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



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 18 | 19 || 21 | 22 |   ...   | 25 |

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

-- [ Page 20 ] --

PacifiCorp's investments in money market mutual funds are accounted for as available-for-sale securities and are stated at fair value. PacifiCorp uses a readily observable quoted market price to record the fair value.

The following table reconciles the beginning and ending balances of PacifiCorp's commodity derivative assets and liabilities

measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant Level 3 inputs for the years ended December 31 (in millions):

–  –  –

In December 2011, PacifiCorp elected to designate certain derivative contracts as normal purchases or normal sales, an exception afforded by GAAP. As a result of making the designation, the fair value of the contracts was frozen as of December 31, 2011 and $168 million of net derivative liabilities were reclassified from derivative contracts to other assets and liabilities. The frozen liability and associated regulatory asset are being amortized over the remaining terms of the agreements.

PacifiCorp's long-term debt is carried at cost on the Consolidated Financial Statements. The fair value of PacifiCorp's long-term debt is a Level 2 fair value measurement and has been estimated based upon quoted market prices, where available, or at the present value of future cash flows discounted at rates consistent with comparable maturities with similar credit risks. The carrying value of PacifiCorp's variable-rate long-term debt approximates fair value because of the frequent repricing of these instruments at market rates. The following table presents the carrying value and estimated fair value of PacifiCorp's long-term debt as of

December 31 (in millions):

–  –  –

(13) Commitments and Contingencies Legal Matters PacifiCorp is party to a variety of legal actions arising out of the normal course of business. Plaintiffs occasionally seek punitive or exemplary damages. PacifiCorp does not believe that such normal and routine litigation will have a material impact on its consolidated financial results. PacifiCorp is also involved in other kinds of legal actions, some of which assert or may assert claims or seek to impose fines, penalties and other costs in substantial amounts and are described below.

USA Power

In October 2005, prior to MEHC's ownership of PacifiCorp, PacifiCorp was added as a defendant to a lawsuit originally filed in February 2005 in the Third District Court of Salt Lake County, Utah ("Third District Court") by USA Power, LLC, USA Power Partners, LLC and Spring Canyon Energy, LLC (collectively, the "Plaintiff"). The Plaintiff's complaint alleged that PacifiCorp misappropriated confidential proprietary information in violation of Utah's Uniform Trade Secrets Act and accused PacifiCorp of breach of contract and related claims in regard to the Plaintiff's 2002 and 2003 proposals to build a natural gas-fueled generating facility in Juab County, Utah. In October 2007, the Third District Court granted PacifiCorp's motion for summary judgment on all counts and dismissed the Plaintiff's claims in their entirety. In February 2008, the Plaintiff filed a petition requesting consideration by the Utah Supreme Court. In May 2010, the Utah Supreme Court reversed summary judgment and remanded the case back to the Third District Court for further consideration, which led to a trial that began in April 2012. In May 2012, the jury reached a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff on its claims. The jury awarded damages to the Plaintiff for breach of contract and misappropriation of a trade secret in the amounts of $18 million for actual damages and $113 million for unjust enrichment. In May 2012, the Plaintiff filed a motion seeking exemplary damages. Under the Utah Uniform Trade Secrets law, the judge may award exemplary damages in an additional amount not to exceed twice the original award. The Plaintiff also filed a motion to seek recovery of attorneys' fees in an amount equal to 40% of all amounts ultimately awarded in the case. In October 2012, PacifiCorp filed posttrial motions for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a new trial (collectively, "PacifiCorp's post-trial motions"). The trial judge stayed briefing on the Plaintiff's motions, pending resolution of PacifiCorp's post-trial motions. As a result of a hearing in December 2012, the trial judge denied PacifiCorp's post-trial motions with the exception of reducing the aggregate amount of damages to $113 million. In January 2013, the Plaintiff filed a motion for prejudgment interest. In the first quarter of 2013, PacifiCorp filed its responses to the Plaintiff's post-trial motions for exemplary damages, attorneys' fees and prejudgment interest.

