DOCSLIB.ORG

EC14-96-000 Pepco Holdings, Inc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EC14-96-000 Pepco Holdings, Inc 149 FERC ¶ 61,148 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Before Commissioners: Cheryl A. LaFleur, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, Tony Clark, and Norman C. Bay. Exelon Corporation and Docket No. EC14-96-000 Pepco Holdings, Inc. ORDER AUTHORIZING PROPOSED MERGER (Issued November 20, 2014) I. Background ............................................................................................................................ 2. A. Description of Applicants ............................................................................................... 2. 1. Exelon ........................................................................................................................... 2. a. Exelon Energy Delivery Company and Its Electric Utility Subsidiaries ................. 4. i. Commonwealth Edison ......................................................................................... 6. ii. PECO ................................................................................................................... 7. iii. Baltimore Gas & Electric ................................................................................... 9. b. Exelon Generation .................................................................................................... 11. c. Purple Acquisition .................................................................................................... 12. 2. Pepco Holdings and Pepco Holdings Affiliates ........................................................... 13. a. Pepco Holdings ........................................................................................................ 13. b. Regulated Public Utilities ........................................................................................ 14. i. Pepco ..................................................................................................................... 16. ii. Delmarva ............................................................................................................. 17. iii. Atlantic City Electric .......................................................................................... 19. c. Pepco Energy Services ............................................................................................. 20. B. The Proposed Transaction ................................................................................................ 21. II. Notice of Filings ................................................................................................................... 22. III. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 26. A. Procedural Matters ........................................................................................................... 26. B. Standard of Review under Section 203 ............................................................................ 29. C. Analysis of the Proposed Merger ..................................................................................... 30. 1. Effect on Horizontal Competition ................................................................................ 30. a. Applicants’ Analysis ............................................................................................... 30. b. Comments and Protests ............................................................................................ 33. c. Answers .................................................................................................................... 35. Docket No. EC14-96-000 - 2 - d. Commission Determination ..................................................................................... 44. 2. Effect on Vertical Competition ..................................................................................... 50. a. Combining Generation and Natural Gas Facilities .................................................. 50. i. Applicants’ Analysis ............................................................................................. 50. ii. Comments and Protests ....................................................................................... 53. iii. Answers .............................................................................................................. 55. b. Combining Generation and Transmission ................................................................ 60. i. Applicants’ Analysis ............................................................................................. 60. ii. Comments and Protests ...................................................................................... 61. iii. Answers .............................................................................................................. 67. c. Commission Determination ...................................................................................... 76. 3. Effect on Rates .............................................................................................................. 84. a. Applicants’ Analysis ............................................................................................... 84. b. Comments, Protests, and Answers ........................................................................... 85. i. Procedures for Recovery of Merger Related Costs .............................................. 86. ii. Costs Subject to Applicants Hold Harmless Commitment ................................. 93. iii. Formula Rate Protocols ...................................................................................... 101. c. Commission Determination ...................................................................................... 105. 4. Effect on Regulation ..................................................................................................... 116. a. Applicants’ Analysis ............................................................................................... 116. b. Comments and Protests ............................................................................................ 117. c. Answer ...................................................................................................................... 119. d. Commission Determination ..................................................................................... 120. 5. Cross-Subsidization ...................................................................................................... 125. a. Applicants’ Analysis ............................................................................................... 125. b. Comments and Protests ............................................................................................ 127. c. Applicants Answer ................................................................................................... 132. d. Commission Determination ..................................................................................... 134. 6. Other Issues .................................................................................................................. 136. a. Environmental Risks ................................................................................................ 