Commitments and Contingencies (Notes) | 9 Months Ended |
Sep. 30, 2014 |
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. |
|
Valmy Generating Station |
|
In June 2009, 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 Valmy Generating Station, a 522-megawatt generating facility located in Valmy, Nevada. The Company owns 50% and operates this coal-fueled generating facility while Idaho Power Company owns the other 50% interest. 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 response to the Environmental Protection Agency in December 2009 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. |
|
Newmont Nevada Energy Investment - TS Power Plant |
|
Newmont Nevada Energy Investment, LLC ("Newmont") owns a 203 megawatt coal-fueled power plant facility located in Eureka County, Nevada (the "TS Power Plant") that is interconnected to the Company's transmission system. As a result of system modifications required for a 500-kilovolt transmission line connecting the Company and Nevada Power ("ON Line"), Newmont will need to install certain protection equipment at its TS Power Plant. Newmont brought suit against the Company in the Second Judicial District of Nevada seeking declaratory relief and to enjoin the operation at full capacity of certain equipment to be installed by the Company for the ON Line project, until such time as Newmont completes the design, fabrication and installation of protection equipment at its power plant to protect its generator from potential adverse effects caused by the operation of the Company's equipment at full capacity. In addition, Newmont's complaint asserted a claim under the parties' interconnection agreement seeking to recover the cost of making the necessary modifications to the TS Power Plant. |
|
A hearing on Newmont's motion for a preliminary injunction was held during the week of August 12, 2013, after which the trial court concluded that it would enter an order enjoining the Company from operating its equipment at full capacity from January 1, 2014 until approximately April 8, 2014, and from approximately June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014 (or the time Newmont has completed the installation of its protection equipment), so as to allow installation and testing of protection equipment at the TS Power Plant. The district court issued the order in December 2013. Newmont posted the required $1 million bond and subsequently filed a complaint with the FERC to address the issue of who will pay for the protection equipment and its installation at the TS Power Plant. In April 2014, the FERC issued an order directing the Company to pay the costs of studies relating to subsynchronous resonance conducted by Newmont and the installation of the protection equipment at the TS Power Plant. The costs are a component of the ON Line construction costs and are shared between the Company and Nevada Power at 5% and 95%, respectively. The protection equipment has been installed at the TS Power Plant and the Sierra Pacific facilities are now operating at full capacity. Accordingly, the $1 million bond posted by Newmont has been released. Newmont is also seeking recovery of legal fees associated with litigating this matter. The parties have finalized a settlement in this matter and final documents dismissing the claims are being filed with the court. The terms of the settlement will not have a material impact to the Company. |
|
Caughlin Fire |
|
On November 18, 2011, a fire was reported in the hills near Reno, Nevada (the "Caughlin Fire"). In January 2012, the Reno Fire Department issued a report in which they opined that "this fire was most likely the result of an electrical event in the area," and that "something such as a tree branch hitting the power-line" was a likely cause of the fire. The Company is continuing its investigation in the matter. |
|
To date, six subrogation lawsuits and two individual claimant lawsuits have been filed against the Company in relation to the Caughlin Fire. The subrogation lawsuits have been brought by various insurance companies, and involve similar causes of action (negligence, inverse condemnation, trespass, nuisance, subrogation and strict liability). One of the individual claimant lawsuits identifies six plaintiffs, while the other individual claimant lawsuit purports to be brought on behalf of a class of similarly affected individuals within the fire perimeter who suffered damage or loss of use of their property as a result of the Caughlin Fire and the evacuation order associated with it. |
|
All of the remaining cases have been consolidated before a single judge in Washoe County, Nevada. In July 2014, the Company reached a settlement with the plaintiffs in the six subrogation lawsuits identified above, which did not have a material impact to the Company. At this time, management cannot assess or predict what the impact or outcome of the two individual claimant lawsuits may be, or what, if any, other litigation may be brought on this matter. |