Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Third-Party Power Purchase Agreements During the six months ended June 30, 2015, SCE had new power procurement contracts with additional commitments estimated to be: $41 million for remainder of 2015, $208 million for 2016, $297 million for 2017, $347 million for 2018, $384 million for 2019 and $4.7 billion for the period remaining thereafter. Indemnities Edison International and SCE have various financial and performance guarantees and indemnity agreements which are issued in the normal course of business. Edison International and SCE have provided indemnifications through contracts entered into in the normal course of business. These are primarily indemnifications against adverse litigation outcomes in connection with underwriting agreements, and indemnities for specified environmental liabilities and income taxes with respect to assets sold. Edison International's and SCE's obligations under these agreements may or may not be limited in terms of time and/or amount, and in some instances Edison International and SCE may have recourse against third parties. Edison International and SCE have not recorded a liability related to these indemnities. The overall maximum amount of the obligations under these indemnifications cannot be reasonably estimated. SCE has indemnified the City of Redlands, California in connection with Mountainview's California Energy Commission permit for cleanup or associated actions related to groundwater contaminated by perchlorate due to the disposal of filter cake at the City's solid waste landfill. The obligations under this agreement are not limited to a specific time period or subject to a maximum liability. SCE has not recorded a liability related to this indemnity. Contingencies In addition to the matters disclosed in these Notes, Edison International and SCE are involved in other legal, tax and regulatory proceedings before various courts and governmental agencies regarding matters arising in the ordinary course of business. Edison International and SCE believe the outcome of these other proceedings will not, individually or in the aggregate, materially affect its results of operations or liquidity. San Onofre Related Matters Replacement steam generators were installed at San Onofre in 2010 and 2011. On January 31, 2012, a leak suddenly occurred in one of the heat transfer tubes in San Onofre's Unit 3 steam generators. The Unit was safely taken off-line and subsequent inspections revealed excessive tube wear. Unit 2 was off-line for a planned outage when areas of unexpected tube wear were also discovered. On June 6, 2013, SCE decided to permanently retire Units 2 and 3. Settlement of San Onofre CPUC Proceedings In November 2014, the CPUC approved the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement that SCE had entered into with TURN, ORA, SDG&E, the Coalition of California Utility Employees, and Friends of the Earth. The San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement resolved the CPUC's investigation regarding the Steam Generator Replacement Project at San Onofre and the related outages and subsequent shutdown of San Onofre. The San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement does not affect proceedings related to recoveries from third parties described below, but does describe how shareholders and customers will share any potential recoveries. A federal lawsuit challenging the CPUC's authority to permit rate recovery of San Onofre costs and an application to the CPUC for rehearing of its decision approving the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement were filed in November and December 2014, respectively. In April 2015, the federal lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice and the plaintiffs in that case appealed the dismissal to the Ninth Circuit in May 2015. Both the appeal and the application for rehearing remain pending. In February 2015, SCE filed in the OII proceeding a Late-Filed Notice of Ex Parte Communication regarding a meeting in March 2013 between an SCE senior executive and the president of the CPUC, both of whom have since retired from their respective positions. Following this filing, the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility ("A4NR"), one of the intervenors in the OII, filed a motion requesting that the CPUC institute an investigation into whether sanctions should be imposed on SCE for the late notice of the March 2013 meeting. The motion requests that the CPUC order SCE to produce all ex parte communications between SCE and the CPUC or its staff since January 31, 2012 and all internal SCE unprivileged communications that discuss such ex parte communications. On May 6, 2015, A4NR amended its motion to recommend that the CPUC impose a $38.2 million penalty on SCE and additional restrictions on ex parte communications. On April 14, 2015, the OII ALJs ordered SCE, among other things, to produce unprivileged documents pertaining to oral and written communications regarding the possible settlement of the OII proceeding between any SCE employee and CPUC decision makers from March 2013 to November 2014. SCE produced responsive documents and information on April 29, 2015. On June 26, 2015, the ALJs requested additional information, which SCE provided on July 3, 2015. Subsequently, another intervenor, the Coalition