| COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES We have significant commitments and contingencies arising from our operations, including those related to unconditional purchase obligations, environmental remediation, and enforcement and litigation matters. Unconditional Purchase Obligations Energy Related Purchased Power Agreements We routinely enter into long-term purchase and sale commitments for various quantities and lengths of time. We have obligations to distribute and sell electricity and natural gas to our customers and expect to recover costs related to these obligations in future customer rates. The following table shows our minimum future commitments related to these purchase obligations as of December 31, 2015 . Payments Due By Period (in millions) Date Contracts Extend Through Total Amounts Committed 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Later Years Electric utility: Purchased power 2031 $ 95.4 $ 29.4 $ 25.5 $ 19.3 $ 5.3 $ 3.3 $ 12.6 Coal supply and transportation 2018 410.3 212.9 130.9 66.5 — — — Nuclear 2033 10,012.5 412.8 415.3 420.0 445.4 475.1 7,843.9 Natural gas utility supply and transportation 2024 257.3 58.3 47.1 43.9 40.0 30.9 37.1 Total $ 10,775.5 $ 713.4 $ 618.8 $ 549.7 $ 490.7 $ 509.3 $ 7,893.6 Operating Leases We lease various property, plant, and equipment with various terms in the operating leases. The operating leases generally require us to pay property taxes, insurance premiums, and maintenance costs associated with the leased property. Many of our leases contain one of the following options upon the end of the lease term: (a) purchase the property at the current fair market value, or (b) exercise a renewal option, as set forth in the lease agreement. Rental expense attributable to operating leases was $6.7 million , $4.8 million , and $4.0 million in 2015 , 2014 , and 2013 , respectively. Future minimum payments under noncancelable operating leases are payable as follows: Year Ending December 31 Payments (in millions) 2016 $ 4.9 2017 3.8 2018 3.3 2019 1.4 2020 1.3 Later years 23.1 Total $ 37.8 Environmental Matters Consistent with other companies in the energy industry, we face significant ongoing environmental compliance and remediation obligations related to current and past operations. Specific environmental issues affecting us include, but are not limited to, current and future regulation of air emissions such as SO 2 , NOx, fine particulates, mercury, and GHGs; water discharges; disposal of coal combustion products such as fly ash; and remediation of impacted properties, including former manufactured gas plant sites. We have continued to pursue a proactive strategy to manage our environmental compliance obligations, including: • the development of additional sources of renewable electric energy supply; • the addition of improvements for water quality matters such as treatment technologies to meet regulatory discharge limits and improvements to our cooling water intake systems; • the addition of emission control equipment to existing facilities to comply with new ambient air quality standards and federal clean air rules; • the protection of wetlands and waterways, threatened and endangered species, and cultural resources associated with utility construction projects; • the retirement of old coal plants and conversion to modern, efficient, natural gas generation and super-critical pulverized coal generation; • the beneficial use of ash and other products from coal-fired and biomass generating units; and • the remediation of former manufactured gas plant sites. Air Quality Sulfur Dioxide National Air Ambient Quality Standards The EPA issued a revised 1-Hour SO 2 NAAQS that became effective in August 2010. The EPA issued a final rule in August 2015 describing the implementation requirements and established a compliance timeline for the revised standard. The final rule affords state agencies latitude in rule implementation. States have the option of modeling or monitoring to show attainment (subject to EPA approval for this selection) and make attainment designation recommendations. If a state chooses modeling and an area does not show attainment, and sources do not agree to reductions by 2017 to allow attainment, the area would be classified as nonattainment. A plan would need to be developed requiring emission reductions to bring the area back into attainment by 2023. Alternatively, if a state opted out of modeling and instead chose to install air quality monitors, and subsequently monitored nonattainment, then it would face a 2026 compliance date. A nonattainment designation could have negative impacts for a localized geographic area, including additional permitting requirements for new or existing sources in the area. In March 2015, a federal court entered a consent decree between the EPA and the Sierra Club and others agreeing to specific actions related to implementing the revised standard for areas containing large sources emitting above a certain threshold level of SO 2 . The consent decree requires the EPA to complete attainment designations for certain areas with large sources by no later than July 2, 2016. SO 2 emissions from PIPP are above the emission threshold, which means that the Marquette area requires action earlier than would otherwise be required under the revised NAAQS. However, we were able to show through modeling that the area should be designated as attainment. Based upon this modeling, the state of Michigan recommended to the EPA that the Marquette area be designated as attainment. We expect that the EPA will act on this recommendation in 2016. We believe our fleet overall is well positioned to meet the new regulation. 