DOCSLIB.ORG

MJB&A Slide Template

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MJB&A Slide Template Benchmarking Air Emissions Of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States July 2015 Summary Presentation Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com Report Authors: Christopher Van Atten Amlan Saha Lauren Slawsky Clement Russell Contributors: Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: Key Findings • In 2013, power plant SO2 and NOx emissions were 80 percent and 74 percent lower, respectively, than they were in 1990 when Congress passed major amendments to the Clean Air Act. • In 2013, power plant CO2 emissions were 14 percent higher than they were in 1990. However, in recent years, from 2008 through 2013, power plant CO2 emissions decreased by 12 percent. Some of the factors driving this trend include slow economic growth, energy efficiency improvements, and the displacement Download the full 2015 Benchmarking Air of coal generation by natural gas and renewable energy Emissions report and plant level data at: www.mjbradley.com resources. • Mercury emissions from power plants have decreased 50 percent since 2000, and will decline further as the first-ever federal limits on mercury and other hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired power plants go into effect in 2015. Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 2 JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: Rankings by Generation Generation (million MWh; Top 20 Power Producers Shown) 0 50 100 150 200 250 Duke 243.4 Exelon 195.1 Southern 180.2 NextEra Energy 175.7 AEP 153.1 Tennessee Valley Authority 144.1 Entergy 129.4 Calpine 103.0 NRG 99.4 Coal FirstEnergy 96.5 Natural Gas Dominion 93.9 MidAmerican* 91.9 Oil PPL 88.6 Nuclear Energy Future Holdings 73.4 Hydro US Corps of Engineers 69.0 Other/Renewable Xcel 68.8 Dynegy 60.8 PSEG 54.4 DTE Energy 43.9 Ameren 43.8 *On April 30, 2014, MidAmerican Energy Holdings NOTE: Only the top 20 producers shown. (MidAmerican) changed its name to Berkshire Hathaway Energy. Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 3 JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: Emission Contributions SO2 NOx Mercury (Hg) CO2 (million ton) (million ton) (ton) (billion ton) 100% 3.21 1.73 23.71 2.28 100 largest producers 90% 84% 87% 85% No. of producers 75% 24 44 30 49 50% 9 15 11 16 Percent of industry of emissions Percent 25% 3 5 3 5 AEP AEP AEP Duke Southern Duke Energy Future Holdings AEP NRG MidAmerican* NRG Southern PPL NRG Southern MidAmerican* Air pollution emissions from power plants are highly concentrated among a small number of producers. For example, nearly a quarter of the electric power industry’s SO2 and CO2 emissions are emitted by just three and five top 100 producers, respectively. *On April 30, 2014, MidAmerican Energy Holdings (MidAmerican) changed its name to Berkshire Hathaway Energy. Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 4 JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: Rankings by Total Emissions SO2 NOx ('000 tons) ('000 tons) 0 200 400 600 0 50 100 150 AEP 280 AEP 104 Southern 229 Duke 102 NRG 204 MidAmerican* 75 Duke 203 PPL 73 Energy Future Holdings 179 Southern 71 Tennessee Valley Authority 124 FirstEnergy 65 DTE Energy 123 NRG 62 General Electric 114 Xcel 49 PPL 114 Tennessee Valley Authority 47 AES 111 DTE Energy 40 CO2 Mercury (million tons) (tons) 0 100 200 0 1 2 3 Duke 137 AEP 2.05 AEP 134 Energy Future Holdings 2.00 Southern 108 NRG 1.40 NRG 84 Southern 1.22 MidAmerican* 74 MidAmerican* 0.85 Tennessee Valley Authority 69 DTE Energy 0.76 FirstEnergy 67 Ameren 0.74 PPL 67 Duke 0.68 Energy Future Holdings 61 PPL 0.66 Dynegy 57 Tennessee Valley Authority 0.63 *On April 30, 2014, MidAmerican Energy Holdings (MidAmerican) NOTE: Only the top 10 for each category shown. changed its name to Berkshire Hathaway Energy. Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 5 JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: State-by-State CO2 Emissions Total CO2 Emissions by State All Sources – CO2 Emission Rate (million tons; top 5 and bottom 5 are shown) (lb/MWh; top 5 and bottom 5 are shown) 0 200 400 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 264.9 Texas Kentucky 2,092 Florida 114.6 Wyoming 2,025 Ohio 111.7 West Virginia 1,978 Indiana 109.0 Indiana 1,975 Pennsylvania 106.7 North Dakota 1,868 South Dakota 3.6 Maine 357 Rhode Island 2.9 Oregon 337 Maine 2.5 Washington 230 Idaho 1.5 Idaho 201 Vermont 0.02 Vermont 5 Electricity Exporters/Importers Fossil – CO2 Emission Rate (2012 Net Trade Index; top 5 exporters and importers are shown) (lb/MWh; top 5 and bottom 5 are shown) 0 1 2 3 4 E 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 Total in-state supply X Vermont 298% of electricity as % P share of total in-state North Dakota 2,374 consumption needs; O Wyoming 255% Montana 2,295 R in-state supply North Dakota 233% includes international T imports. Kansas 2,281 E West Virginia 219% Wyoming 2,262 R S Montana 184% Nebraska 2,217 I M Delaware 66% Maine 964 P Connecticut 949 O Massachusetts 61% R Virginia 60% Rhode Island 933 T California 908 E Idaho 60% R Maryland 57% Idaho 875 S Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 6 JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: Annual Trends Electric Sector Emissions Generation Fuel Mix Macroeconomic Indicators (Indexed; 2000 = 100) (Indexed; 2000 = 100) (Indexed; 2000 = 100) 220 220 220 187 180 180 180 Natural Gas 151 140 140 140 Renewable* 128 GDP** Nuclear 105 108 100 100 100 CO 90 Total Generation 2 Coal 81 60 SO2 60 60 NOx 32 28 20 20 20 2000 02 04 06 08 10 12 2014 2000 02 04 06 08 10 12 2014 2000 02 04 06 08 10 12 2014 *Includes hydroelectric, wind, solar, biomass, geothermal and other renewable sources. **GDP in chained 2009 dollars. The electric power sector has made significant progress in terms of reducing its NOx and SO2 emissions over the past decade. Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 7 JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: Regional CO2 Emission Rate Trends CO2 Emission Rates of Select Power Producers in Three Regions (all fuels across entire portfolio; lb/MWh) Change 0% Southeast 2000-2013 Midwest Southwest/West 2,500 2,500 2,500 Hoosier Great River Energy Energy -9% Arkansas Electric Coop -15% 2,000 2,000 Asso. Elec. Coop 2,000 -14% -21% OGE -9% -15% AEP Xcel 1,500 Southern 1,500 1,500 -17% PNM Resources -16% NE Public Power District -14% TVA -31% Pinnacle West -17% 1,000 -33% 1,000 1,000 Dominion -41% El Paso Electric -40% -12% 500 Entergy 500 500 0 0 0 2000 03 04 06 08 09 10 11 12 2013 2000 03 04 06 08 09 10 11 12 2013 2000 03 04 06 08 09 10 11 12 2013 NOTE: The x-axes in the charts above do not denote equal intervals. Data for years 2001, 2002, 2005, and 2007 are not shown in the charts above. Over time a wide range of factors influences a company’s CO2 emissions: plant utilization, share of low-carbon generation, new builds, nuclear uprates, plant divestitures and retirements, and mergers and acquisitions. Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 8 JULY 2015 2015 Benchmarking Report: Rankings by CO2 Emission Rate for the top 20 privately/investor owned power producers All Sources – CO2 Emission Rate (lb/MWh) 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 Exelon (2) 200 NextEra Energy (4) 555 PSEG (18) 564 Entergy (7) 594 Dominion (11) 779 Calpine (8) 815 Duke (1) 1,126 Southern (3) 1,194 FirstEnergy (10) 1,390 PPL (13) 1,507 Ameren (20) 1,509 Xcel (16) 1,552 MidAmerican* (12) 1,606 Energy Future Holdings (14) 1,668 NRG (9) 1,686 Edison Mission Energy (23) 1,720 AEP (5) 1,752 DTE Energy (19) 1,764 Dynegy (17) 1,878 AES (22) 1,947 *On April 30, 2014, MidAmerican Energy Holdings NOTE: Ranking by generation shown in parentheses next to power producer name. (MidAmerican) changed its name to Berkshire Hathaway Energy. Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States Full Report at: www.mjbradley.com 9 JULY 2015.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pennsylvania Electric Company