An initial judgment was entered in April 2013 in which the trial judge denied the Plaintiff's motions for exemplary damages and prejudgment interest and ruled that PacifiCorp must pay the Plaintiff's attorneys' fees based on applying a reasonable rate to hours worked rather than the Plaintiff's request for an amount equal to 40% of all amounts ultimately awarded. In May 2013, a final judgment was entered against PacifiCorp in the amount of $115 million, which includes the $113 million of aggregate damages previously awarded and amounts awarded for the Plaintiff's attorneys' fees. The final judgment also ordered that postjudgment interest accrue beginning as of the date of the April 2013 initial judgment. In May 2013, PacifiCorp posted a surety bond issued by a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway to secure its estimated obligation. PacifiCorp strongly disagrees with the jury's verdict and plans to vigorously pursue all appellate measures. Both PacifiCorp and the Plaintiff filed appeals with the Utah Supreme Court.





The parties are briefing their positions before the Utah Supreme Court with briefing expected to be completed and oral arguments held by late 2014. As of December 31, 2013, PacifiCorp had accrued $117 million for the final judgment and postjudgment interest, and believes the likelihood of any additional material loss is remote; however, any additional awards against PacifiCorp could also have a material effect on the consolidated financial results. Any payment of damages will be at the end of the appeals process, which could take as long as several years.

Sanpete County, Utah Rangeland Fire

In June 2012, a major rangeland fire occurred in Sanpete County, Utah. Certain parties allege that contact between two of PacifiCorp’s transmission lines may have triggered a ground fault that led to the fire. PacifiCorp has engaged experts to review the cause and origin of the fire, as well as to assess the damages. PacifiCorp has accrued its best estimate of the potential loss and believes it is reasonably possible it may incur additional loss beyond the amount accrued. PacifiCorp does not believe the potential additional loss will have a material impact to its consolidated financial results, particularly with PacifiCorp's ability to seek insurance recovery if considered necessary.

Northwest Refund Case

In October 2011, the FERC issued an order on remand by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in which it determined that additional procedures are needed to address possible unlawful activity that may have influenced prices in the Pacific Northwest wholesale spot market during the period from December 2000 through June 2001. PacifiCorp was a participant in the Pacific Northwest wholesale spot market during this period. The FERC ordered an evidentiary, trial-type hearing before an administrative law judge to permit parties to present evidence of alleged unlawful market activity. However, the FERC held the hearing in abeyance pending settlement discussions among all parties. The plaintiff parties to the proceeding filed claims against multiple parties, including PacifiCorp. PacifiCorp entered into settlements with the plaintiff parties, and the resulting settlements were approved by the FERC. The outcome of such settlements did not have a material impact on PacifiCorp's consolidated financial results. The FERC, however, declined to dismiss PacifiCorp from the case entirely, noting that additional parties may, in the future, assert sequential claims against parties to the case, including PacifiCorp. PacifiCorp believes it is unlikely that the FERC will address sequential claims until after the primary cases have proceeded through the trial-type hearing. Due to the uncertainties associated with the sequential claims, PacifiCorp is unable to predict the outcome and the impact of any claims on its consolidated financial results.

Environmental Laws and Regulations

PacifiCorp is subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding air and water quality, renewable portfolio standards, emissions performance standards, climate change, coal combustion byproduct disposal, hazardous and solid waste disposal, protected species and other environmental matters that have the potential to impact PacifiCorp's current and future operations.

PacifiCorp believes it is in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

Hydroelectric Relicensing

PacifiCorp's Klamath hydroelectric system is currently operating under annual licenses with the FERC. In February 2010, PacifiCorp, the United States Department of the Interior, the United States Department of Commerce, the State of California, the State of Oregon and various other governmental and non-governmental settlement parties signed the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement ("KHSA"). Among other things, the KHSA provides that the United States Department of the Interior conduct scientific and engineering studies to assess whether removal of the Klamath hydroelectric system's mainstem dams is in the public interest and will advance restoration of the Klamath Basin's salmonid fisheries. If it is determined that dam removal should proceed, dam removal is expected to commence no earlier than 2020.

Under the KHSA, PacifiCorp and its customers are protected from uncapped dam removal costs and liabilities. For dam removal to occur, federal legislation consistent with the KHSA must be enacted to provide, among other things, protection for PacifiCorp from all liabilities associated with dam removal activities. If Congress does not enact legislation, then PacifiCorp will resume relicensing with the FERC. In November 2011, bills were introduced in both chambers of the 112th United States Congress that, if passed, would enact the KHSA and a companion agreement that seeks to resolve other water-related conflicts and restore habitat in the Klamath basin. These bills are pending re-introduction into the 113th United States Congress.