8-Hour Ozone National Air Ambient Quality Standards The EPA completed its review of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in November 2014, and announced a proposal to tighten (lower) the NAAQS. In October 2015, the EPA released the final rule, which lowered the limit for ground-level ozone. This is expected to cause nonattainment designations for some counties in Wisconsin with potential future impacts for our fossil-fueled power plant fleet. For nonattainment areas, the state will have to develop a state implementation plan to bring the areas back into attainment. We will be required to comply with this state implementation plan no earlier than 2020 and are in the process of reviewing and determining potential impacts resulting from this rule. Mercury and Other Hazardous Air Pollutants In December 2011, the EPA issued the final MATS rule, which imposes stringent limitations on emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants from coal and oil-fired electric generating units beginning in April 2015. In addition, both Wisconsin and Michigan have state mercury rules that require a 90% reduction of mercury; however, these rules are not in effect as long as MATS is in place. In June 2015, the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) ruled on a challenge to the MATS rule and remanded the case back to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals), ruling that the EPA failed to appropriately consider the cost of the regulation. The MATS rule has been remanded to the EPA to address the Supreme Court decision, but remains in effect while the EPA completes its cost evaluation. Our compliance plans currently include capital projects for PIPP to achieve the required reductions for MATS. Construction on the addition of a dry sorbent injection system for further control of mercury and acid gases at PIPP is essentially complete and going through final startup and tuning. In April 2013, we received a one year MATS compliance extension from the MDEQ for PIPP through April 2016. Climate Change In 2015, the EPA issued the Clean Power Plan, a final rule regulating GHG emissions from existing generating units, a proposed federal plan as an alternative to state compliance plans, and final performance standards for modified and reconstructed generating units and new fossil-fueled power plants. The final rule for existing fossil generating units seeks to achieve state-specific GHG emission reduction goals by 2030, and requires states to submit plans by September 6, 2016. States submitting initial plans and requesting an extension would be required to submit final plans by September 2018, either alone or in conjunction with other states. States will be required to meet interim goals over the period from 2022 through 2029, and a final goal in 2030, with the goal of reducing nationwide GHG emissions by 32% from 2005 levels. The rule is seeking GHG emission reductions in Wisconsin and Michigan of 41% and 39% , respectively, below 2012 levels by 2030. The building blocks used by the EPA to determine each state's emission reduction requirements include a combination of improving power plant efficiency, increasing reliance on combined cycle natural gas units, and adding new renewable energy resources. Rules for existing, as well as new, modified, and reconstructed generating units became effective in October 2015. A draft Federal Plan and Model Trading Rule were also published in October 2015 for use in developing state plans or for use in states where a plan is not submitted or approved. In December 2015, the state of Wisconsin submitted petitions for review to the EPA of the final standards for existing as well as new, modified, and reconstructed generating units. A petition for review was also submitted jointly by the Wisconsin utilities. The utilities' petition narrowly asks the EPA to consider revising the state goal for existing units to reflect the 2013 retirement of the Kewaunee Power Station, which could lower the state's CO 2 equivalent reduction goal by about 10% . The state's petition asks for review of a number of aspects of the final rules, including an adjustment to reflect the Kewaunee Power Station retirement. In January 2016, we submitted comments on the draft Federal Plan and Model Trading Rule. Michigan state agencies announced modeling results that suggest that the state will be able to meet existing source requirements until 2025, based on planned coal plant retirements, along with a continuation of state renewable standards and current levels of energy efficiency. A stakeholder process began in the middle of January 2016. Michigan plans to submit an interim plan by September 6, 2016, with a request for a two year extension for submittal of a final plan. We are in the process of reviewing the final rule for existing generating units to determine the potential impacts to our operations. The rule could result in significant additional compliance costs, including capital expenditures, could impact how we operate our existing fossil-fueled power plants and biomass facility, and could have a material adverse impact on our operating costs. In October 2015, following publication of the final rule, numerous states (including Wisconsin and Michigan), trade associations, and private parties filed lawsuits challenging the final rule, including a request to stay the implementation of the final rule pending the outcome of these legal challenges. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the stay request, but on February 9, 2016, the Supreme Court stayed the effectiveness of the rule until disposition of the litigation in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and to the extent that review is sought, at the Supreme Court. Therefore, it is unlikely that states will move forward on the development of state plans until the litigation is complete. In addition, on February 15, 2016, the Governor of Wisconsin issued Executive Order 186, which prohibits state agencies, departments, boards, commissions, or other state entities from developing or promoting the development of a state plan. We are required to report our CO 2 equivalent emissions from our electric generating facilities under the EPA Greenhouse Gases Reporting Program. For 2014, we reported aggregated CO 2 equivalent emissions of approximately 23.3 million metric tonnes to the EPA. Based upon our preliminary analysis of the data, we estimate that we will report CO 2 equivalent emissions of approximately 25.3 million metric tonnes to the EPA for 2015. The level of CO 2 and other GHG emissions vary from year to year and are dependent on the level of electric generation and mix of fuel sources, which is determined primarily by demand, the availability of the generating units, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and how our units are dispatched by MISO. We are also required to report CO 2 equivalent amounts related to the natural gas that our natural gas operations distribute and sell. For 2014, we reported aggregated CO 2 equivalent emissions of approximately 4.4 million metric tonnes to the EPA related to our distribution and sale of natural gas. Based upon our preliminary analysis of the data, we estimate that we will report CO 2 equivalent emissions of approximately 3.8 million metric tonnes to the EPA for 2015. Water Quality Clean Water Act Cooling Water Intake Structure Rule In August 2014, the EPA issued a final regulation under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, which requires that the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures at existing power plants reflect the Best Technology Available (BTA) for minimizing adverse environmental impacts from both impingement and entrainment. The rule became effective in October 2014, and applies to all of our existing generating facilities with cooling water intake structures, except for the Oak Creek expansion units, which were permitted under the rules governing new facilities. Facility owners must select from seven compliance options available to meet the impingement mortality (IM) reduction standard. The rule requires state permitting agencies to make BTA determinations, subject to EPA oversight, for IM reduction over the next several years as facility permits are reissued. Based on our assessment, we believe that existing technologies at our generating facilities, except for VAPP Units 1 and 2, satisfy the IM BTA requirements. For VAPP Unit 2, a project to install fish protection screens to meet the IM BTA standard was completed in October 2015. The same types of screens are scheduled to be installed on VAPP Unit 1 starting in September 2016. BTA determinations must also be made by the WDNR and MDEQ to address entrainment mortality (EM) reduction on a site-specific basis taking into consideration several factors. We have received an EM BTA determination by the WDNR, with EPA concurrence, for our proposed intake modification at VAPP. BTA determinations for EM will be made in future permit reissuances for PWGS, Pleasant Prairie Power Plant, PIPP, and Oak Creek Power Plant Units 5 through 8. During 2016-2018, we plan to complete studies and evaluate options to address the EM BTA requirements at our plants. With the exception of Pleasant Prairie Power Plant (which has existing cooling towers that meet EM BTA requirements) and VAPP, we cannot yet determine what, if any, intake structure or operational modifications will be required to meet the new EM BTA requirements at our facilities. In addition, the rule allows the EM BTA requirements to be waived in cases of pending facility retirements, which we are currently considering for PIPP. Based on discussions with the MDEQ, if we submit a signed certification with our next National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit application stating that PIPP will be retired no later than the end of the next permit cycle (assumed to be October 1, 2022), then the EM BTA requirements will be waived. Steam Electric Effluent Guidelines The EPA's final steam electric effluent guidelines rule took effect in January 2016 and applies to discharges of wastewater from our power plant processes in Wisconsin and Michigan. Unless pending challenges to the final guidelines are successful, the WDNR and MDEQ will modify the state rules and incorporate the new requirements into