    Supplement No. 9 Electric Pa P.U.C. No. S-1 PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY Electric Generation Supplier Coordination Tariff Company Office Location 2800 Pottsville Pike P. O. Box 16001 Reading, Pennsylvania 19612 Issued: April 18, 2017 Effective: April 19, 2017 Steven E. Strah, President NOTICE Supplement No. 9 makes changes to existing Rules and Regulations. Electric Pa P.U.C. No. S-1 (Supp. 9) Ninth Revised Page No. 2 Pennsylvania Electric Company Superseding Eighth Revised Page No. 2 LIST OF MODIFICATIONS Rules and Regulations Modified Section 5.3 to shorten the Customer switching period and, as a result, the notification period required to process a Customer’s enrollment with an EGS (See Second Revised Page Nos. 20-22). Issued: April 18, 2017 Effective: April 19, 2017 Electric Pa P.U.C. No. S-1(Supp. 5) First Revised Page No. 3 Pennsylvania Electric Company Superseding Original Page No. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Modifications ..................................................................................................................2 Table of Contents. ......................................................................................................................3 How to Use Loose-Leaf Tariff ...................................................................................................4 Definition of Terms and Explanation of Abbreviations. ...........................................................5 RULES AND REGULATIONS: 1. The Tariff....................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • COMPLETE CUSTOMER INFORMATION FORM All Contact Information Is Provided
    COMPLETE CUSTOMER INFORMATION FORM All contact information is provided IBO information is provided and complete Under Contract? i. Please have the customer confirm if they are under contract and provide the contract terms and end date COMPLETE THE LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan and Virginia markets do not apply You must complete a separate LOA for each legal entity(s) you enroll Complete the Personal Information Section List the accounts for which a quote is requested Print Name Sign and Date PROVIDE INVOICE COPIES Please provide the most recent invoice for each account you will be requesting a quote for For Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan and Virginia only– Please provide either 12- months of usage or a legible usage graph for each account PLEASE BE SURE TO SEND COMPLETE PACKET WITH ALL REQUIRED FORMS TO: FAX: 866.452.0053 EMAIL: [email protected] CUSTOMER INFORMATION FORM OHIO THRESHOLD FOR LARGE/MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS IS MORE THAN $17,000 IN ANNUAL COMMODITY SPEND. EMAIL: [email protected] IBO NAME: FAX: 866.452.0553 IBO #: ATTN: ACN/XOOM Energy Commercial Division EMAIL: DATE: # OF PAGES: PHONE: COMPANY NAME: CONTACT: PHONE: EMAIL: CURRENTLY BUYING ENERGY FROM: ADDITIONAL NOTES: Utility Supplier/Retailer IF RETAILER WHO ARE YOU UNDER CONTRACT? IF YES, WHAT IS THE EXPIRATION DATE? Yes No PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU INCLUDE ALL OF THE ITEMS BELOW WHEN SUBMITTING YOUR INFORMATION: CHECK THE UTILITY: Big Business Program Customer AEP Ohio Duke Energy (Electricity) Information Form Completed AES Ohio Duke Energy
    [Show full text]
  • FORM 10-K (Mark One)
