WWW.THESIS.DISLIB.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Online materials, documents
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 10 | 11 || 13 | 14 |   ...   | 25 |

«Commission Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter; IRS Employer File Number State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or ...»

-- [ Page 12 ] --

Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA may establish emissions standards that reflect the degree of emissions reductions achievable through the best technology that has been demonstrated, taking into consideration the cost of achieving those reductions and any non-air quality health and environmental impact and energy requirements. The EPA entered into a settlement agreement with a number of parties, including certain state governments and environmental groups, in December 2010 to promulgate emissions standards covering GHG. In April 2012, the EPA proposed new source performance standards for new fossil-fueled generating facilities that would limit emissions of carbon dioxide to 1,000 pounds per MWh. In June 2013, President Obama announced a national climate change strategy and issued a presidential memorandum requiring the EPA to issue a re-proposed GHG new source performance standard for fossil-fueled generating facilities by September 2013. Rather than re-propose the April 2012 proposal, the EPA issued a new proposal. The September 2013 GHG new source performance standards released by the EPA set different standards for coal-fueled and natural gas-fueled generating facilities. The proposed standard for natural gas-fueled generating facilities considers the size of the unit and the electricity sent to the grid from the unit, establishing a standard of 1,000 to 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh. The standard proposed for coal-fueled generating facilities is 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh on an annual basis or 1,000 to 1,050 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh averaged over a seven-year period, both of which would require partial carbon capture and sequestration. The proposed standards were published in the Federal Register January 8, 2014, and the 60-day public comment period closes March 10, 2014. Any new fossil-fueled generating facilities constructed by PacifiCorp will be required to meet the final GHG new source performance standards.

Regional and State Activities

Several states have promulgated or otherwise participate in state-specific or regional laws or initiatives to report or mitigate GHG

emissions. These are expected to impact PacifiCorp and include:

• Under the authority of California's Global Warming Solutions Act signed into law in 2006, the California Air Resources Board adopted a GHG cap-and-trade program with an effective date of January 1, 2012; compliance obligations were imposed on entities beginning in 2013. The program purports to impose compliance obligations on entities, including PacifiCorp, that deliver wholesale energy to points that are outside of California, irrespective of retail service obligations.

These obligations and other impacts to wholesale energy market structures may, if implemented as written, increase costs to PacifiCorp. In addition, California law imposes a GHG emissions performance standard to all electricity generated within the state or delivered from outside the state that is no higher than the GHG emissions levels of a state-of-the-art combined-cycle natural gas-fueled generating facility, as well as legislation that adopts an economy-wide cap on GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The first auction of GHG allowances was held in California in November 2012.

• Over the past several years, the states of California, Washington and Oregon have adopted GHG emissions performance standards for base load electricity generating resources. Under the laws in California and Oregon, the emissions performance standards provide that emissions must not exceed 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh. Effective April 2013, Washington's amended emissions performance standards provide that GHG emissions for base load electricity generating resources must not exceed 970 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh. These GHG emissions performance standards generally prohibit electric utilities from entering into long-term financial commitments (e.g., new ownership investments, upgrades, or new or renewed contracts with a term of five or more years) unless any base load generation supplied under long-term financial commitments comply with the GHG emissions performance standards.

• Washington and Oregon enacted legislation in May 2007 and August 2007, respectively, establishing goals for the reduction of GHG emissions in their respective states. Washington's goals seek to (a) reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; (b) reduce emissions to 25% below 1990 levels by 2035; and (c) reduce emissions to 50% below 1990 levels by 2050, or 70% below Washington's forecasted emissions in 2050. Oregon's goals seek to (a) cease the growth of Oregon GHG emissions by 2010; (b) reduce GHG levels to 10% below 1990 levels by 2020; and (c) reduce GHG levels to at least 75% below 1990 levels by 2050. Each state's legislation also calls for state government to develop policy recommendations in the future to assist in the monitoring and achievement of these goals.

