by GenOn Energy Holdings and some of its subsidiaries against third parties were transferred to MC Asset Recovery, a wholly owned subsidiary of GenOn Energy Holdings. MC Asset Recovery is governed by a manager who is independent of NRG and GenOn. MC Asset Recovery is a disregarded entity for income tax purposes. Under the remaining action transferred to MC Asset Recovery, MC Asset Recovery seeks to recover damages from Commerzbank AG and various other banks, or the Commerzbank Defendants, for alleged fraudulent transfers that occurred prior to Mirant's bankruptcy proceedings. In December 2010, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas dismissed MC Asset Recovery's complaint against the Commerzbank Defendants. In January 2011, MC Asset Recovery appealed the District Court's dismissal of its complaint against the Commerzbank Defendants to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, or the Fifth Circuit. In March 2012, the Fifth Circuit reversed the District Court's dismissal and reinstated MC Asset Recovery's amended complaint against the Commerzbank Defendants. On December 10, 2015, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Commerzbank Defendants. On December 29, 2015, MC Asset Recovery filed a notice to appeal this judgment with the Fifth Circuit. On June 1, 2017, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the District Court's judgment. On June 12, 2017, MC Asset Recovery petitioned the Fifth Circuit for rehearing. The petition for rehearing was denied and a court order and judgment affirming the District Court's judgments was entered on July 17, 2017. On January 17, 2018, the bankruptcy court will hear a Motion for a Final Decree in the Mirant bankruptcy. Natural Gas Litigation (GenOn) — GenOn is party to several lawsuits, certain of which are class action lawsuits, in state and federal courts in Kansas, Missouri, Nevada 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. Defendants filed their briefs in opposition to class plaintiffs' motions for class certification on June 24, 2016. On March 30, 2017, the court denied the plaintiffs' motions for class certification. On April 13, 2017, the plaintiffs petitioned the Ninth Circuit for interlocutory review of the court’s order denying class certification. On June 13, 2017, the Ninth Circuit granted plaintiffs' petition for interlocutory review. In May 2016 in one of the Kansas cases, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Subsequently in December 2016, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the Ninth Circuit. The appeal has been fully briefed by the parties. GenOn has agreed to indemnify CenterPoint against certain losses relating to these lawsuits. In September 2012, the State of Nevada Supreme Court, which was handling the remaining case, affirmed dismissal by the Eighth Judicial District Court for Clark County, Nevada of all plaintiffs' claims against GenOn. In February 2013, the plaintiffs in the Nevada case filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari, thereby ending one of the five lawsuits. Mirant Chapter 11 Proceedings (GenOn and GenOn Americas Generation) — In July 2003, and various dates thereafter, the Mirant Debtors filed voluntary petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. GenOn Energy Holdings and most of the other Mirant Debtors emerged from bankruptcy on January 3, 2006, when the plan of reorganization that was approved in conjunction with Mirant Corporation's emergence from bankruptcy protection, or the Mirant Plan, became effective. The remaining Mirant Debtors emerged from bankruptcy on various dates in 2007. Approximately 461,000 of the shares of GenOn Energy Holdings common stock to be distributed under the Mirant Plan have not yet been distributed and have been reserved for distribution with respect to claims disputed by the Mirant Debtors that have not been resolved. Upon the Mirant/RRI Merger, those reserved shares converted into a reserve for approximately 1.3 million shares of GenOn common stock. Upon the NRG Merger, those reserved shares converted into a reserve for approximately 159,000 