In addition, the KHSA limits PacifiCorp's contribution to dam removal costs to no more than $200 million, of which up to $184 million would be collected from PacifiCorp's Oregon customers with the remainder to be collected from PacifiCorp's California customers. An additional $250 million for dam removal costs is expected to be raised through a California bond measure or other appropriate State of California financing mechanism. If dam removal costs exceed $200 million and if the State of California is unable to raise the additional funds necessary for dam removal costs, sufficient funds would need to be provided by an entity other than PacifiCorp in order for the KHSA and dam removal to proceed.

PacifiCorp has begun collection of surcharges from Oregon customers for their share of dam removal costs, as approved by the OPUC, and is depositing the proceeds into trust accounts maintained by the OPUC. PacifiCorp has begun collection of surcharges from California customers for their share of dam removal costs, as approved by the California Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC"), and is depositing the proceeds into trust accounts maintained by the CPUC. PacifiCorp is authorized to collect the surcharges through 2019.

As of December 31, 2013, PacifiCorp's assets included $103 million of costs associated with the Klamath hydroelectric system's mainstem dams and the associated relicensing and settlement costs. PacifiCorp has received approvals from the OPUC and the CPUC to depreciate and amortize the Klamath hydroelectric system's mainstem dams and the associated relicensing and settlement costs through the December 2019 expected dam removal date. PacifiCorp also filed for consistent ratemaking treatment in the 2011 and 2013 Washington general rate cases and the treatment was uncontested in both cases. PacifiCorp has received approvals from the UPSC, the WPSC and the IPUC to depreciate and amortize the Klamath hydroelectric system's mainstem dams and the associated relicensing and settlement costs through December 31, 2022.

Hydroelectric Commitments

Certain of PacifiCorp's hydroelectric licenses contain requirements for PacifiCorp to make certain capital and operating expenditures related to its hydroelectric facilities. PacifiCorp estimates it is obligated to make capital expenditures of approximately $189 million over the next 10 years related to these licenses.

Commitments PacifiCorp has the following firm commitments that are not reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Minimum payments as

of December 31, 2013 are as follows (in millions):

–  –  –

Purchased Electricity Contracts As part of its energy resource portfolio, PacifiCorp acquires a portion of its electricity through long-term purchases and exchange agreements. PacifiCorp has several power purchase agreements with wind-powered facilities that are not included in the table above as the payments are based on the amount of energy generated and there are no minimum payments. Included in the purchased electricity payments are any power purchase agreements that meet the definition of a lease. Rent expense related to those power purchase agreements that meet the definition of a lease totaled $24 million for 2013, $19 million for 2012 and $28 million for 2011.

Included in the minimum fixed annual payments for purchased electricity above are commitments to purchase electricity from several hydroelectric systems under long-term arrangements with public utility districts. These purchases are made on a "cost-ofservice" basis for a stated percentage of system output and for a like percentage of system operating expenses and debt service.



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 18 | 19 || 21 | 22 |   ...   | 25 |


Similar works:

«Focused on the future. 2014 Annual Report 1 Report to Shareholders 4 Management’s Discussion and Analysis 57 Management’s Responsibility for Financial Statements and Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting 59 Independant Auditors’ Reports 63 Consolidated Financial Statements 68 Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 122 Five Years in Review 123 Shareholders’ Information 124 Corporate Information The Annual General Meeting of Shareholders will be held on January 14, 2015...»

«DISMOUNTABLE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR AUROVILLE PROJECT 1: AUROVILLE TRANSIT LOUNGE @ COURAGE Friday 15th April 2011T.H. Conference hall 5pm Auroville Housing Survey Housing for Count % Count Family 32.31% 42 Couple 27.69% 36 Single parent with kids 3.85% 5 Single 36.15% 47 answered question 130 When do you need a home? Response Response Answer Options Percent Count 29.2% 40 Immediately 41.6% 57 Within a year 13.9% 19 2 years 2.9% 4 3 years 12.4% 17 Other (please specify) answered question 137...»

«I J A B E R, Vol. 13, No. 5, (2015): 2817-2833 THE EXTENT OF ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION IN THE NIGERIAN BANKING SECTOR Ishaya John Dabari* and Siti Zabedah Saidin** Abstract: There has been an unprecedented increase in the number of organisations adopting enterprise risk management (ERM) process in their operations across the world in recent times, due to its growing importance and influence. The quality of a satisfactory analysis is known by the quality of preliminary data...»

