Carty Generating Station (Notes)	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Carty Generating Station [Abstract]
contractors [Text Block]	CARTY GENERATING STATION The Company is constructing the Carty Generating Station (Carty), a 440 MW baseload natural gas-fired generating plant in Eastern Oregon, located adjacent to the Boardman coal plant. As of March 31, 2016, PGE had $501 million, including $50 million of AFDC, included in CWIP for the project as compared to $424 million, including $41 million of AFDC, as of December 31, 2015. The final order issued by the OPUC on November 3, 2015 in connection with the Company’s 2016 GRC, authorized the inclusion in customer prices of capital costs for Carty of up to $514 million, including AFDC, as well as Carty’s operating costs, at such time that the plant is placed in service, provided that occurs by July 31, 2016. In 2013, the Company entered into an agreement (Construction Agreement) for engineering, procurement and construction of Carty with Abeinsa Abener Teyma General Partnership (Contractor or Abeinsa). On December 18, 2015, the Company declared Abeinsa in default under multiple provisions of the Construction Agreement and terminated the Construction Agreement. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Zurich American Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to collectively as the Sureties) have provided a performance bond (Performance Bond) of $145.6 million under the Construction Agreement. Following termination of the Construction Agreement, PGE, in consultation with the Sureties, brought on new contractors and construction resumed during the week of December 21, 2015. On January 28, 2016, PGE received notice from the International Court of Arbitration that Abengoa S.A., the parent company of the Contractor, had submitted a Request for Arbitration in which it alleged that the Company’s termination of the Construction Agreement was wrongful and in breach of the agreement terms and does not give rise to liability of Abengoa S.A. under the terms of a guaranty in favor of PGE pursuant to which Abengoa S.A. agreed to guaranty certain obligations of the Contractor under the Construction Agreement. PGE disagrees with the assertions in the Request for Arbitration and on February 29, 2016 filed a Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon seeking to have the arbitration claim dismissed on the grounds that the Company has not made a demand under the Abengoa S.A. guaranty, and therefore the matter is not ripe for arbitration. On March 28, 2016, Abengoa S.A. and several of its foreign affiliates filed petitions for recognition under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code requesting interim relief, including an injunction precluding the prosecution of any proceedings against the Chapter 15 debtors. On March 29, 2016, a number of Abengoa S.A.’s U.S. subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, including the four entities that collectively comprise the Contractor. On March 31, 2016, the Delaware Bankruptcy Court granted the petition for interim relief. As a result, on April 5, 2016, the U.S. District Court issued an order stating that the District Court action was stayed. On March 9, 2016, the Sureties delivered a letter to the Company denying liability in whole under the Performance Bond. In the letter, the Sureties made the following assertions in support of their determination: 1. that, because the Contractor and its parent company, Abengoa S.A. have alleged that PGE wrongfully terminated the Construction Agreement and have requested arbitration of the claim, PGE must disprove such claim as a condition precedent to recovery under the Performance Bond; and 2. that, irrespective of the outcome of the foregoing wrongful termination claim, the Sureties have various contractual and equitable defenses to payment and are not liable to PGE for any amount under the Performance Bond. The Company disagrees with the Sureties’ assertions and on March 23, 2016 filed a breach of contract action against the Sureties in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The Company’s complaint disputes the Sureties’ assertion that the Company wrongfully terminated the Construction Agreement and asserts that the Sureties are responsible for the payment of all damages sustained by PGE as a result of the Sureties’ breach of contract, including damages in excess of the $145.6 million stated amount of the Performance Bond. Such damages include additional costs incurred by PGE to complete Carty. On April 15, 2016, the Sureties filed a motion to stay the proceeding, alleging that PGE’s claims should be addressed in the arbitration proceeding initiated by Abengoa S.A. in January, 2016 and referenced above because PGE’s claims are intertwined with the issues involved in such arbitration and all parties necessary to resolve PGE’s claims are parties to the arbitration. PGE disagrees with this assertion and will oppose the Sureties’ motion to stay the proceeding. As a result of the termination of the Construction Agreement, the transition to a new construction team, and related matters, additional costs have been and are expected to be incurred to complete construction of Carty. PGE currently expects the total cost of Carty could range from $635 million to $670 million, including AFDC. The Company is targeting an in service date in July 2016. However, due to uncertainties relating to the work performed by the Contractor and the work necessary to correct defects and complete construction, the costs and completion date for Carty could vary from the Company’s current projection. In the event the total project costs incurred by PGE, net of any amounts received from the Sureties, Abengoa S.A. or the Contractor, exceed the OPUC’s approved amount of $514 million, including AFDC, the Company intends to seek approval to recover the excess amounts in customer prices. The Company will also likely seek a regulatory deferral of the revenue requirements associated with any costs in excess of the $514 million approved by the OPUC from Carty’s in service date until such amounts are approved in a subsequent GRC proceeding. However, there is no assurance that such recovery would be allowed by the OPUC. In accordance with GAAP and the Company’s accounting policies, these costs would be charged to expense at the time disallowance of recovery becomes probable and a reasonable estimate of the amount of such disallowance can be made. As of the date of this report, the Company has concluded that the likelihood that a portion of the cost of Carty will be disallowed for recovery in customer prices is less than probable. Accordingly, no loss has been recorded to date related to the project. If the in service date for Carty were to be delayed beyond July 31, 2016, PGE intends to pursue one or more alternative avenues to obtain OPUC approval for the inclusion of Carty costs in customer prices. Under such circumstance, the Company might not be able to recover some, or all, of the net revenue requirements for Carty from the date Carty is placed into service until the time approved prices go in effect.