136. i. Protests .................................................................................................................. 136. ii. Applicants Answer .............................................................................................. 139. iii. Commission Determination ................................................................................ 140. b. Ex Parte Contacts ..................................................................................................... 142. i. Protests .................................................................................................................. 142. ii. Applicants Answer .............................................................................................. 144. iii. Commission Determination ................................................................................ 145. c. Corporate Relationships ........................................................................................... 146. i. Protest and Answer ............................................................................................... 146. ii. Commission Determination ................................................................................. 148. d. Accounting Treatment .............................................................................................. 149. e. Other Obligations ..................................................................................................... 153. Docket No. EC14-96-000 - 3 - 1. On May 30, 2014, Exelon Corporation (Exelon) and Pepco Holdings, Inc. (Pepco Holdings) (together, Applicants), together with their respective subsidiaries that are public utilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission, filed an application pursuant to sections 203(a)(1)1 and 203(a)(2)2 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) and Part 33 of the Commission’s Regulations3 requesting that the Commission approve a merger and disposition of assets by which Exelon would acquire Pepco Holdings (Proposed Merger).4 As discussed below, we have reviewed the Proposed Merger under the Commission’s Merger Policy Statement5 and authorize the Proposed Merger under FPA section 203 as consistent with the public interest, subject to the clarifications discussed below. I. Background A. Description of Applicants 1. Exelon 2. Applicants explain
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Maryland Darter Etheostoma Sellare
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Maryland darter Etheostoma Sellare Introduction The Maryland darter is a small freshwater fish only known from a limited area in Harford County, Maryland. These areas, Swan Creek, Gashey’s Run (a tributary of Swan Creek) and Deer Creek, are part of the larger Susquehanna River drainage basin. Originally discovered in Swan Creek nymphs. Spawning is assumed to species of darters. Electrotrawling is in 1912, the Maryland darter has not occur during late April, based on other the method of towing a net from a boat been seen here since and only small species, but no Maryland darters have with electrodes attached to the net that numbers of individuals have been been observed during reproduction. send small, harmless pulses through found in Gashey’s Run and Deer the water to stir up fish. Electrofishing Creek. A Rare Species efforts in the Susquehanna are Some biologists suspect that the continuing. Due to its scarcity, the Maryland Maryland darter could be hiding darter was federally listed as in the deep, murky waters of the A lack of adequate surveying of endangered in 1967, and critical Susquehanna River. Others worry large rivers in the past due to limited habitat was designated in 1984. The that the decreased darter population technology leaves hope for finding darter is also state listed. The last is evidence that the desirable habitat Maryland darters in this area. The new known sighting of the darter was in for these fish has diminished, possibly studies would likely provide definitive 1988. due to water quality degradation and information on the population status effects of residential development of the Maryland darter and a basis for Characteristics in the watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Post Settlement Hearing Brief of Sierra Club And
    Maillog Number: ________________; Date filed: May 1, 2015 STATE OF MARYLAND BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION In the Matter of the ) Merger of Exelon Corporation and ) Case No. 9361 Pepco Holdings, Inc. ) POST-SETTLEMENT HEARING BRIEF OF THE SIERRA CLUB AND CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK Charles McPhedran, Esq. Susan Stevens Miller, Esq. admitted pro hac vice Earthjustice Earthjustice 1625 Massachusetts Ave., NW 1617 JFK Blvd., Suite 1675 Suite 702 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Washington, DC 20036 215.717.4520 202.667.4500 212.918.1556 [fax] 202.667.2356 [fax] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for the Sierra Club and Chesapeake Climate Action Network MAY 1, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................. 4 I. Contrary to Applicants’ Assertion, the March 16 Settlement Does Not Include “Critical Parties.” ............................................................................................................................... 4 II. Exelon’s Commitment to Develop 15 MW of Solar is Designed Solely to Meet Exelon’s Statutory Obligations .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 20200025E.Pdf
    CONTENTS LETTER FROM THE GOVERNOR 3 BOARD OF DIRECTORS 4 LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR 5 MISSION AND VISION 6 ORGANIZATION CHART 7 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 9 ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATIONS 14 CURRENT AND POTENTIAL PARTNERS 17 2017 HIGHLIGHTS 19 TEAMMATE MILESTONES 20 PARTNERS AND VENDORS 22 Barge off Poplar Island 2 MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR Our administration is committed to providing a quality education for our children, growing our economy, and working to ensure that every Marylander enjoys the benefits of a healthy and clean environment. Since taking office, we have made unprecedented investments in our environment, and are moving forward on high-priority initiatives, like the pilot dredging project at the Conowingo Dam, that help ensure the long-term health of the Chesapeake Bay. Maryland Environmental Service (MES) is currently working on over 900 projects that have a significant impact on the health of the Bay and directly affects the quality of life for our citizens throughout the state. While we have made incredible strides over the past three years, there is still more work to do to ensure Maryland remains the best place to live, work, and raise a family. Working with state and local partners, MES will continue to fulfill its mission of protecting and enhancing Maryland’s environment for our citizens. In 2016, our administration launched the Customer Service Promise, a program designed to foster improvements in customer service across all Maryland state agencies. At the Maryland Environmental Service, this means a commitment to finding innovative solutions to our region’s most complex environmental challenges that will preserve our precious natural resources for generations to come.