shares of NRG common stock. Under the terms of the Mirant Plan, upon the resolution of such a disputed claim, the claimant will receive the same pro rata distributions of common stock, cash, or both as previously allowed claims, regardless of the price at which the common stock is trading at the time the claim is resolved. If the aggregate amount of any such payouts results in the number of reserved shares being insufficient, additional shares of common stock may be issued to address the shortfall. On January 17, 2018, the bankruptcy court will hear a Motion for a Final Decree in the Mirant Bankruptcy. Potomac River Environmental Investigation (GenOn Mid-Atlantic) — In March 2013, NRG Potomac River LLC, a subsidiary of GenOn Mid-Atlantic, 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. GenOn Noteholders' Lawsuit (GenOn and GenOn Americas Generation) — On December 13, 2016, certain indenture trustees for an ad hoc group of holders, or the Noteholders, of the GenOn Energy, Inc. 7.875% Senior Notes due 2017, 9.500% Notes due 2018, and 9.875% Notes due 2020, and the GenOn Americas Generation, LLC 8.50% Senior Notes due 2021 and 9.125% Senior Notes due 2031, along with certain of the Noteholders, filed a complaint in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware against NRG and GenOn alleging certain claims related to a services agreement between NRG and GenOn. Plaintiffs generally seek recovery of all monies paid under the services agreement and any other damages that the court deems appropriate. On February 3, 2017, the court entered an order approving a Standstill Agreement whereby the parties agreed to suspend all deadlines in the case until March 1, 2017. The Standstill Agreement terminated on March 1, 2017. On April 30, 2017, the Noteholders filed an amended complaint that asserts (i) additional fraudulent transfer claims in relation to GenOn’s sale of the Marsh Landing project to NRG Yield LLC, (ii) alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by certain current and former officers and directors of GenOn in relation to the management services agreement and the alleged usurpation of corporate opportunities concerning the Mandalay and Canal projects and (iii) claims against NRG for allegedly aiding and abetting such claimed breaches of fiduciary duties. In addition to NRG and GenOn, the amended complaint names NRG Yield LLC and certain current and former officers and directors of GenOn as defendants. The plaintiffs generally seek recovery of all monies paid under the services agreement and any other damages that the court deems appropriate. On March 31, 2017, NRG and GenOn filed separate motions to dismiss the complaint, but such motions are superseded by the amended complaint. Pursuant to the terms of the Restructuring Support Agreement, this matter should ultimately be resolved if the GenOn Entities' plan of reorganization is approved by the Bankruptcy Court. 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. Morgantown v. GenOn Mid-Atlantic — On June 8, 2017, Morgantown and Dickerson Owner Lessors filed a lawsuit against GenOn Mid-Atlantic, LLC, NRG North America LLC, GenOn Americas Generation, LLC, NRG Americas, Inc., GenOn Energy Holdings, Inc., GenOn Energy, Inc., and NRG Energy, Inc. in New York State Supreme Court. The plaintiffs allege that they were overcharged by defendants for certain services outlined in a Services Agreement and that defendants caused a Qualified Credit Support portion of a Participation Agreement, or QCS Agreement, to be violated by causing the transfer of certain monies outside the allowable confines set forth in the QCS Agreement. In addition, plaintiffs claim that the transfers were unfairly executed and done so in an effort to defraud plaintiffs and hinder their ability to continue to do business. As such, plaintiffs seek, among other things, the return of certain transferred funds and service charges paid and to bar defendants from executing additional transfers on plaintiffs’ behalf. A claims estimation ruling on this matter by the Bankruptcy Court could occur as early as November 7, 2017.