GHG Litigation

PacifiCorp closely monitors ongoing environmental litigation. Numerous lawsuits have been unsuccessfully pursued against the industry that attempt to link GHG emissions to public or private harm. The lower courts initially refrained from adjudicating the cases under the "political question" doctrine, because of their inherently political nature. These cases have typically been appealed to federal appellate courts and, in certain circumstances, to the United States Supreme Court. While unsuccessful to date, an adverse ruling in such cases would likely result in increased regulation and costs for GHG emitters, including PacifiCorp's generating facilities.





Renewable Portfolio Standards

Each state's RPS described below could significantly impact PacifiCorp's consolidated financial results. Resources that meet the qualifying electricity requirements under each RPS vary from state to state. Each state's RPS requires some form of compliance reporting and PacifiCorp can be subject to penalties in the event of noncompliance. PacifiCorp believes it is in material compliance with all applicable RPS laws and regulations.

Washington's Energy Independence Act establishes a renewable energy target for qualifying electric utilities, including PacifiCorp.

The requirements are 3% of retail sales by January 1, 2012 through 2015, 9% of retail sales by January 1, 2016 through 2019 and 15% of retail sales by January 1, 2020 and thereafter. In April 2013, Washington State Senate Bill No. 5400 ("SB 5400") was signed into law. SB 5400 expands the geographic area in which eligible renewable resources may be located to beyond the Pacific Northwest, allowing renewable resources located in all states served by PacifiCorp to qualify. SB 5400 also provides PacifiCorp with additional flexibility and options to meet Washington's renewable mandates.

The Oregon Renewable Energy Act ("OREA") provides a comprehensive renewable energy policy and RPS for Oregon. Subject to certain exemptions and cost limitations established in the law, PacifiCorp and other qualifying electric utilities must meet minimum qualifying electricity requirements for electricity sold to retail customers of at least 5% in 2011 through 2014, 15% in 2015 through 2019, 20% in 2020 through 2024, and 25% in 2025 and subsequent years. As required by the OREA, the OPUC has approved an automatic adjustment clause to allow an electric utility, including PacifiCorp, to recover prudently incurred costs of its investments in renewable energy generating facilities and associated transmission costs.

The California RPS requires all California retail sellers to procure an average of 20% of retail load from renewable resources by December 31, 2013, 25% by December 31, 2016 and 33% by December 31, 2020 and each year thereafter. In December 2011, the CPUC adopted a decision confirming that multi-jurisdictional utilities, such as PacifiCorp, are not subject to the percentage limits within the three categories of RPS-eligible resources established by the legislation that have been imposed on other California retail sellers. The CPUC is in the process of an extensive rulemaking to implement the new requirements under the legislation.

Utah's Energy Resource and Carbon Emission Reduction Initiative provides that, beginning in the year 2025, 20% of adjusted retail electric sales of all Utah utilities be supplied by renewable energy, if it is cost effective. Retail electric sales will be adjusted by deducting the amount of generation from sources that produce zero or reduced carbon emissions, and for sales avoided as a result of energy efficiency and DSM programs. Qualifying renewable energy sources can be located anywhere in the WECC areas, and renewable energy credits can be used.

Water Quality Standards

The federal Water Pollution Control Act ("Clean Water Act") establishes the framework for maintaining and improving water quality in the United States through a program that regulates, among other things, discharges to and withdrawals from waterways.