to Decommission San Onofre, filed a motion to move the start date for the production of documents under the CPUC’s order to January 31, 2012 and to authorize the intervenors to conduct discovery of SCE. That motion remains pending. On April 17, 2015, ORA and TURN issued press releases asking the CPUC to impose penalties on SCE as a sanction for allegedly improper ex parte communications pertaining to San Onofre or failures to report such communications. ORA recommended penalties in the amount of $648 million, representing ORA's calculation of the difference in ratepayer value between ORA's initial settlement negotiating position in the San Onofre OII and the approved settlement. TURN did not recommend a penalty amount. On April 27, 2015, A4NR filed a petition to modify the CPUC’s decision approving the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement based on SCE’s alleged failures to disclose communications between SCE and CPUC decision-makers pertaining to the issues in the San Onofre OII. The petition seeks the reversal of the decision approving the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement and reopening of the OII proceeding. Subsequently, TURN filed a response supporting A4NR's petition to reopen the San Onofre OII proceeding. Edison International and SCE cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings. NEIL Insurance Claims San Onofre carries accidental property damage and carried accidental outage insurance issued by Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited ("NEIL") and has placed NEIL on notice of claims under both policies. The NEIL policies have a number of exclusions and limitations that NEIL may assert reduce or eliminate coverage (such as a limitation under which benefits may be reduced by up to 90% for periods following a planned shutdown), and SCE may choose to challenge NEIL's application of any such exclusions and limitations. Through August 30, 2014, the San Onofre owners had submitted approximately $433 million in claims (SCE's share of which is approximately $339 million) under the accidental outage insurance. These claims continue to be under review and are subject to revision and updating over time. The accidental outage insurance at San Onofre has been canceled prospectively as a result of the permanent retirement. SCE has not submitted a proof of loss under the accidental property damage insurance but reserves the right to do so. The parties are continuing discussions. SCE may challenge any reduction or denial of coverage that results from any coverage determination by NEIL. No amounts have been recognized in SCE's financial statements, pending NEIL's response to the San Onofre owners’ claims. Under the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement, recoveries from NEIL, if any, will first be applied to reimburse costs incurred in pursuing such recoveries, including litigation costs. To the extent SCE's share of recoveries from NEIL exceeds such costs, recoveries under the accidental outage insurance will be allocated 95% to customers and 5% to SCE and all other NEIL recoveries will be allocated 82.5% to customers and 17.5% to SCE. SCE customers' portion of amounts recovered from NEIL would be distributed to SCE customers via a credit to SCE's ERRA account. MHI Claims SCE is also pursuing claims against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. and a related company ("MHI"), which designed and supplied the RSGs. MHI warranted the RSGs for an initial period of 20 years from acceptance and is contractually obligated to repair or replace defective items with dispatch and to pay specified damages for certain repairs. MHI's stated liability under the purchase agreement is limited to $138 million and excludes consequential damages, defined to include "the cost of replacement power;" however, limitations in the contract are subject to applicable exceptions both in the contract and under law. SCE has advised MHI that it believes one or more of such exceptions apply and that MHI's liability is not limited to $138 million. MHI has advised SCE that it disagrees. In October 2013, SCE sent MHI a formal request for binding arbitration under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce in accordance with the purchase contract seeking damages for all losses. In the request for arbitration, SCE alleges contract and tort claims and seeks at least $4 billion in damages on behalf of itself and its customers and in its capacity as Operating Agent for San Onofre. MHI has denied any liability and has asserted counterclaims for $41 million, for which SCE has denied any liability. Each of the other San Onofre owners sued MHI, alleging claims arising from MHI's supplying the faulty steam generators. These litigation claims have been stayed pending the arbitration. The other owners (SDG&E and Riverside) have been added as additional claimants in the arbitration. The arbitration is being conducted pursuant to a confidentiality order issued by the arbitration panel. SCE, on behalf of itself and the other San Onofre owners, has submitted seven invoices to MHI totaling $149 million for steam generator repair costs incurred through April 30, 2013. MHI paid the first invoice of $45 million, while reserving its right to challenge it and subsequently rejected a portion of the first invoice and has not paid further invoices, claiming further documentation is required, which SCE disputes. SCE recorded its share of the invoice paid (approximately $35 million) as a reduction of repair and inspection costs in 2012. Under the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement, recoveries from MHI (including amounts paid by MHI under the first invoice), if any, will first be applied to reimburse costs incurred in pursuing such recoveries, including litigation costs. To the extent SCE's share of recoveries from MHI exceed such costs, they will be allocated 50% to customers and 50% to SCE. The first $282 million of SCE's customers' portion of such recoveries from MHI will be distributed to customers via a credit to a sub-account of SCE's Base Revenue Requirement Balancing Account ("BRRBA"), reducing revenue requirements from customers. Amounts in excess of the first $282 million distributable to SCE customers will reduce SCE's regulatory asset represented by the unamortized balance of investment in San Onofre base plant, reducing the revenue requirement needed to amortize such investment. The amortization period, however, will be unaffected. Any additional amounts received after the regulatory asset is recovered will be applied to the BRRBA. The San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement provides the utilities with the discretion to resolve the NEIL and MHI disputes without CPUC approval or review, but the utilities are obligated to use their best efforts to inform the CPUC of any settlement or other resolution of these disputes to the extent this is possible without compromising any aspect of the resolution. SCE and SDG&E have also agreed to allow the CPUC to review the documentation of any final resolution of the NEIL and MHI disputes and the litigation costs incurred in pursuing claims against NEIL and MHI to ensure they are not exorbitant in relation to the recovery obtained. There is no assurance that there will be any recoveries from NEIL or MHI or, that if there are recoveries, that they will equal or exceed the costs incurred to pursue them. NRC Proceedings In February 2015, the NRC issued a proposed decision resolving the review of SCE's compliance with the license amendment regulatory process related to the RSGs by an NRC Staff Petition Review Board by finding the issue to be moot, given the permanent cessation of operation of San Onofre. In March 2015, the NRC issued a lessons learned report in which it restated earlier NRC inspection findings that SCE properly concluded that the replacement steam generators at San Onofre did not require a formal license amendment prior to installation using a common NRC process for replacement components. Certain anti-nuclear groups and individual members of Congress have alleged that SCE knew of deficiencies in the steam generators when they were installed or otherwise did not correctly follow NRC requirements for the design and installation of the replacement steam generators, all of which SCE has vigorously denied, and have called for investigations, including by the Department of Justice. SCE cannot predict when or whether ongoing proceedings by the NRC will be completed or whether inquiries by other government agencies concerning how the RSG project was conducted will be initiated or reopened. Environmental Remediation SCE records its environmental remediation liabilities when site assessments and/or remedial actions are probable and a range of reasonably likely cleanup costs can be estimated. SCE reviews its sites and measures the liability quarterly, by assessing a range of reasonably likely costs for each identified site using currently available information, including existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations, experience gained at similar sites, and the probable level of involvement and financial condition of other potentially responsible parties. These estimates include costs for site investigations, remediation, operation and maintenance, monitoring and site closure. Unless there is a single probable amount, SCE records the lower end of this reasonably likely range of costs (reflected in "Other long-term liabilities") at undiscounted amounts as timing of cash flows is uncertain. At June 30, 2015, SCE's recorded estimated minimum liability to remediate its 19 identified material sites (sites in which the upper end of the range of the costs is at least $1 million) was $115 million, including $83 million related to San Onofre. In addition to these sites, SCE also has 39 immaterial sites for which the total minimum recorded liability was $4 million. Of the $119 million total environmental remediation liability for SCE, $116 million has been recorded as a regulatory asset. SCE expects to recover $30 million through an incentive mechanism that allows SCE to recover 90% of its environmental remediation costs at certain sites (SCE may request to include additional sites) and $85 million through a mechanism that allows SCE to recover 100% of the costs incurred at certain sites through customer rates. SCE's identified sites include several sites for which there is a lack of currently available information, including the nature and magnitude of contamination, and the extent, if any, that SCE may be held responsible for contributing to any costs incurred for remediating these sites. Thus, no reasonable estimate of cleanup costs