Commitments and Contingencies (GenOn, GenOn Americas Generation and GenOn Mid-Atlantic)

This footnote should be read in conjunction with the complete description under Note 14, Commitment and Contingencies, to the Registrants' 2016 Form 10-K.

Contingencies

The Registrants’ material legal proceedings are described below. The Registrants believe that they have valid defenses to these legal proceedings and intend to defend them vigorously. The Registrants record 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 Registrants believe they have 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 Registrants are 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 Registrants’ liabilities and contingencies could be at amounts that are different from their currently recorded reserves and that such difference could be material.

In addition to the legal proceedings noted below, the Registrants are parties 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 the Registrants’ respective consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

GenOn Chapter 11 Cases (GenOn and GenOn Americas Generation) — On the Petition Date, the GenOn Entities filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. As a result of such bankruptcy filings, substantially all proceedings pending against the GenOn Entities have been stayed by operation of Section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. Under the Restructuring Support Agreement to which the GenOn Entities, NRG and certain of GenOn's and GenOn Americas Generation's senior unsecured noteholders are parties, each of them has agreed to support Bankruptcy Court approval of the Plan. GenOn has a customary "fiduciary out" under the Restructuring Support Agreement. Moreover, the Bankruptcy Court may not approve the Plan. If the Plan is not approved and consummated, GenOn may not be entitled to the benefits of the Settlement Agreement provided under the Restructuring Support Agreement and it will remain subject to any claims of NRG and the noteholders, including claims relating to or arising out of any shared services and any other relationships or transactions between the companies. See Note 3, Chapter 11 Cases, for additional information. The GenOn Entities are in the process of evaluating claims submitted in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases to determine the validity of such claims but has not yet finished their assessment of valid claims and are currently unable to determine the amount of such claims.

Actions Pursued by MC Asset Recovery (GenOn) — With Mirant Corporation's emergence from bankruptcy protection in 2006, certain actions filed by GenOn Energy Holdings and some of its subsidiaries against third parties were transferred to MC Asset Recovery, a wholly owned subsidiary of GenOn Energy Holdings. MC Asset Recovery is governed by a manager who is independent of NRG and GenOn. MC Asset Recovery is a disregarded entity for income tax purposes. Under the remaining action transferred to MC Asset Recovery, MC Asset Recovery seeks to recover damages from Commerzbank AG and various other banks, or the Commerzbank Defendants, for alleged fraudulent transfers that occurred prior to Mirant's bankruptcy proceedings. In December 2010, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas dismissed MC Asset Recovery's complaint against the Commerzbank Defendants. In January 2011, MC Asset Recovery appealed the District Court's dismissal of its complaint against the Commerzbank Defendants to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, or the Fifth Circuit. In March 2012, the Fifth Circuit reversed the District Court's dismissal and reinstated MC Asset Recovery's amended complaint against the Commerzbank Defendants. On December 10, 2015, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Commerzbank Defendants. On December 29, 2015, MC Asset Recovery filed a notice to appeal this judgment with the Fifth Circuit. On June 1, 2017, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the District Court's judgment. On June 12, 2017, MC Asset Recovery petitioned the Fifth Circuit for rehearing. The petition for rehearing was denied and a court order and judgment affirming the District Court's judgments was entered on July 17, 2017. On January 17, 2018, the bankruptcy court will hear a Motion for a Final Decree in the Mirant bankruptcy.

Natural Gas Litigation (GenOn) — GenOn is party to several lawsuits, certain of which are class action lawsuits, in state and federal courts in Kansas, Missouri, Nevada 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. Defendants filed their briefs in opposition to class plaintiffs' motions for class certification on June 24, 2016. On March 30, 2017, the court denied the plaintiffs' motions for class certification. On April 13, 2017, the plaintiffs petitioned the Ninth Circuit for interlocutory review of the court’s order denying class certification. On June 13, 2017, the Ninth Circuit granted plaintiffs' petition for interlocutory review.

In May 2016 in one of the Kansas cases, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Subsequently in December 2016, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the Ninth Circuit. The appeal has been fully briefed by the parties. GenOn has agreed to indemnify CenterPoint against certain losses relating to these lawsuits.

In September 2012, the State of Nevada Supreme Court, which was handling the remaining case, affirmed dismissal by the Eighth Judicial District Court for Clark County, Nevada of all plaintiffs' claims against GenOn. In February 2013, the plaintiffs in the Nevada case filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari, thereby ending one of the five lawsuits.