    [Show full text]
  • Returning the American Eel to the Susquehanna River
    Returning the American Eel to the Susquehanna River ph ot o- Jo sh D . T r y n in e w s k by Josh D. Tryninewski i Fisheries Biologist PFBC Anadromous Fish Restoration Unit photo-USFWS The Susquehanna River once supported tremendous numbers of a long-lived and highly migratory fish that looked more like a snake than a fish. The American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) with its slimy, slender, elongated body, slithering movements, and reclusive and nocturnal lifestyle can conjure up feelings of fright and disgust to the unsuspecting angler. However, the misunderstood American Eel has a complex and fascinating life history with environmental importance that has gained A Normandeau appreciation, understanding and a refreshed restoration focus Associates Biologist counts American in recent years. photo-Josh Tryninewski The American Eel is a catadromous fish that requires access Eels at the Conowingo to both freshwater and marine environments to complete its Dam eel collection facility. life cycle. The entire population, which ranges from Greenland to northern South America, spawns in the Sargasso Sea. Young eels are then transported by ocean currents to the Atlantic Unfortunately, historical abundance was severely impacted Coast, where the eels move into estuaries and freshwater rivers by human activities, mainly dam building. Since the early to grow and mature. Juvenile eels are around 2- to 3-years- 1900s, the lower Susquehanna River has been harnessed by old and 4- to 6-inches in length when migration into the four large hydroelectric dams. While providing electricity to Susquehanna River begins. However, when mature, adult eels many communities, the dams effectively closed the river to may be 7- to 40-years-old and 3- to 5-feet in length.
    [Show full text]
  • Studying and Fishing for Invasive Flathead Catfish in the Susquehanna River Watershed
    River Monsters – Studying and fishing for invasive flathead catfish in the Susquehanna River watershed. Unfortunately, Maryland is now home to two non-native, invasive catfish species -- flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris) and blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus). Both of these species are native to the Mississippi River watershed and were recently introduced into the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Both species grow very large (more than 100 pounds) and are highly predatory in nature. As their numbers increase, they pose a serious threat to our native and naturalized fish populations. Because of this, we ask that anglers harvest any blue or flathead catfish they catch. Click Here to learn more about invasive catfish species and how to identify them! Understanding the Adversary - Flathead catfish have been reported in Maryland’s portion of the Susquehanna and Conowingo Reservoir since the early 2000’s but were not collected during routine fisheries surveys until 2010. Following this, the most common sampling technique- boat electrofishing was utilized at first to try to collect individuals for study. Unfortunately, these efforts failed to effectively collect flathead catfish in the two areas. In 2017, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Freshwater Fisheries Program joined an ongoing study being conducted by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission to study flathead catfish populations within the Susquehanna River watershed. These studies entail collecting flatheads above and below Conowingo Dam using baited hoop nets. Total length and weight are recorded from each fish collected. Additionally, the otoliths (the fish’s ear bone) from each fish is extracted and examined to determine the fish’s age.
    [Show full text]
  • Recreation on Conowingo Pond
    Welcome to ABOUT Recreation on Conowingo Pond Conowingo Pond is one of the largest bodies of fresh water in the Northeast, and its shorelines possess great beauty and abundant natural resources. It’s a place where clean energy is generated, where wildlife can grow and thrive and where visitors can enjoy a great outdoor experience. Exelon Generation is proud to be caretaker of this natural resource and invites you to experience all it has to offer. MAKING THE MOST OF YOUR VISIT Conowingo Pond and the area surrounding it has a wealth of resources for the enjoyment of nature and recreational activities. The pond is one of the largest bodies of fresh water in the Northeast. On its water and along its shores you will find opportunities to boat, kayak, water ski, fish, hike, camp, and bird watch. Exelon Generation has developed several public facilities including a swimming pool, marinas, boat launches, and fishing areas. The company has also provided land to government agencies and private organizations to develop parks, marinas, and boat launches. 2 Click the buttons to make a phone call or access directions. Muddy Run Recreational Park Muddy Run Recreational Park contains a beautiful 100-acre lake surrounded by 700 acres of woods and rolling fields. 172 Bethesda Church Road 717-284-5856 West Holtwood, PA, 17532 Park Activities include camping, boating, fishing, hiking, and picnicking. Muddy Run Lake offers easy shoreline access, a boat launch as well as boat rentals. The Campground has more than 150 tent and trailer sites with picnic tables, grills, and water and electric hookups.