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 OR TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission Registrant; State of Incorporation; I.R.S. Employer File Number Address; and Telephone Number Identification No. 333-21011 FIRSTENERGY CORP. 34-1843785 (An Ohio Corporation) 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Telephone (800)736-3402 000-53742 FIRSTENERGY SOLUTIONS CORP. 31-1560186 (An Ohio Corporation) c/o FirstEnergy Corp. 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Telephone (800)736-3402 1-2578 OHIO EDISON COMPANY 34-0437786 (An Ohio Corporation) c/o FirstEnergy Corp. 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Telephone (800)736-3402 1-2323 THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY 34-0150020 (An Ohio Corporation) c/o FirstEnergy Corp. 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Telephone (800)736-3402 1-3583 THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY 34-4375005 (An Ohio Corporation) c/o FirstEnergy Corp. 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Telephone (800)736-3402 1-3141 JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 21-0485010 (A New Jersey Corporation) c/o FirstEnergy Corp. 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Telephone (800)736-3402 1-446 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY 23-0870160 (A Pennsylvania Corporation) c/o FirstEnergy Corp. 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Telephone (800)736-3402 1-3522 PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 25-0718085 (A Pennsylvania Corporation) c/o FirstEnergy Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • Firstenergy's History of Bad Business Decisions
    FirstEnergy’s history of bad business decisions Risky beginning In 1997, Ohio Edison changed its name to FirstEnergy when it acquired Centerior Energy, becoming the 11th largest electric utility in the country, serving 2.2 million customers in northern Ohio and western Pennsylvania. Centerior had invested in three expensive nuclear power plants, just about the time that the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 drove up the cost for these plants. Centerior cancelled one of the nuclear plants in 1994, slashed its dividend, and took a $1 billion write-off. Despite such troubles, and the threat of additional problems at reactors, Ohio Edison bailed out Centerior with the 1997 merger. With this risky investment, FirstEnergy was born. Safety violations FirstEnergy has made repeated mistakes with its poor safety record, as evidenced by its frequent citations from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for safety violations. In 2002, FirstEnergy narrowly averted disaster at the Davis-Besse reactor. The NRC had set a 2001 deadline for a crucial safety inspection, but FirstEnergy pushed it back to 2002, when the plant was scheduled to close for refueling. The NRC found a coolant leak from the reactor core had caused a gaping hole in the reactor cover, eating away six inches of the 6½-inch thick steel plate. The NRC also found a host of defective welds. FirstEnergy had to shut the plant down for two years for repairs. Poor oversight High costs for nuclear maintenance and safety led FirstEnergy to cut costs in other areas, like its tree trimming budget. In 2003, FirstEnergy inadvertently turned out the lights on the eastern U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010: the Proxy Statement
    ® ℠ Morningstar Document Research FORM DEF 14A American Water Works Company, Inc. - AWK Filed: March 26, 2010 (period: May 07, 2010) Official notification to shareholders of matters to be brought to a vote (Proxy) Table of Contents UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 SCHEDULE 14A Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Filed by the Registrant ⌧ Filed by a Party other than the Registrant � Check the appropriate box: � Preliminary Proxy Statement � Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e) (2)) ⌧ Definitive Proxy Statement � Definitive Additional Materials � Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12 AMERICAN WATER WORKS COMPANY, INC. (Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter) (Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement if other than the Registrant) Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box): ⌧ No fee required. � Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11. (1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: (2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: (3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): (4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: (5) Total fee paid: � Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. � Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Future Holdings Bankruptcy Emergence Plans Cast Shadows Over Oncor Credit Profile Moody's Investors Service Infrastructure and Project Finance
    INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE ISSUER COMMENT Oncor Electric Delivery Company, LLC 18 AUGUST 2015 Energy Future Holdings bankruptcy RATINGS emergence plans cast shadows over Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC Oncor credit profile Issuer Rating Baa1 Outlook Positive Energy Future Holdings Corp.'s (EFH, unrated) most recent amended plan of reorganization Moody's and disclosure statement is credit negative for Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC (Oncor, KEY METRICS: Baa1 positive), EFH’s 80%-owned regulated transmission and distribution utility. The plan proposes spinning off Texas Competitive Energy Holdings Company LLC (TCEH, unrated), Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC 2014 2013 2012 EFH’s unregulated merchant power operations to its creditors, and selling a reorganized CFO pre-w/ 4.5x 4.6x 4.3x EFH to Hunt Consolidated (Hunt, unrated). Hunt plans to restructure Oncor into a real c+Interest/ Interest estate investment trust (REIT) and will file the appropriate applications with the Public Utility CFO pre-w/c/ 18% 21.2% 18.7 Commission of Texas (PUCT) in September. The PUCT has about six months to review this Debt change-of-control application. Debt/Book 42% 41.2% 42.6% Capitalization While the plan is not yet final and requires bankruptcy court approval before the PUCT considers it, we view the separation from TCEH to be credit positive for Oncor, in general. ANALYST CONTACTS Separation from the riskier and financially distressed affiliate would eliminate any contagion Jairo Chung 212-553-5123 risk across family. On the other hand, we also see three credit-negative risks associated Analyst with EFH's bankruptcy emergence plans: heightened regulatory contentiousness during the [email protected] approval process for Oncor’s conversion to a REIT structure; dismantling of existing ring- Peter Giannuzzi 212-553-2917 fence provisions; and the potential for higher leverage on top of Oncor as EFH emerges out Associate Analyst of bankruptcy.
    [Show full text]
  • American Transmission Systems, Incorporated a Firstenergy Company
    AMERICAN TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED A FIRSTENERGY COMPANY LETTER OF NOTIFICATION THE FORMER BURGER 138 kV TRANSMISSION LINE EXTENSIONS TO HOLLOWAY SUBSTATION OPSB CASE NO.: 19-0985-EL-BLN May 21, 2019 American Transmission Systems, Incorporated 76 South Main Street Akron, Ohio 44308 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION THE FORMER BURGER 138 kV TRANSMISSION LINES EXTENSION TO HOLLOWAY SUBSTATION PROJECT The following information is being provided in accordance with the procedures in the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) Chapter 4906-6 for the application and review of Accelerated Certificate Applications. Based upon the requirements found in Appendix A to OAC Rule 4906- 1-01, this Project qualifies for submittal to the Ohio Power Siting Board (“Board”) as a Letter of Notification application. 4906-6-05: ACCELERATED APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS 4906-6-05: Name Name of Project: The former Burger 138 kV Transmission Lines Extensions to Holloway Substation Project (“Project”). 4906-6-05 (B)(1): Brief Description of the Project In this Project, American Transmission Systems, Incorporated (“ATSI”), a FirstEnergy company, is proposing to construct approximately 0.27-mile-long new transmission line extensions from the deenergized former Burger-Harmon No.2, Burger-Cloverdale No. 1, and the Burger Line Loop Transmission Lines into AEP’s Holloway Substation. The new transmission line extensions will be placed on three (3) new double circuit, steel pole structures. To connect the new transmission line extensions, existing Structure 15400 will be modified at its current location and existing Structure 15401, which supports the Former Burger Line Loop, will be relocated approximately 50 feet south of its current location inline with the existing centerline.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Annual Report
    20FOCUSED ON OUR FUTURE 20 ANNUAL REPORT 2020 FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Paid annualized dividend of $1.56 per common share consistent with dividend policy. • Provided three-year dividend growth: $1.44 in 2018; $1.52 in 2019; $1.56 in 2020. • Invested $1.15 billion in 2020 to modernize our transmission system as part of our Energizing the Future initiative. • Invested $1.76 billion in our distribution system in 2020. FINANCIALS AT A GLANCE 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL REVENUES (in millions) $11,261 $11,035 $10,790 BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE (GAAP) $1.99 $1.70 $1.99 OPERATING EARNINGS PER SHARE (non-GAAP*) $2.59 $2.58 $2.39 DIVIDENDS PAID PER COMMON SHARE $1.44 $1.52 $1.56 CAPITAL TRANSMISSION DISTRIBUTION SPEND RATE BASE RATE BASE (in $ millions) (in $ millions) (in $ millions) 2,986 2,992 2,983 3,000 8,000 16,000 7,585 15,510 6,945 7,000 14,820 15,000 2,500 6,313 6,000 13,878 14,000 2,000 5,000 13,000 1,500 4,000 12,000 3,000 1,000 11,000 2,000 500 10,000 1,000 0 0 0 2018 2018 2018 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 * See non-GAAP Financial Measures information on the inside back cover of this report. On the cover: Alex Greathouse, line worker, installs automated reclosing devices on Penn Power lines to help limit the frequency and duration of service interruptions for customers. A MESSAGE TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS In 2020, our company continued its strong We are making significant changes in our approach operational performance and advanced our to governmental affairs engagement, as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter of Implementation of Section 224 of the Act A
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 ) In the Matter of ) ) WC Docket No. 07-245 Implementation of Section 224 of the Act ) ) GN Docket No. 09-51 A National Broadband Plan for our Future ) ) ) TO:THE COMMISSION PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COALITION OF CONCERNED UTILITIES Consumers Energy Detroit Edison FirstEnergy Corp. Hawaiian Electric Co. NSTAR Pepco Holdings, Inc. Jack Richards Thomas B. Magee Matthew M. DeTura Keller and Heckman LLP 1001 G Street, N.W., Suite 500 West Washington, DC 20001 (202) 434-4100 (telephone) (202) 434-4646 (fax) Counsel to Coalition of Concerned Utilities Dated: June 8, 2011 SUMMARY The Coalition of Concerned Utilities serves more than 17.5 million electric customers in 10 states and the District of Columbia and owns, in whole or in part, approximately 8.1 million electric distribution poles. We urge the Commission to reconsider its April 7 Order in the hope that specific aspects will be made more workable for the electric utility industry. Absent reconsideration, many utilities will be unable as a practical matter to comply with the Commission’s new pole attachment requirements without serious adverse impact to the safety and reliability of electric service provided to the public. Numerous complaints likely will be filed with the Commission. Make-Ready Deadlines. The new and unprecedented make-ready deadlines are unworkable and unwise and should be fundamentally reconsidered by the Commission or at a minimum revised to better recognize utility operational constraints. To bring the make-ready deadlines more into line with the reality of electric utility operations, the Coalition proposes that the lower limit on the number of attachment requests subject to the deadlines be reduced from 300 to 100 poles, and the upper limit reduced from 3,000 to 500 poles.