«Are Credit Ratings Subjective? The Role of Credit Analysts in Determining Ratings* Cesare Fracassi University of Texas – Austin Stefan Petry University of Melbourne Geoffrey Tate University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill August 30, 2013 Abstract Credit ratings affect firms’ access to capital and investment choices. We show that the identity of the credit analysts covering a firm significantly affects the firm’s rating, comparing ratings for the same firm at the same time across...»

«PERMANENT COMMUNITY IMPACT FUND BOARD MEETING Department of Workforce Services Housing and Community Development Division Salt Lake City, Utah MINUTES Thursday, July 7, 2016 Members Present Keith Heaton Chairman David Damschen State Treasurer Bruce Adams Southeastern Utah Association of Local Governments Steve Farrell State Board of Water Resources Jae Potter Carbon County Gregg Galecki State Board of Water Quality Jim Matson Five County Association of Governments Ron Winterton Uintah Basin...»

«The Second Asian Roundtable on Corporate Governance The Role of Disclosure in Strengthening Corporate Governance and Accountability Co-hosted by: Hong Kong Society of Accountants The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited and Securities & Futures Commission Island Shangri-La Hotel, Hong Kong, China 31 May – 2 June 2000 Co-sponsored by: The Government of Japan The Global Corporate Governance Forum With the participation of representatives of: APEC International Accounting Standards Committee...»

«Wanted: a Rector for. St. Margaret’s Church, Bagendon St. John the Evangelist, Elkstone All Saints, North Cerney THE CHURN VALLEY BENEFICE St. Mary the Virgin, Cowley St. Peter’s Church, Stratton St. Peter’s Church Rendcomb St. Mary Magdalene, Baunton St. Giles, Coberley St. James’ Church, Colesbourne The Churn Valley Benefice Statement The Churn Valley Benefice is looking for a new incumbent who will befriend us and lead us to minister in collaborative and creative ways across the...»

«YOUR FUTURE CARE DRAFT CONSULTATION DOCUMENT Draft for NEW Devon CCG Governing Body meeting 28 September 2016 DATE 21 September 2016 Document in draft. This is not a designed version and is subject to final proof reading Contents What this document is for 1. Your local NHS 2. The current challenges facing the local NHS 3. Building on what you have told us 4. What we want to do next; Your Future Care 5. What service changes are needed? 6. Safe and effective implementation 7. Your future care –...»

«WIDER Working Paper No. 2013/105 Multiple pathways to gender-sensitive budget support in the education sector Analysing the effectiveness of sex-disaggregated indicators in performance assessment frameworks and gender working groups in (education) budget support to Sub-Saharan Africa countries Nathalie Holvoet and Liesbeth Inberg* October 2013 Abstract In order to correct for the initial gender blindness of the Paris Declaration and related aid modalities as general and sector budget support,...»

«Directory of Sport Science 6th Edition | International Council of Sport S. https://www.icsspe.org/bookshop/latest-publications-individual-publicati. Like 1 of 1 23/04/2014 2:35 PM 0 ICSSPE ISBN 0-99-006293-7 ~HUMAN KINETICS British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Directory of Sport Science, 6th Edition All rights reserved. Except for use in a review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a...»

«LEE.WL (DO NOT DELETE) 4/5/2010 1:11 PM WHAT’S IN A NAME?: THE ROLE OF DANIELSON IN THE TAXATION OF CREDIT CARD SECURITIZATIONS Grace Soyon Lee* I.  Introduction II.  Background A.  Securitization in General B.  Credit Card Securitizations 1.  Structure of a Credit Card Securitization 2.  Treatment of Credit Card Securitizations Under Accounting Rules 3.  Recent Changes to Credit Card Securitizations.123  III.  Taxation of Credit Card Securitizations A.  The Debt-Equity Distinction...»

«Manteca, California July 7, 2015 The Board of Directors of the South San Joaquin Irrigation District met in special session in their chambers at 9:00 a.m. President Holmes called the meeting to order and led the flag salute.Upon roll call the following members were noted present: DIRECTORS: HOLBROOK HOLMES KAMPER KUIL ROOS ABSENT: NONE Also present were General Manager Jeff Shields, General Counsel Steve Emrick, Engineering Department Manager Sam Bologna, and Executive Secretary Betty Garcia....»





 
<<  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.