    [Show full text]
  • Conowingo Dam Exelon's View Kathleen Barrón Senior Vice President, Government and Regulatory Affairs and Public Policy
    Conowingo Hydroelectric Station Kathleen Barrón Senior Vice President, Government and Regulatory Affairs and Public Policy Chesapeake Bay Commission January 3, 2019 About Exelon Competitive Transmission Generation Energy Sales and Delivery Nation’s largest producer of Retail and wholesale sales Six utilities delivering clean energy through Constellation electricity and natural gas to 32,000 MW of owned capacity business unit more than 10 million ~2 million residential, public customers: BGE (MD), ComEd Generates enough electricity to (IL), Delmarva (DE and MD), power 20 million homes and sector and business customers PECO (PA), Pepco (D.C. and businesses MD), Atlantic City Electric (NJ) Two-thirds of Fortune 100 companies Committed to powering a cleaner and brighter future for our customers and communities 1 Exelon in Maryland Competitive Transmission Generation Energy Sales and Delivery Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant Retail sales, as well as MD’s largest natural gas and Criterion Wind Project successful Home electric utility Conowingo Dam Performance with ENERGY Maryland Customers: STAR program BGE Electric: 1.25 million 2,326 MW of carbon-free BGE Natural Gas: 650,000 energy Completed 342 energy efficiency projects, saving Delmarva: 204,000 2.2 million+ homes customers over $16M Pepco: 567,000 annually in energy costs 7,500 Maryland residents employed by Exelon 2 2018 Philanthropy & Stewardship in Maryland Tome Visitor • More than $10 million in Center & Turtle Habitat corporate gifts in MD • 2,700 Maryland employees pledged $1.7 million in Rocky Gap Employee Giving campaign State Park • 65,000+ hours volunteered • $235,900 raised in “Dollars for Doers” volunteer rewards to 550 unique MD nonprofits 3 Conowingo Generating Station Overview For nearly 90 years, the Conowingo Dam has been a source of clean, reliable energy for thousands of residents and businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Political Contributions Guidelines
    LE-AC-23 Corporate Political Revision 2 Effective: 07-25-2016 Contributions Guidelines Review Type: 3 year Page 1 of 7 Corporate Political Contributions of Money, Property and Services Exelon and its subsidiaries are allowed to make political contributions to candidates for election to state and local municipal political offices when state and local laws permit them to do so. Exelon and its subsidiaries are not allowed to make contributions to support candidates for election to federal offices. However , the Citizens United decision handed down by the United States Supreme Court in January 2010 has eliminated limits on independent expenditures by Exelon and its subsidiaries for advertisements to support or oppose the election of a candidate for public office in federal and state elections. At present, only an employee-funded political action committee (ExelonPAC; ACEPAC; and PECOPAC) can participate in federal, New Jersey, Pennsylvania or Texas political campaigns. Other states may have similar limits. In contrast, Illinois, Maryland and some other states allow both employee-funded political action committees (ComEdPAC; ExGenPAC; BGE PAC; and Maryland Pepco PAC) and corporate political contributions for state and local elections, subject to statutory limits. These guidelines are intended to provide corporate governance, control, oversight and procedural guidance for corporate contributions of money, property or services for political activities on both a federal level and in the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maryland, Delaware, New York and other states that allow corporate contributions to the political process. Failure to follow these guidelines may result in disciplinary action for the employees involved. 1.0 SCOPE AND PURPOSE 1.1 These Guidelines address only corporate political contributions in those limited jurisdictions that allow corporations to fund political activities.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 RESPONSIBILITY and IMPACT REPORT Letter from the CEO What Drives Us…Making Progress for Our Employees, Customers, Communities and Environment
    A partner for progress across the Mid-Atlantic 2020 RESPONSIBILITY AND IMPACT REPORT Letter from the CEO What Drives Us…Making Progress for Our Employees, Customers, Communities and Environment “Utilities were built to do big things.” The first time I heard that quote, it resonated with me. the CEO of a critical energy infrastructure Build a clean, sustainable and resilient company that spans Delaware, the District energy future of Columbia, Maryland and New Jersey, employs more than 4,100 individuals and Enable thriving communities, deliver touches millions of people every day, I recog- a world-class customer experience and nize the responsibility we have to tackle big provide affordable energy solutions to all our things and help make progress on these and customers and communities; and so many other challenges. Drive economic opportunity, equity and The impact of Pepco Holdings and our continued growth utilities—Atlantic City Electric, Delmarva Power and Pepco—does not start and stop Our vision is clear. And, so is how we will at the meter to a home or business. How achieve it. We commit to running our the electricity and natural gas we deliver is business with a focus on: produced, the way in which it’s transmitted and how it’s ultimately consumed has an Safety and Security impact. It impacts our environment, our employees, our customers, our communities Reliable and Excellent Service It put into perspective our mission, which is and the planet. to provide safe, affordable, reliable and sus- Strong Partnerships and Connecting tainable energy to millions of people across That is why we not only think about what Customers and Communities the communities we’re privileged to serve.
    [Show full text]
  • Order No. 88192
    ORDER NO. 88192 IN THE MATTER OF THE * BEFORE THE APPLICATIONS OF U.S. WIND, INC. AND * PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION SKIPJACK OFFSHORE ENERGY, LLC * OF MARYLAND FOR A PROPOSED OFFSHORE WIND * PROJECT(S) PURSUANT TO THE * _____________ MARYLAND OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY * ACT OF 2013 * CASE NO. 9431 ____________________________________ * _____________ Issue Date: May 11, 2017 Before: W. Kevin Hughes, Chairman Harold D. Williams, Commissioner Michael T. Richard, Commissioner Anthony J. O’Donnell, Commissioner TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ......................................................................................................1 II. Background ......................................................................................................4 A. The Applicants ...................................................................................................4 B. The Applications ................................................................................................6 C. Procedural History ...........................................................................................11 D. Positions of the Parties .....................................................................................15 III. Legal Standard Applicable to this Proceeding and Required Procedural Findings ...........................................................................................................23 A. Determination of Administrative Completeness ..............................................25 B. Minimum Threshold Criteria Determination
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland's Dysfunctional Residential Third-Party Energy Supply Market
    Maryland’s Dysfunctional Residential Third-Party Energy Supply Market: An Assessment of Costs and Policies By Laurel Peltier and Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D. December 2018 The Abell Foundation www.abell.org Suite 2300 Phone: 410-547-1300 111 S. Calvert Street @abellfoundation Baltimore, MD 21202-6174 Cover photo: Shutterstock TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 Third-Party Supply Data .................................................................................................... 5 Third-Party Supplier View ................................................................................................. 8 Growth of Maryland’s Third-Party Energy Supplier Market ............................................ 8 Maryland's Electricity Choice Pricing Outcomes ............................................................ 9 The Burdens and Harms Due to Unaffordable Utility Bills ........................................... 16 Data From Other States .................................................................................................... 19 Current Status at the Maryland PSC ................................................................................ 20 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 21 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Communityfocus PG 10.11.16 Web
    COMMUNITY FOCUS Pepco Celebrates Utility Workers In celebration of July’s National Lineworker Appreciation Day, Pepco saluted the men and women who work tirelessly, day-in and day-out, to provide safe and reliable energy services to Maryland and the District of Columbia. Pepco depends upon 340 utility workers who operate and maintain electric systems and respond to emergencies 24 hours a day, seven days a week, often in challenging conditions, and on weekends and holidays to keep the lights on for customers. “I would like to commend our lineworkers who work daily to maintain and improve the core electric infrastructure that powers our homes and businesses,” said Donna M. Cooper, Pepco region president. “We appreciate and depend on their commitment and dedication to our customers and each other to perform this critical work safely and effciently.” To honor the nation’s lineworkers, a resolution was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives designating July 10, 2016 as National Lineworker Appreciation Day. Pepco joins utility companies across the nation including Exelon sister utilities Atlantic City Electric, BGE, ComEd, Delmarva Power and PECO in honoring all utility workers – both on the lines and in the feld. Pepco Receives ‘Utility of the Year’ Award for Easing Access to Solar Pepco’s effort to make it easier, faster and less expensive for customers to access solar has been hailed as a national model by the Smart Electric Power Alliance (SEPA), an infuential solar organization. SEPA named Pepco 2016 Utility of the Year and recognized the company for promoting solar, creating programs that drive smart utility growth and expanding access to solar for customers.
    [Show full text]