can be made for these sites. The ultimate costs to clean up SCE's identified sites may vary from its recorded liability due to numerous uncertainties inherent in the estimation process, such as: the extent and nature of contamination; the scarcity of reliable data for identified sites; the varying costs of alternative cleanup methods; developments resulting from investigatory studies; the possibility of identifying additional sites; and the time periods over which site remediation is expected to occur. SCE believes that, due to these uncertainties, it is reasonably possible that cleanup costs at the identified material sites and immaterial sites could exceed its recorded liability by up to $159 million and $8 million, respectively. The upper limit of this range of costs was estimated using assumptions least favorable to SCE among a range of reasonably possible outcomes. SCE expects to clean up and mitigate its identified sites over a period of up to 30 years. Remediation costs for each of the next four years are expected to range from $6 million to $24 million. Costs incurred for both the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 were $3 million and $1 million. Based upon the CPUC's regulatory treatment of environmental remediation costs incurred at SCE, SCE believes that costs ultimately recorded will not materially affect its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. There can be no assurance, however, that future developments, including additional information about existing sites or the identification of new sites, will not require material revisions to estimates. Nuclear Insurance SCE is a member of NEIL, a mutual insurance company owned by entities with nuclear facilities. NEIL provides insurance for nuclear property damage, including damages caused by acts of terrorism up to specified limits, and for accidental outages for active facilities. The amount of nuclear property damage insurance purchased for San Onofre and Palo Verde exceeds the minimum federal requirement of $1.06 billion. If NEIL losses at any nuclear facility covered by the arrangement were to exceed the accumulated funds for these insurance programs, SCE could be assessed retrospective premium adjustments of up to approximately $52 million per year. Federal law limits public offsite liability claims for bodily injury and property damage from a nuclear incident to the amount of available financial protection, which is currently approximately $13.4 billion. Based on its ownership interests, SCE could be required to pay a maximum of approximately $255 million per nuclear incident. However, it would have to pay no more than approximately $38 million per incident in any one year. For more information on nuclear insurance coverage, see Note 11 in the 2014 Form 10-K. Wildfire Insurance Severe wildfires in California have given rise to large damage claims against California utilities for fire-related losses alleged to be the result of the failure of electric and other utility equipment. Invoking a California Court of Appeal decision, plaintiffs pursuing these claims have relied on the doctrine of inverse condemnation, which can impose strict liability (including liability for a claimant's attorneys' fees) for property damage. Prolonged drought conditions in California have also increased the risk of severe wildfire events. On June 1, 2015, Edison International renewed its liability insurance coverage, which included coverage for SCE's wildfire liabilities up to a $610 million limit (with a self-insured retention of $10 million per wildfire occurrence). Various coverage limitations within the policies that make up this insurance coverage could result in additional self-insured costs in the event of multiple wildfire occurrences during the policy period (June 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016). SCE also has additional coverage for certain wildfire liabilities of $390 million, which applies when total covered wildfire claims exceed $610 million, through June 14, 2016. SCE may experience coverage reductions and/or increased insurance costs in future years. No assurance can be given that future losses will not exceed the limits of SCE's insurance coverage. Spent Nuclear Fuel Under federal law, the Department of Energy ("DOE") is responsible for the selection and construction of a facility for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The DOE has not met its contractual obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel. Extended delays by the DOE have led to the construction of costly alternatives and associated siting and environmental issues. Currently, both San Onofre and Palo Verde have interim storage for spent nuclear fuel on site sufficient for the current license period. SCE, as operating agent, filed a lawsuit on behalf of the San Onofre owners against the DOE in the Court of Federal Claims seeking damages of approximately $182 million for the DOE's failure to meet its obligation to begin accepting spent nuclear fuel for the period from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2013. Additional legal action would be necessary to recover damages incurred after December 31, 2013. All damages recovered by SCE are subject to CPUC review as to how these amounts would be distributed among customers, shareholders, or to offset fuel decommissioning or storage costs.