our facility permits, which are renewed every five years . We expect the new requirements to be phased in between 2018 and 2023 as our permits are renewed. Our power plant facilities already have advanced wastewater treatment technologies installed that meet many of the discharge limits established by this rule. However, these standards will require additional wastewater treatment retrofits as well as installation of other equipment to minimize process water use. The final rule phases in new or more stringent requirements related to limits of arsenic, mercury, selenium, and nitrogen in wastewater discharged from wet scrubber systems. New requirements for wet scrubber wastewater treatment will likely require additional biological treatment capital improvements for the Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie facilities. The rule also requires dry fly ash handling, which is already in place at all of our power plants. Dry bottom ash transport systems are also required by the new rule, and modifications will be required at Oak Creek Units 5 and 6, the Pleasant Prairie units, and PIPP Units 5 through 9. We are beginning preliminary engineering for compliance with the rule and estimate a total cost range of $60 million to $80 million for these biological treatment and bottom ash transport systems. Valley Power Plant Wisconsin Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit The WDNR issued a WPDES permit for VAPP that became effective in January 2013. The permit contained several additional requirements including effluent toxicity testing and monitoring for additional parameters (phosphorous, mercury and ammonia-nitrogen), and a new heat addition limit from the cooling water discharges that all took effect immediately. Other long-term compliance requirements included thermal discharge studies, phosphorous evaluation and feasibility for reduction, mercury minimization planning, and the installation of new cooling water intake fish protection screens. Installation of wedge wire screens for fish protection on the VAPP Unit 2 cooling water intake structure is complete. An identical modification is planned for VAPP Unit 1 in 2016. We are also currently involved in planning to meet the remaining long-term requirements. Land Quality Coal Combustion Residuals Rule In April 2015, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities final rule was entered into the Federal Register. The final rule regulates the disposal of coal combustion residuals as a non-hazardous waste. We do not expect the compliance costs will be significant because we currently have a program of beneficial utilization for most of our coal combustion products. If needed, we have landfill capacity that meets the rule requirements for our remaining coal combustion product sources. Coal Combustion Product Landfill Sites We aggressively seek environmentally acceptable, beneficial uses for our coal combustion products. However, some coal combustion products have been, and to a small degree continue to be, managed in company-owned, licensed landfills. Some early designed and constructed landfills have at times required some level of monitoring or remediation. Where we have become aware of these conditions, and where necessary, we have worked to define the nature and extent of the impact, if any, and work has been performed to address these conditions. During 2015 , 2014 and 2013 , landfill remediation expenses were not material. See Note 8, Asset Retirement Obligations, for more information about obligations related to these sites. Renewables, Efficiency, and Conservation Wisconsin Act 141 In 2006, Wisconsin revised the requirements for renewable energy generation by enacting Act 141. Act 141 established a goal that 10% of all electricity consumed in Wisconsin be generated by renewable resources by December 31, 2015. Under Act 141, we are required to increase our renewable energy percentage to 8.27% . To comply with these requirements, we constructed the Blue Sky Green Field wind park, the Glacier Hills wind park, and the Rothschild biomass facility. We also rely on renewable energy purchases to meet our renewable portfolio standard commitments. We are in compliance with Act 141's 2015 standard and have entered into agreements for renewable energy credits, which should allow us to remain in compliance through 2022. If market conditions are favorable, we may purchase more renewable energy credits. Act 141 assigned responsibility for the administration of energy efficiency, conservation, and renewable programs to the PSCW and/or contracted third parties. The funding required by Act 141 for 2015 was 1.2% of our annual operating revenues. Michigan Act 295 In 2008, Michigan revised the requirements for renewable energy generation by enacting Act 295. Act 295 requires 10% of the state's energy to come from renewables by 2015 and energy optimization (efficiency) targets up to 1% annually by 2015. We are currently in compliance with this requirement. Act 295 specifically calls for current recovery of costs incurred to meet the standards and provides for ongoing review and revision to assure the measures taken are cost-effective. Manufactured Gas Plant Remediation We have identified sites at which we or a predecessor company owned or operated a manufactured gas plant or stored manufactured gas. We have