CARTY GENERATING STATION

The Company is constructing the Carty Generating Station (Carty), a 440 MW baseload natural gas-fired generating plant in Eastern Oregon, located adjacent to the Boardman coal plant. As of March 31, 2016, PGE had $501 million, including $50 million of AFDC, included in CWIP for the project as compared to $424 million, including $41 million of AFDC, as of December 31, 2015. The final order issued by the OPUC on November 3, 2015 in connection with the Company’s 2016 GRC, authorized the inclusion in customer prices of capital costs for Carty of up to $514 million, including AFDC, as well as Carty’s operating costs, at such time that the plant is placed in service, provided that occurs by July 31, 2016.

In 2013, the Company entered into an agreement (Construction Agreement) for engineering, procurement and construction of Carty with Abeinsa Abener Teyma General Partnership (Contractor or Abeinsa). On December 18, 2015, the Company declared Abeinsa in default under multiple provisions of the Construction Agreement and terminated the Construction Agreement. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Zurich American Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to collectively as the Sureties) have provided a performance bond (Performance Bond) of $145.6 million under the Construction Agreement. Following termination of the Construction Agreement, PGE, in consultation with the Sureties, brought on new contractors and construction resumed during the week of December 21, 2015.

On January 28, 2016, PGE received notice from the International Court of Arbitration that Abengoa S.A., the parent company of the Contractor, had submitted a Request for Arbitration in which it alleged that the Company’s termination of the Construction Agreement was wrongful and in breach of the agreement terms and does not give rise to liability of Abengoa S.A. under the terms of a guaranty in favor of PGE pursuant to which Abengoa S.A. agreed to guaranty certain obligations of the Contractor under the Construction Agreement. PGE disagrees with the assertions in the Request for Arbitration and on February 29, 2016 filed a Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon seeking to have the arbitration claim dismissed on the grounds that the Company has not made a demand under the Abengoa S.A. guaranty, and therefore the matter is not ripe for arbitration. On March 28, 2016, Abengoa S.A. and several of its foreign affiliates filed petitions for recognition under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code requesting interim relief, including an injunction precluding the prosecution of any proceedings against the Chapter 15 debtors. On March 29, 2016, a number of Abengoa S.A.’s U.S. subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, including the four entities that collectively comprise the Contractor. On March 31, 2016, the Delaware Bankruptcy Court granted the petition for interim relief. As a result, on April 5, 2016, the U.S. District Court issued an order stating that the District Court action was stayed.

On March 9, 2016, the Sureties delivered a letter to the Company denying liability in whole under the Performance Bond. In the letter, the Sureties made the following assertions in support of their determination:

1. that, because the Contractor and its parent company, Abengoa S.A. have alleged that PGE wrongfully terminated the Construction Agreement and have requested arbitration of the claim, PGE must disprove such claim as a condition precedent to recovery under the Performance Bond; and

2. that, irrespective of the outcome of the foregoing wrongful termination claim, the Sureties have various contractual and equitable defenses to payment and are not liable to PGE for any amount under the Performance Bond.

The Company disagrees with the Sureties’ assertions and on March 23, 2016 filed a breach of contract action against the Sureties in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The Company’s complaint disputes the Sureties’ assertion that the Company wrongfully terminated the Construction Agreement and asserts that the Sureties are responsible for the payment of all damages sustained by PGE as a result of the Sureties’ breach of contract, including damages in excess of the $145.6 million stated amount of the Performance Bond. Such damages include additional costs incurred by PGE to complete Carty. On April 15, 2016, the Sureties filed a motion to stay the proceeding, alleging that PGE’s claims should be addressed in the arbitration proceeding initiated by Abengoa S.A. in January, 2016 and referenced above because PGE’s claims are intertwined with the issues involved in such arbitration and all parties necessary to resolve PGE’s claims are parties to the arbitration. PGE disagrees with this assertion and will oppose the Sureties’ motion to stay the proceeding.

As a result of the termination of the Construction Agreement, the transition to a new construction team, and related matters, additional costs have been and are expected to be incurred to complete construction of Carty. PGE currently expects the total cost of Carty could range from $635 million to $670 million, including AFDC. The Company is targeting an in service date in July 2016. However, due to uncertainties relating to the work performed by the Contractor and the work necessary to correct defects and complete construction, the costs and completion date for Carty could vary from the Company’s current projection.

In the event the total project costs incurred by PGE, net of any amounts received from the Sureties, Abengoa S.A. or the Contractor, exceed the OPUC’s approved amount of $514 million, including AFDC, the Company intends to seek approval to recover the excess amounts in customer prices. The Company will also likely seek a regulatory deferral of the revenue requirements associated with any costs in excess of the $514 million approved by the OPUC from Carty’s in service date until such amounts are approved in a subsequent GRC proceeding. However, there is no assurance that such recovery would be allowed by the OPUC. In accordance with GAAP and the Company’s accounting policies, these costs would be charged to expense at the time disallowance of recovery becomes probable and a reasonable estimate of the amount of such disallowance can be made. As of the date of this report, the Company has concluded that the likelihood that a portion of the cost of Carty will be disallowed for recovery in customer prices is less than probable. Accordingly, no loss has been recorded to date related to the project. If the in service date for Carty were to be delayed beyond July 31, 2016, PGE intends to pursue one or more alternative avenues to obtain OPUC approval for the inclusion of Carty costs in customer prices. Under such circumstance, the Company might not be able to recover some, or all, of the net revenue requirements for Carty from the date Carty is placed into service until the time approved prices go in effect.