The Clean Water Act requires that cooling water intake structures reflect the "best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact" to aquatic organisms. In July 2004, the EPA established significant new technology-based performance standards for existing electricity generating facilities that take in more than 50 million gallons of water per day. These rules were aimed at minimizing the adverse environmental impacts of cooling water intake structures by reducing the number of aquatic organisms lost as a result of water withdrawals. In response to a legal challenge to the rule, in January 2007, the Second Circuit remanded almost all aspects of the rule to the EPA, without addressing whether companies with cooling water intake structures were required to comply with these requirements. On appeal from the Second Circuit, in April 2009, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the EPA permissibly relied on a cost-benefit analysis in setting the national performance standards regarding "best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact" at cooling water intake structures and in providing for costbenefit variances from those standards as part of the §316(b) Clean Water Act Phase II regulations. The United States Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Second Circuit to conduct further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

In March 2011, the EPA released a proposed rule under §316(b) of the Clean Water Act to regulate cooling water intakes at existing facilities. The proposed rule establishes requirements for all power generating facilities that withdraw more than two million gallons per day, based on total design intake capacity, of water from waters of the United States and use at least 25% of the withdrawn water exclusively for cooling purposes. PacifiCorp's Dave Johnston generating facility withdraws more than two million gallons per day of water from waters of the United States for once-through cooling applications. PacifiCorp's Jim Bridger, Naughton, Gadsby, Hunter, Carbon and Huntington generating facilities currently utilize closed cycle cooling towers but withdraw more than two million gallons of water per day. The proposed rule includes impingement (i.e., when fish and other organisms are trapped against screens when water is drawn into a facility's cooling system) mortality standards to be met through average impingement mortality or intake velocity design criteria and entrainment (i.e., when organisms are drawn into the facility) standards to be determined on a case-by-case basis. The standards are required to be met as soon as possible after the effective date of the final rule, but no later than eight years thereafter. While the rule was required to be finalized by the EPA by July 2012, the deadline for finalizing the rule was extended to June 2013 and then again to January 2014. Currently, the EPA is under an agreement to issue its final rule no later than April 17, 2014. Until the final rule is released, it cannot be determined when PacifiCorp's generating facilities impacted by the final rule will be required to complete impingement and entrainment studies to assess compliance options.

The costs of compliance with the cooling water intake structure rule cannot be determined until the rule is final and the prescribed studies are conducted. In the event that PacifiCorp's existing intake structures require modification, the costs are not anticipated to be significant to the consolidated financial statements.

In June 2013, the EPA published proposed effluent limitation guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating sector. These guidelines, which had not been revised since 1982, were revised in response to the EPA's concerns that the addition of controls for air emissions have changed the effluent discharged from coal- and natural gas-fueled generating facilities. The EPA expects the final rule to be published in May 2014. It is likely that the new guidelines will impose more stringent limits on wastewater discharges from coal-fueled generating facilities and ash and scrubber ponds. However, until the revised guidelines are finalized, PacifiCorp cannot predict the impact on its generating facilities.



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 10 | 11 || 13 | 14 |   ...   | 25 |


Similar works:

«2015/ Lee Green Lives Annual Report and Statement of Accounts Welcome to the Lee Green Community Centre! Contents Lee Green Lives: Chair’s report 2015-16. Community Development..6 Co-ordinator’s report /A Fresh Eye..8 About our current programme Volunteer Network..14 Leegate Redevelopment/ The Local Plan Financial Report..16 General Information Lee Green Lives: Chair’s report 2015-16 Last year, I wrote, “Who would have thought when we were created five years ago that we would. have...»

«SEDERI Yearbook ISSN: 1135-7789 sederiyearbook@yahoo.es Spanish and Portuguese Society for English Renaissance Studies España Cuder, Primavera Jesús López-Peláez, ed. 2011 Strangers in Early Modern English Texts Anglo-American studies, 41. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang SEDERI Yearbook, núm. 22, 2012, pp. 175-180 Spanish and Portuguese Society for English Renaissance Studies Valladolid, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=333528766010 How to cite Complete issue...»

«AGENDA FOR THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY 12 JUNE 2012 COMMENCING AT 7.30 PM AT THE CASTLEMAINE SENIOR CITIZEN’S CENTRE. Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of Council – Mount Alexander Shire Council – 12 June 2012 Pg 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PRESENT 4 2. APOLOGIES 4 3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 4 4. MINUTES 4 4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL – 22 MAY 2012 4 5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 4 6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 4 7. COMMITTEE REPORTS 5 NO...»

«UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) È ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended January 2, 2016 OR ‘ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to. Commission file number 0-15867 CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 00-0000000 (State or...»

«FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-30056 Plaintiff-Appellee,  D.C. No. v. 2:08-cr-00404RAYMOND ERIKSEN, JCC-1  Defendant-Appellant.  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-30057 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No.  v. 2:08-cr-00404JCC-2 SIGMUND ERIKSEN,  Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington John C. Coughenour, District Judge, Presiding Argued and...»

«UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 0748 September Term, 2014 STEPHEN KINGMAN v. PERSONNEL BOARD FOR PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND Zarnoch, Berger, Nazarian, JJ. Opinion by Zarnoch, J. Filed: June 10, 2015 *This is an unreported opinion, and it may not be cited in any paper, brief, motion, or other document filed in this Court or any other Maryland Court as either precedent within the rule of stare decisis or as persuasive authority. Md. Rule 1-104. ‒Unreported...»

«Nyaya-Vaisheshika: The Indian Tradition of Physics Roopa Hulikal Narayan 1 Introduction This paper is the first in a series on the Indian tradition of physics that while summarizing the earlier review by Kak [1], [2] will set the stage for a more comprehensive analysis to follow in later papers. In ancient India, the schools of Nyaya and Vaisheshika focused on logic and atomic approach to matter. In this paper, the idea of atomicity and other physical ideas given in Vaisheshika are reviewed in...»

«1666 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 207-9100 Facsimile: (202) 862-8433 www.pcaobus.org Inspection of Pritchett, Siler & Hardy, P.C. (Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah) Issued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board July 29, 2010 THIS IS A PUBLIC VERSION OF A PCAOB INSPECTION REPORT PORTIONS OF THE COMPLETE REPORT ARE OMITTED FROM THIS DOCUMENT IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH SECTIONS 104(g)(2) AND 105(b)(5)(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 PCAOB RELEASE NO....»

«Journal of Libertarian Studies Volume 17, no. 1 (Winter 2003), pp. 17–56 2003 Ludwig von Mises Institute www.mises.org HAYEK ON TRADITION Edward Feser* Traditional morality is rejected today as commonly as it was once taken for granted. And if the specific content of that morality, especially where it touches on matters of sexuality, is widely regarded with contempt, the meta-ethical notion that one ought to respect a moral code precisely because it is traditional gets even worse...»

«7/7/2015 Supply Chain Management in 2015 and Beyond ­ Article from Supply Chain Management Review Logistics Management Material Handling Product News Modern Materials Handling Access Premium PLUS+ Content. Log in Now or Begin Your PLUS+ Subscription News Critical Topics Guides Blogs Subscribe Resources: White Papers Webcasts Find/Post Jobs Follow us on Twitter, Facebook or RSS    |  | More From the May­June 2015 Issue...»

«7+((7(51$/)$7(2) 81%(/,(9(56 The following paper has been excerpted and adapted from Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment by Robert A. Peterson (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing), 1995. Used by permission. Extract by Garry J. Moes. Introduction There is a day of great unforeseen catastrophe in store for men and women who die without Christ. Little do they imagine the horror that awaits them. Though the church has traditionally taught that the fate of the...»

«BRIEFING PAPER Number 7535, 26 April 2016 Direct taxes: rates and By Antony Seely allowances 2016/17 Inside: 1. Rates and thresholds 2. Income tax allowances 3. Income tax – other allowances & reliefs 4. Other direct taxes 5. Budget 2016 announcements for 2017/18 6. Main personal income tax rates & allowances since 1990/91 www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | papers@parliament.uk | @commonslibrary Number 7535, 26 April 2016 2 Contents Summary 3 1. Rates...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2017 www.thesis.dislib.info - Online materials, documents

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.