Commitments and Contingencies

Third-Party Power Purchase Agreements

During the six months ended June 30, 2015, SCE had new power procurement contracts with additional commitments estimated to be: $41 million for remainder of 2015, $208 million for 2016, $297 million for 2017, $347 million for 2018, $384 million for 2019 and $4.7 billion for the period remaining thereafter.

Indemnities

Edison International and SCE have various financial and performance guarantees and indemnity agreements which are issued in the normal course of business.

Edison International and SCE have provided indemnifications through contracts entered into in the normal course of business. These are primarily indemnifications against adverse litigation outcomes in connection with underwriting agreements, and indemnities for specified environmental liabilities and income taxes with respect to assets sold. Edison International's and SCE's obligations under these agreements may or may not be limited in terms of time and/or amount, and in some instances Edison International and SCE may have recourse against third parties. Edison International and SCE have not recorded a liability related to these indemnities. The overall maximum amount of the obligations under these indemnifications cannot be reasonably estimated.

SCE has indemnified the City of Redlands, California in connection with Mountainview's California Energy Commission permit for cleanup or associated actions related to groundwater contaminated by perchlorate due to the disposal of filter cake at the City's solid waste landfill. The obligations under this agreement are not limited to a specific time period or subject to a maximum liability. SCE has not recorded a liability related to this indemnity.

Contingencies

In addition to the matters disclosed in these Notes, Edison International and SCE are involved in other legal, tax and regulatory proceedings before various courts and governmental agencies regarding matters arising in the ordinary course of business. Edison International and SCE believe the outcome of these other proceedings will not, individually or in the aggregate, materially affect its results of operations or liquidity.

San Onofre Related Matters

Replacement steam generators were installed at San Onofre in 2010 and 2011. On January 31, 2012, a leak suddenly occurred in one of the heat transfer tubes in San Onofre's Unit 3 steam generators. The Unit was safely taken off-line and subsequent inspections revealed excessive tube wear. Unit 2 was off-line for a planned outage when areas of unexpected tube wear were also discovered. On June 6, 2013, SCE decided to permanently retire Units 2 and 3.

Settlement of San Onofre CPUC Proceedings

In November 2014, the CPUC approved the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement that SCE had entered into with TURN, ORA, SDG&E, the Coalition of California Utility Employees, and Friends of the Earth. The San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement resolved the CPUC's investigation regarding the Steam Generator Replacement Project at San Onofre and the related outages and subsequent shutdown of San Onofre. The San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement does not affect proceedings related to recoveries from third parties described below, but does describe how shareholders and customers will share any potential recoveries.

A federal lawsuit challenging the CPUC's authority to permit rate recovery of San Onofre costs and an application to the CPUC for rehearing of its decision approving the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement were filed in November and December 2014, respectively. In April 2015, the federal lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice and the plaintiffs in that case appealed the dismissal to the Ninth Circuit in May 2015. Both the appeal and the application for rehearing remain pending.

In February 2015, SCE filed in the OII proceeding a Late-Filed Notice of Ex Parte Communication regarding a meeting in March 2013 between an SCE senior executive and the president of the CPUC, both of whom have since retired from their respective positions. Following this filing, the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility ("A4NR"), one of the intervenors in the OII, filed a motion requesting that the CPUC institute an investigation into whether sanctions should be imposed on SCE for the late notice of the March 2013 meeting. The motion requests that the CPUC order SCE to produce all ex parte communications between SCE and the CPUC or its staff since January 31, 2012 and all internal SCE unprivileged communications that discuss such ex parte communications. On May 6, 2015, A4NR amended its motion to recommend that the CPUC impose a $38.2 million penalty on SCE and additional restrictions on ex parte communications.

On April 14, 2015, the OII ALJs ordered SCE, among other things, to produce unprivileged documents pertaining to oral and written communications regarding the possible settlement of the OII proceeding between any SCE employee and CPUC decision makers from March 2013 to November 2014. SCE produced responsive documents and information on April 29, 2015. On June 26, 2015, the ALJs requested additional information, which SCE provided on July 3, 2015. Subsequently, another intervenor, the Coalition to Decommission San Onofre, filed a motion to move the start date for the production of documents under the CPUC’s order to January 31, 2012 and to authorize the intervenors to conduct discovery of SCE. That motion remains pending.