Mirant Chapter 11 Proceedings (GenOn and GenOn Americas Generation) — In July 2003, and various dates thereafter, the Mirant Debtors filed voluntary petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. GenOn Energy Holdings and most of the other Mirant Debtors emerged from bankruptcy on January 3, 2006, when the plan of reorganization that was approved in conjunction with Mirant Corporation's emergence from bankruptcy protection, or the Mirant Plan, became effective. The remaining Mirant Debtors emerged from bankruptcy on various dates in 2007. Approximately 461,000 of the shares of GenOn Energy Holdings common stock to be distributed under the Mirant Plan have not yet been distributed and have been reserved for distribution with respect to claims disputed by the Mirant Debtors that have not been resolved. Upon the Mirant/RRI Merger, those reserved shares converted into a reserve for approximately 1.3 million shares of GenOn common stock. Upon the NRG Merger, those reserved shares converted into a reserve for approximately 159,000 shares of NRG common stock. Under the terms of the Mirant Plan, upon the resolution of such a disputed claim, the claimant will receive the same pro rata distributions of common stock, cash, or both as previously allowed claims, regardless of the price at which the common stock is trading at the time the claim is resolved. If the aggregate amount of any such payouts results in the number of reserved shares being insufficient, additional shares of common stock may be issued to address the shortfall. On January 17, 2018, the bankruptcy court will hear a Motion for a Final Decree in the Mirant Bankruptcy.

Potomac River Environmental Investigation (GenOn Mid-Atlantic) — In March 2013, NRG Potomac River LLC, a subsidiary of GenOn Mid-Atlantic, 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.

GenOn Noteholders' Lawsuit (GenOn and GenOn Americas Generation) — On December 13, 2016, certain indenture trustees for an ad hoc group of holders, or the Noteholders, of the GenOn Energy, Inc. 7.875% Senior Notes due 2017, 9.500% Notes due 2018, and 9.875% Notes due 2020, and the GenOn Americas Generation, LLC 8.50% Senior Notes due 2021 and 9.125% Senior Notes due 2031, along with certain of the Noteholders, filed a complaint in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware against NRG and GenOn alleging certain claims related to a services agreement between NRG and GenOn. Plaintiffs generally seek recovery of all monies paid under the services agreement and any other damages that the court deems appropriate. On February 3, 2017, the court entered an order approving a Standstill Agreement whereby the parties agreed to suspend all deadlines in the case until March 1, 2017. The Standstill Agreement terminated on March 1, 2017. On April 30, 2017, the Noteholders filed an amended complaint that asserts (i) additional fraudulent transfer claims in relation to GenOn’s sale of the Marsh Landing project to NRG Yield LLC, (ii) alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by certain current and former officers and directors of GenOn in relation to the management services agreement and the alleged usurpation of corporate opportunities concerning the Mandalay and Canal projects and (iii) claims against NRG for allegedly aiding and abetting such claimed breaches of fiduciary duties. In addition to NRG and GenOn, the amended complaint names NRG Yield LLC and certain current and former officers and directors of GenOn as defendants. The plaintiffs generally seek recovery of all monies paid under the services agreement and any other damages that the court deems appropriate. On March 31, 2017, NRG and GenOn filed separate motions to dismiss the complaint, but such motions are superseded by the amended complaint. Pursuant to the terms of the Restructuring Support Agreement, this matter should ultimately be resolved if the GenOn Entities' plan of reorganization is approved by the Bankruptcy Court.

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.

Morgantown v. GenOn Mid-Atlantic — On June 8, 2017, Morgantown and Dickerson Owner Lessors filed a lawsuit against GenOn Mid-Atlantic, LLC, NRG North America LLC, GenOn Americas Generation, LLC, NRG Americas, Inc., GenOn Energy Holdings, Inc., GenOn Energy, Inc., and NRG Energy, Inc. in New York State Supreme Court. The plaintiffs allege that they were overcharged by defendants for certain services outlined in a Services Agreement and that defendants caused a Qualified Credit Support portion of a Participation Agreement, or QCS Agreement, to be violated by causing the transfer of certain monies outside the allowable confines set forth in the QCS Agreement. In addition, plaintiffs claim that the transfers were unfairly executed and done so in an effort to defraud plaintiffs and hinder their ability to continue to do business. As such, plaintiffs seek, among other things, the return of certain transferred funds and service charges paid and to bar defendants from executing additional transfers on plaintiffs’ behalf. A claims estimation ruling on this matter by the Bankruptcy Court could occur as early as November 7, 2017.