    [Show full text]
  • Firstenergy Corp. and Its Subsidiaries
    FirstEnergy Corp. and its Subsidiaries American Element FirstEnergy FirstEnergy FirstEnergy Jersey Centrall Pennsylvania The The Monongahela The Potomac West Penn FELHC, Inc. FirstEnergy FirstEnergy FirstEnergy FirstEnergy GPU Nuclear, Inc. GPU Power, Inc. MARBEL Energy Metropolitan Ohio Edison Allegheny Transmission Merger Facilities Services Fiber Holdings Nuclear Operating Power & Lightt Electric Cleveland Electric Toledo Edison Power Edison Power Properties, Inc. Service Company Solutions Corp.* Ventures Corp. Corporation Edison Company Company Energy, Inc. Systems, Sub, Inc. Group, LLC Corp. Company Company Company Illuminating Company Company Company Company Incorporated Company Ohio Valley Allegheny Allegheny JCP&L The Allegheny Allegheny Allegheny Allegheny FE Aircraft Bay Shore EI Canada MetEd OES Capital , Penelec Allegheny Green Valley Electric Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Coal Centerior Funding Toledo Edison Energy Supply Energy Transition Energy Service Ventures , Inc. Hydro , LLC Pittsburgh Coal Leasing Corp. Power Company Holding Limited Funding LLC Incorporated Funding LLC Company , LLC Corporation Transmission, LLC Coal Company Company Funding LLC Corporation Capital Corporation Corporation (See Note 4) (See Note 1) (See Note 1) Company (90%) (See Note 1) Allegheny FirstEnergy JCP&L The Waverly Engineered OES Ventures The Generating PE Transferring Engineering, Transition Electric Light Allegheny Allegheny Trans -Allegheny The West Processes Ltd. EI Services Incorporated Toledo Edison AET Path Company Agent, LLC Incorporated Funding II LLC and Power Generating Communications Interstate Line Virginia Power & Canada Limited Capital Corporation Company, LLC (See Note 2) Company Company Connect , Inc. Company Transmission (10%) (See Note 2) Company Virginia FirstEnergy Warranton River Mon Power AFN Finance Capital , L.L.C . PNBV Allegheny Renaissance, LLC Generation Corp. Terminal, Ltd. Company (See Note 3) WPP Energy Supply Potomac -Appalachian Transmission Highline, LLC Capital Trust No.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Minutes
    Meeting Minutes Sub-regional RTEP Committee, PJM South area Via teleconference Tuesday, February 16, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. EPT Administration (1:00 – 1:05) 1. Aaron Berner, PJM, called the meeting to order, and reviewed the Antitrust, Code of Conduct, media participation, and WebEx guidelines. RTEP Updates (1:05 – 1:10) 2. Dominion Supplemental Projects Kunal Amare, Dominion, presented a need for supplemental projects in Dominion. Informational Postings M-3 Process Needs Status This spreadsheet allows stakeholders to track process defined in Open Access Transmission Tariff, Attachment M-3 and leading to the development of the supplemental projects. Aggregate Maps for Supplemental Projects Aggregate geographic representation of supplemental projects not previously included in Local Plan. Planning Community Open Questions Open questions regarding M-3 projects received through Planning Community. Future Meeting Dates March 18, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference April 14, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference May 20, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference June 15, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference July 12, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference August 13, 2021 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Teleconference September 14, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference October 14, 2021 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Teleconference Nov ember 18, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference December 20, 2021 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Teleconference PJM © 2021 For Public Use 1 Meeting Minutes Attendance List Last Name First Name Company Sector Hacker William GPU Energy Not Applicable Herman Michael PJM Interconnection, LLC Not Applicable Davis James (Jim) Dominion Energy Marketing, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • STRINGS ATTACHED How Utilities Use Charitable Giving to Influence Politics and Increase Investor Profits
    STRINGS ATTACHED How utilities use charitable giving to influence politics and increase investor profits December 2019 - Energy and Policy Institute Strings Attached How utilities use charitable giving to influence politics and increase investor profits December 2019 The Energy and Policy Institute is a watchdog organization working to expose attacks on renewable energy and counter misinformation by fossil fuel and utility interests. It does not receive funding from for-profit corporations or trade associations. Authors David Anderson Matt Kasper David Pomerantz Kelly Roache Alissa Jean Schafer Joe Smyth Daniel Tait Itai Vardi Energy and Policy Institute Strings Attached, December 2019 1 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4 II. SCOPE OF THIS REPORT ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 III. KEY FINDINGS: FOUR WAYS UTILITIES USE CHARITABLE GIVING TO INFLUENCE POLITICS ...................................... 7 1. GRANTEES WEIGH IN ON POLITICAL MATTERS IN SUPPORT OF UTILITIES........................................................................................................7 2. UTILITIES GIVE TO ORGANIZATIONS CONNECTED WITH OR FAVORED BY IMPORTANT POLICYMAKERS.........................................................8 3. UTILITIES USE PHILANTHROPY
    [Show full text]