
(11)	Commitments and Contingencies

Legal Matters

The Company is party to a variety of legal actions arising out of the normal course of business. Plaintiffs occasionally seek punitive or exemplary damages. The Company does not believe that such normal and routine litigation will have a material impact on its consolidated financial results. The Company 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 BHE'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 post-trial 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 is vigorously pursuing all appellate measures. Both PacifiCorp and the Plaintiff filed appeals with the Utah Supreme Court. Briefing before the Utah Supreme Court is complete and oral arguments will most likely be held in 2015. As of September 30, 2014, PacifiCorp had accrued $118 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.

Commitments

The Topaz Project, which is a 550-MW solar project in California, and the Solar Star Projects, which are a combined 579-MW solar project in California, are in construction and are being placed in-service in phases in 2014 and 2015. BHE has committed to separately provide Topaz Solar Farms LLC and Solar Star Funding, LLC and its subsidiaries with equity to fund the costs of the projects in an amount up to $2.44 billion for the Topaz Project and $2.75 billion for the Solar Star Projects, less, among other things, the gross proceeds of long-term debt issuances, project revenue prior to completion and the total equity contributions made by BHE or its subsidiaries. As of September 30, 2014, the remaining equity commitment for the Topaz Project is $550 million and for the Solar Star Projects is $1.19 billion. If BHE does not maintain a minimum credit rating from two of the following three ratings agencies of at least BBB- from Standard & Poor's Ratings Services or Fitch Ratings or Baa3 from Moody's Investors Service, BHE's obligations under the equity commitment agreements would be supported by cash collateral or a letter of credit issued by a financial institution that meets certain minimum criteria specified in the respective financing documents. Upon reaching the final commercial operation date of the Topaz and Solar Star Projects, respectively, BHE will have no further obligation to make any equity contributions and any unused equity contribution obligations will be canceled under each project's respective equity commitment agreement.

Environmental Laws and Regulations

The Company is subject to federal, state, local and foreign 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 the Company's current and future operations. The Company believes it is in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

Guarantees

The Company has entered into guarantees as part of the normal course of business and the sale of certain assets. These guarantees are not expected to have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial results.