On April 17, 2015, ORA and TURN issued press releases asking the CPUC to impose penalties on SCE as a sanction for allegedly improper ex parte communications pertaining to San Onofre or failures to report such communications. ORA recommended penalties in the amount of $648 million, representing ORA's calculation of the difference in ratepayer value between ORA's initial settlement negotiating position in the San Onofre OII and the approved settlement. TURN did not recommend a penalty amount.

On April 27, 2015, A4NR filed a petition to modify the CPUC’s decision approving the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement based on SCE’s alleged failures to disclose communications between SCE and CPUC decision-makers pertaining to the issues in the San Onofre OII. The petition seeks the reversal of the decision approving the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement and reopening of the OII proceeding. Subsequently, TURN filed a response supporting A4NR's petition to reopen the San Onofre OII proceeding.

Edison International and SCE cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings.

NEIL Insurance Claims

San Onofre carries accidental property damage and carried accidental outage insurance issued by Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited ("NEIL") and has placed NEIL on notice of claims under both policies. The NEIL policies have a number of exclusions and limitations that NEIL may assert reduce or eliminate coverage (such as a limitation under which benefits may be reduced by up to 90% for periods following a planned shutdown), and SCE may choose to challenge NEIL's application of any such exclusions and limitations. Through August 30, 2014, the San Onofre owners had submitted approximately $433 million in claims (SCE's share of which is approximately $339 million) under the accidental outage insurance. These claims continue to be under review and are subject to revision and updating over time. The accidental outage insurance at San Onofre has been canceled prospectively as a result of the permanent retirement. SCE has not submitted a proof of loss under the accidental property damage insurance but reserves the right to do so. The parties are continuing discussions. SCE may challenge any reduction or denial of coverage that results from any coverage determination by NEIL. No amounts have been recognized in SCE's financial statements, pending NEIL's response to the San Onofre owners’ claims.

Under the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement, recoveries from NEIL, if any, will first be applied to reimburse costs incurred in pursuing such recoveries, including litigation costs. To the extent SCE's share of recoveries from NEIL exceeds such costs, recoveries under the accidental outage insurance will be allocated 95% to customers and 5% to SCE and all other NEIL recoveries will be allocated 82.5% to customers and 17.5% to SCE. SCE customers' portion of amounts recovered from NEIL would be distributed to SCE customers via a credit to SCE's ERRA account.

MHI Claims

SCE is also pursuing claims against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. and a related company ("MHI"), which designed and supplied the RSGs. MHI warranted the RSGs for an initial period of 20 years from acceptance and is contractually obligated to repair or replace defective items with dispatch and to pay specified damages for certain repairs. MHI's stated liability under the purchase agreement is limited to $138 million and excludes consequential damages, defined to include "the cost of replacement power;" however, limitations in the contract are subject to applicable exceptions both in the contract and under law. SCE has advised MHI that it believes one or more of such exceptions apply and that MHI's liability is not limited to $138 million. MHI has advised SCE that it disagrees. In October 2013, SCE sent MHI a formal request for binding arbitration under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce in accordance with the purchase contract seeking damages for all losses. In the request for arbitration, SCE alleges contract and tort claims and seeks at least $4 billion in damages on behalf of itself and its customers and in its capacity as Operating Agent for San Onofre. MHI has denied any liability and has asserted counterclaims for $41 million, for which SCE has denied any liability. Each of the other San Onofre owners sued MHI, alleging claims arising from MHI's supplying the faulty steam generators. These litigation claims have been stayed pending the arbitration. The other owners (SDG&E and Riverside) have been added as additional claimants in the arbitration. The arbitration is being conducted pursuant to a confidentiality order issued by the arbitration panel.

SCE, on behalf of itself and the other San Onofre owners, has submitted seven invoices to MHI totaling $149 million for steam generator repair costs incurred through April 30, 2013. MHI paid the first invoice of $45 million, while reserving its right to challenge it and subsequently rejected a portion of the first invoice and has not paid further invoices, claiming further documentation is required, which SCE disputes. SCE recorded its share of the invoice paid (approximately $35 million) as a reduction of repair and inspection costs in 2012.

Under the San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement, recoveries from MHI (including amounts paid by MHI under the first invoice), if any, will first be applied to reimburse costs incurred in pursuing such recoveries, including litigation costs. To the extent SCE's share of recoveries from MHI exceed such costs, they will be allocated 50% to customers and 50% to SCE.

The first $282 million of SCE's customers' portion of such recoveries from MHI will be distributed to customers via a credit to a sub-account of SCE's Base Revenue Requirement Balancing Account ("BRRBA"), reducing revenue requirements from customers. Amounts in excess of the first $282 million distributable to SCE customers will reduce SCE's regulatory asset represented by the unamortized balance of investment in San Onofre base plant, reducing the revenue requirement needed to amortize such investment. The amortization period, however, will be unaffected. Any additional amounts received after the regulatory asset is recovered will be applied to the BRRBA.

The San Onofre OII Settlement Agreement provides the utilities with the discretion to resolve the NEIL and MHI disputes without CPUC approval or review, but the utilities are obligated to use their best efforts to inform the CPUC of any settlement or other resolution of these disputes to the extent this is possible without compromising any aspect of the resolution. SCE and SDG&E have also agreed to allow the CPUC to review the documentation of any final resolution of the NEIL and MHI disputes and the litigation costs incurred in pursuing claims against NEIL and MHI to ensure they are not exorbitant in relation to the recovery obtained. There is no assurance that there will be any recoveries from NEIL or MHI or, that if there are recoveries, that they will equal or exceed the costs incurred to pursue them.

NRC Proceedings

In February 2015, the NRC issued a proposed decision resolving the review of SCE's compliance with the license amendment regulatory process related to the RSGs by an NRC Staff Petition Review Board by finding the issue to be moot, given the permanent cessation of operation of San Onofre. In March 2015, the NRC issued a lessons learned report in which it restated earlier NRC inspection findings that SCE properly concluded that the replacement steam generators at San Onofre did not require a formal license amendment prior to installation using a common NRC process for replacement components.

Certain anti-nuclear groups and individual members of Congress have alleged that SCE knew of deficiencies in the steam generators when they were installed or otherwise did not correctly follow NRC requirements for the design and installation of the replacement steam generators, all of which SCE has vigorously denied, and have called for investigations, including by the Department of Justice. SCE cannot predict when or whether ongoing proceedings by the NRC will be completed or whether inquiries by other government agencies concerning how the RSG project was conducted will be initiated or reopened.

Environmental Remediation

SCE records its environmental remediation liabilities when site assessments and/or remedial actions are probable and a range of reasonably likely cleanup costs can be estimated. SCE reviews its sites and measures the liability quarterly, by assessing a range of reasonably likely costs for each identified site using currently available information, including existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations, experience gained at similar sites, and the probable level of involvement and financial condition of other potentially responsible parties. These estimates include costs for site investigations, remediation, operation and maintenance, monitoring and site closure. Unless there is a single probable amount, SCE records the lower end of this reasonably likely range of costs (reflected in "Other long-term liabilities") at undiscounted amounts as timing of cash flows is uncertain.

At June 30, 2015, SCE's recorded estimated minimum liability to remediate its 19 identified material sites (sites in which the upper end of the range of the costs is at least $1 million) was $115 million, including $83 million related to San Onofre. In addition to these sites, SCE also has 39 immaterial sites for which the total minimum recorded liability was $4 million. Of the $119 million total environmental remediation liability for SCE, $116 million has been recorded as a regulatory asset. SCE expects to recover $30 million through an incentive mechanism that allows SCE to recover 90% of its environmental remediation costs at certain sites (SCE may request to include additional sites) and $85 million through a mechanism that allows SCE to recover 100% of the costs incurred at certain sites through customer rates. SCE's identified sites include several sites for which there is a lack of currently available information, including the nature and magnitude of contamination, and the extent, if any, that SCE may be held responsible for contributing to any costs incurred for remediating these sites. Thus, no reasonable estimate of cleanup costs can be made for these sites.