also identified other sites that may have been impacted by historical manufactured gas plant activities. We are responsible for the environmental remediation of these sites. We are also working with various state jurisdictions in our investigation and remediation planning. These sites are at various stages of investigation, monitoring, remediation, and closure. The future costs for detailed site investigation, future remediation, and monitoring are dependent upon several variables including, among other things, the extent of remediation, changes in technology, and changes in regulation. Historically, our regulators have allowed us to recover incurred costs, net of insurance recoveries and recoveries from potentially responsible parties, associated with the remediation of manufactured gas plant sites. Accordingly, we have established regulatory assets for costs associated with these sites. We have established the following regulatory assets and reserves related to manufactured gas plant sites as of December 31: (in millions) 2015 2014 Regulatory assets $ 16.9 $ 18.7 Reserves for future remediation 5.6 6.5 Enforcement and Litigation Matters We are involved in legal and administrative proceedings before various courts and agencies with respect to matters arising in the ordinary course of business. Although we are unable to predict the outcome of these matters, management believes that appropriate reserves have been established and that final settlement of these actions will not have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations. Paris Generating Station Wisconsin Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit In November 2014, the WDNR reissued the WPDES permit for the PSGS. We believed that the WDNR imposed unreasonable permit conditions with respect to temperature monitoring, the control of water treatment additive, and phosphorus discharges. To address these permit conditions, we filed a petition for a contested case hearing with the WDNR in January 2015. On the same day, we also filed a request to be covered by the statewide phosphorus variance to address one of our concerns with the permit. We reached an agreement with the WDNR with respect to the permit conditions for temperature monitoring and for restrictions related to the use of a water treatment additive. In March 2015, the WDNR issued a final WPDES permit with agreed upon modifications, and we withdrew our petition for a contested case hearing. In July 2015, the Milwaukee County Circuit Court entered a stipulation and Order for Judgment between the WDNR and Wisconsin Department of Justice. This order resolves the litigation by allowing us to maintain the ability to apply for and be covered by the statewide phosphorus variance. Paris Generating Station Units 1 and 4 Construction Permit In December 2013, Act 91 was signed into law in Wisconsin, creating a process by which the EPA and WDNR were able to revise the regulations and emissions rates applicable to PSGS Units 1 and 4, allowing those units to restart after a temporary outage related to a construction permit matter with the WDNR. We received an “after the fact” permit from the WDNR, and the units are now available for service. In October, 2014, the Sierra Club filed for a contested case hearing with the WDNR challenging this permit. In February 2013, the Sierra Club also filed for a contested case hearing with the WDNR in connection with the administration order issued in this matter, which was granted. However, a hearing has not yet been scheduled. Valley Power Plant Title V Air Permit In February 2011, the WDNR renewed VAPP's Title V operating permit for five years . In March 2011, the Sierra Club petitioned the EPA for additional reductions and monitoring for particulate matter and revisions to certain applicable requirements. No timeline has been set by the EPA to respond to that petition. In May 2012, the Sierra Club filed a notice of intent to bring suit to force the EPA to issue a response to that petition. We believe that the permit was properly issued and that the plant is in compliance with all applicable regulations and standards. However, if as a result of this proceeding the permit is remanded to the WDNR, the plant will continue to operate under the previous operating permit. Solvay Coke and Gas Site In August 2004, we were identified as a potentially responsible party at the Solvay Coke and Gas Site located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. A predecessor company of ours owned a parcel of property that is within the property boundaries of the site. In 2007, we and several other parties entered into an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order with the EPA to perform additional investigation and assessment and reimburse the EPA's oversight costs. The final remedial investigation report was submitted to the EPA in December 2015, and work will now begin on the feasibility study. Under the Administrative Settlement Agreement, we did not admit to any liability for the site, waive any liability defenses, or commit to perform future site remedial activities. Our share of the costs to perform the required work and reimburse the EPA's oversight costs, as well as potential future remediation cost estimates and reserves, are included in the estimated manufactured gas plant values reported above . |
