Goodwill Impairment	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2013
Goodwill and Intangible Asset Impairment [Abstract]
Goodwill Impairment	Note 18 – Goodwill Impairment In connection with the acquisition of DPL by AES, DPL allocated the purchase price to goodwill for two reporting units, the DP&L reporting unit, which includes DP&L and other entities, and DPLER. Of the total goodwill, approximately $2.4 billion was allocated to the DP&L reporting unit and the remainder was allocated to DPLER. As of October 1, 2013, DPL performed its annual goodwill impairment test at its DP&L reporting unit and recognized a goodwill impairment expense of $306.3 million. In performing the annual goodwill impairment test as of October 1, 2013, Step 1 of the test failed as the fair value of the reporting unit no longer exceeded its carrying amount due primarily to lower estimates of capacity prices in future years as well as lower dark spreads contributing to lower overall operating margins for the business. The fair value of the reporting unit was determined under the income approach using a discounted cash flow valuation model. The significant assumptions included within the discounted cash flow valuation model were capacity price curves, amount of the non-bypassable charge, commodity price curves, dispatching, valuation of regulatory assets and liabilities, discount rates and deferred income taxes. In Step 2, goodwill was determined to have an implied fair value of $317.0 million after the hypothetical purchase price allocation under the accounting guidance for business combinations. DPL recognized a goodwill impairment expense of $1.817.2 million in 2012 at the DP&L reporting unit. During 2012, North American natural gas prices fell significantly compared to the previous year, which exerted downward pressure on wholesale power prices in the Ohio power market. These falling power prices compressed wholesale margins at DP&L and led to increased customer switching from DP&L to other CRES providers, including DPLER, who were offering retail prices lower than DP&L’s standard service offer. In addition, several municipalities in DP&L’s service territory passed ordinances allowing them to become government aggregators and contracted with CRES providers to provide generation service to the customers located within the municipal boundaries, further contributing to the switching trend. CRES providers also became more active in DP&L’s service territory. These developments reduced DP&L’s forecasted profitability, operating cash flows and liquidity. As a result, in September 2012, management lowered its previous forecasts of profitability and operating cash flows. Collectively, these events were considered an interim goodwill impairment indicator at the DP&L reporting unit. There were no interim impairment indicators identified for the goodwill at DPLER. The goodwill associated with the Merger is not deductible for tax purposes. Accordingly, there is no cash tax or financial statement tax benefit related to the impairment. The Company’s effective tax rates were impacted by the pretax impairment, however. The Company’s effective tax rates were (11.2%) and (2.8%) for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Note 18 – Goodwill Impairment

In connection with the acquisition of DPL by AES, DPL allocated the purchase price to goodwill for two reporting units, the DP&L reporting unit, which includes DP&L and other entities, and DPLER. Of the total goodwill, approximately $2.4 billion was allocated to the DP&L reporting unit and the remainder was allocated to DPLER.

As of October 1, 2013, DPL performed its annual goodwill impairment test at its DP&L reporting unit and recognized a goodwill impairment expense of $306.3 million. In performing the annual goodwill impairment test as of October 1, 2013, Step 1 of the test failed as the fair value of the reporting unit no longer exceeded its carrying amount due primarily to lower estimates of capacity prices in future years as well as lower dark spreads contributing to lower overall operating margins for the business. The fair value of the reporting unit was determined under the income approach using a discounted cash flow valuation model. The significant assumptions included within the discounted cash flow valuation model were capacity price curves, amount of the non-bypassable charge, commodity price curves, dispatching, valuation of regulatory assets and liabilities, discount rates and deferred income taxes. In Step 2, goodwill was determined to have an implied fair value of $317.0 million after the hypothetical purchase price allocation under the accounting guidance for business combinations.

DPL recognized a goodwill impairment expense of $1.817.2 million in 2012 at the DP&L reporting unit. During 2012, North American natural gas prices fell significantly compared to the previous year, which exerted downward pressure on wholesale power prices in the Ohio power market. These falling power prices compressed wholesale margins at DP&L and led to increased customer switching from DP&L to other CRES providers, including DPLER, who were offering retail prices lower than DP&L’s standard service offer. In addition, several municipalities in DP&L’s service territory passed ordinances allowing them to become government aggregators and contracted with CRES providers to provide generation service to the customers located within the municipal boundaries, further contributing to the switching trend. CRES providers also became more active in DP&L’s service territory. These developments reduced DP&L’s forecasted profitability, operating cash flows and liquidity. As a result, in September 2012, management lowered its previous forecasts of profitability and operating cash flows. Collectively, these events were considered an interim goodwill impairment indicator at the DP&L reporting unit. There were no interim impairment indicators identified for the goodwill at DPLER.

The goodwill associated with the Merger is not deductible for tax purposes. Accordingly, there is no cash tax or financial statement tax benefit related to the impairment. The Company’s effective tax rates were impacted by the pretax impairment, however. The Company’s effective tax rates were (11.2%) and (2.8%) for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.