The ultimate costs to clean up SCE's identified sites may vary from its recorded liability due to numerous uncertainties inherent in the estimation process, such as: the extent and nature of contamination; the scarcity of reliable data for identified sites; the varying costs of alternative cleanup methods; developments resulting from investigatory studies; the possibility of identifying additional sites; and the time periods over which site remediation is expected to occur. SCE believes that, due to these uncertainties, it is reasonably possible that cleanup costs at the identified material sites and immaterial sites could exceed its recorded liability by up to $159 million and $8 million, respectively. The upper limit of this range of costs was estimated using assumptions least favorable to SCE among a range of reasonably possible outcomes.

SCE expects to clean up and mitigate its identified sites over a period of up to 30 years. Remediation costs for each of the next four years are expected to range from $6 million to $24 million. Costs incurred for both the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 were $3 million and $1 million.

Based upon the CPUC's regulatory treatment of environmental remediation costs incurred at SCE, SCE believes that costs ultimately recorded will not materially affect its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. There can be no assurance, however, that future developments, including additional information about existing sites or the identification of new sites, will not require material revisions to estimates.

Nuclear Insurance

SCE is a member of NEIL, a mutual insurance company owned by entities with nuclear facilities. NEIL provides insurance for nuclear property damage, including damages caused by acts of terrorism up to specified limits, and for accidental outages for active facilities. The amount of nuclear property damage insurance purchased for San Onofre and Palo Verde exceeds the minimum federal requirement of $1.06 billion. If NEIL losses at any nuclear facility covered by the arrangement were to exceed the accumulated funds for these insurance programs, SCE could be assessed retrospective premium adjustments of up to approximately $52 million per year.

Federal law limits public offsite liability claims for bodily injury and property damage from a nuclear incident to the amount of available financial protection, which is currently approximately $13.4 billion. Based on its ownership interests, SCE could be required to pay a maximum of approximately $255 million per nuclear incident. However, it would have to pay no more than approximately $38 million per incident in any one year.

For more information on nuclear insurance coverage, see Note 11 in the 2014 Form 10-K.

Wildfire Insurance

Severe wildfires in California have given rise to large damage claims against California utilities for fire-related losses alleged to be the result of the failure of electric and other utility equipment. Invoking a California Court of Appeal decision, plaintiffs pursuing these claims have relied on the doctrine of inverse condemnation, which can impose strict liability (including liability for a claimant's attorneys' fees) for property damage. Prolonged drought conditions in California have also increased the risk of severe wildfire events. On June 1, 2015, Edison International renewed its liability insurance coverage, which included coverage for SCE's wildfire liabilities up to a $610 million limit (with a self-insured retention of $10 million per wildfire occurrence). Various coverage limitations within the policies that make up this insurance coverage could result in additional self-insured costs in the event of multiple wildfire occurrences during the policy period (June 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016). SCE also has additional coverage for certain wildfire liabilities of $390 million, which applies when total covered wildfire claims exceed $610 million, through June 14, 2016. SCE may experience coverage reductions and/or increased insurance costs in future years. No assurance can be given that future losses will not exceed the limits of SCE's insurance coverage.

Spent Nuclear Fuel

Under federal law, the Department of Energy ("DOE") is responsible for the selection and construction of a facility for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The DOE has not met its contractual obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel. Extended delays by the DOE have led to the construction of costly alternatives and associated siting and environmental issues. Currently, both San Onofre and Palo Verde have interim storage for spent nuclear fuel on site sufficient for the current license period.

SCE, as operating agent, filed a lawsuit on behalf of the San Onofre owners against the DOE in the Court of Federal Claims seeking damages of approximately $182 million for the DOE's failure to meet its obligation to begin accepting spent nuclear fuel for the period from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2013. Additional legal action would be necessary to recover damages incurred after December 31, 2013. All damages recovered by SCE are subject to CPUC review as to how these amounts would be distributed among customers, shareholders, or to offset fuel decommissioning or storage costs.