XML 35 R14.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.2.0.727
Commitments and Contingencies (Notes)
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies

Environmental Laws and Regulations

The Company 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 the Company's current and future operations. The Company believes it is in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

In June 2013, the Nevada State Legislature passed Senate Bill No. 123 ("SB 123"), which included, in significant part:

Accelerating the plan to retire 800 MWs of coal plants, starting as soon as December 31, 2014;
Replacement of such coal plants by issuing requests for proposals for the procurement of 300 MWs from renewable facilities;
Construction or acquisition and ownership of 50 MWs of electric generating capacity from renewable facilities;
Construction or acquisition and ownership of 550 MWs of additional electric generating capacity; and
Assuring regulatory procedures that protect reliability and supply and address financial impacts on customer and utility.

In May 2014, the Company filed its Emissions Reduction Capacity Replacement Plan ("ERCR Plan") in compliance with SB 123 enacted by the 2013 Nevada Legislature. The filing proposed, among other items, the retirement of Reid Gardner Generating Station units 1, 2 and 3 in 2014 and unit 4 in 2017; the elimination of the Company's ownership interest in Navajo Generating Station in 2019; and a plan to replace the generating capacity being retired, as required by SB 123. The ERCR Plan includes the issuance of requests for proposals for 300-MW of renewable energy to be issued between 2014 and 2016; the acquisition of a 272‑MW natural gas co-generating facility in 2014; the acquisition of a 210-MW natural gas peaking facility in 2014; the construction of a 15-MW solar photovoltaic facility expected to be placed in-service in 2015; and the construction of a 200-MW solar photovoltaic facility expected to be placed in-service in 2016. In the second quarter of 2014, the Company executed various contractual agreements to fulfill the proposed ERCR Plan, which are subject to the PUCN approval. The PUCN issued an order dated October 28, 2014 removing the 200-MW solar photovoltaic facility proposed by the Company from the ERCR Plan but accepting the remaining requests. In November 2014, the Company filed a petition for reconsideration, but in December 2014, the PUCN upheld the original order from October 2014 with respect to material matters. In December 2014, the Company filed its acceptance of the modifications to the ERCR Plan.

In July 2015, the Company filed an amendment to its ERCR Plan with the PUCN. The amendment requests PUCN approval of two renewable power purchase agreements with 100‑MW solar photovoltaic generating facilities related to the replacement of coal plants. Each of these agreements were entered into by issuing requests for proposals for the procurement of energy through the competitive solicitation process that was set forth in the Company's ERCR Plan in compliance with SB 123. In June 2015, the Nevada State Legislature passed Assembly Bill No. 498, which modified the capacity replacement components of SB 123. As a result, the Company will not proceed with issuance of a third 100-MW request for proposal for renewable energy until such time as the PUCN determines the Company has satisfactorily demonstrated a need for such electric generating capacity.

Reid Gardner Generation Station

In October 2011, the Company received a request for information from the Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act requesting current and historical operations and capital project information for the Company's Reid Gardner Generating Station located near Moapa, Nevada. The Environmental Protection Agency's Section 114 information request does not allege any incidents of non-compliance at the plant, and there have been no other new enforcement-related proceedings that have been initiated by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the plant. The Company completed its responses to the Environmental Protection Agency during the first quarter of 2012 and will continue to monitor developments relating to this Section 114 request. At this time, the Company cannot predict the impact, if any, associated with this information request.

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.

November 2005 Land Investors

In 2006, November 2005 Land Investors, LLC ("NLI") purchased from the United States through the Bureau of Land Management 2,675 acres of land located in North Las Vegas, Nevada. A small portion of the land is traversed by a 500 kilovolt ("kV") transmission line owned by the Company and sited pursuant to a pre-existing right-of-way grant from the Bureau of Land Management. Subsequent to NLI's purchase, a dispute arose as to whether the Company owed rent and, if it did, the amount owed to NLI under the right-of-way grant. NLI eventually "terminated" the right-of-way grant and brought claims against the Company for breach of contract, inverse condemnation and trespass. The Company counterclaimed for express condemnation of a perpetual easement over the right-of-way corridor. The matter proceeded to trial in the Eighth District Court, Clark County, Nevada ("Eighth District Court"). In September 2013, the Eighth District Court awarded NLI $1 million for unpaid rent and $5 million for inverse condemnation, plus interest and attorneys' fees, bringing the total judgment to $12 million. The Eighth District Court also found the Company was entitled to judgment in its favor on its counterclaim for condemnation of the right-of-way corridor. The Company posted the required bond of $12 million and appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court. In June 2015, the parties finalized a settlement in this matter, separate from the court order above, and final documents dismissing the claims have been filed with the Eighth District Court. The settlement did not have a material impact to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements.

Park Highlands

The Company has six other rights-of-way located on the same 2,675 acres of land located in North Las Vegas, Nevada, commonly referred to as the Park Highlands properties. NLI purportedly also terminated the other six rights‑of‑way. On January 2, 2015, KBS SOR Park Highlands, LLC ("KBS") filed a complaint in the Eighth District Court relating to one of the six rights‑of‑way, specifically the right-of-way that relates to a 230‑kV line that traverses the property. In the complaint, KBS raised the same claims previously raised by NLI in the litigation relating to the 500‑kV line. On January 9, 2015, the Company filed an action in the Eighth District Court relating to the six rights-of-way on the Park Highlands properties. This action sought a declaratory order quieting the Company's title to the rights-of-way or in the alternative condemning an easement interest in the property. In June 2015, the parties finalized a settlement in this matter and final documents dismissing the claims have been filed with the Eighth District Court. The settlement did not have a material impact to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements.

Skye Canyon

In 2005, the Bureau of Land Management sold at auction a parcel of land commonly known as the Skye Canyon properties. The property was sold subject to preexisting rights-of-way held by the Company for the placement of electric transmission and distribution facilities. On January 9, 2015, the Company filed an action in the Eighth District Court relating to 14 rights‑of‑way located within the Skye Canyon properties. The action sought a declaratory order from the court that the rights-of-way held by the Company are still valid, establish the proper rent, if any, payable by the Company and to identify the proper party to whom rent is due. In June 2015, the parties finalized a settlement in this matter and final documents dismissing the claims have been filed with the Eighth District Court. The settlement did not have a material impact to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements.

Sierra Club and Moapa Band of Paiute Indians

In August 2013, the Sierra Club and Moapa Band of Paiute Indians filed a complaint in federal district court in Nevada against the Company and the California Department of Water Resources, alleging that activities at the Reid Gardner Generating Station are causing imminent and substantial harm to the environment and that placement of coal combustion residuals at the on-site landfill constitute "open dumping" in violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The complaint also alleges that the Reid Gardner Generating Station is engaged in the unlawful discharge of pollutants in violation of the Clean Water Act. The notice was issued pursuant to the citizen suit provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Clean Water Act. The California Department of Water Resources was named as a co-defendant in the litigation due to its prior co-ownership in Reid Gardner Generating Station Unit 4. The complaint seeks various injunctive remedies, assessment of civil penalties, and reimbursement of plaintiffs' attorney and legal fees and costs. In August 2014, the court dismissed without prejudice the plaintiff's amended complaint which sought civil penalties. In June 2015, the parties reached a settlement in principle in this matter. The settlement will not have a material impact to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements.