texas petitions to stay cross-state rule; epa claims luminant … · 2011. 9. 14. · india,...

Volume 9 Issue 177 Wednesday, September 14, 2011

© 2011, SNL Financial LC. All Rights Reserved.

Constellation adapts VirtuWatt web application to multiple RTOs

Vermont Yankee trial begins in federal court, viewed as 1st step in legal battle

Washington seeks clarification of NRC’s Yucca Mountain repository vote

IAEA: Fukushima disaster to temper growth rate in nuclear power

Brookfield to combine businesses into $13B renewable power giant

Wide range of intervenors weigh in with NC regulators on Duke/Progress merger

In this IssueClick on headline to advance to story

To Market Story

To Market Report

Continued on p 14

Urging President Barack Obama to roll back more emissions regulations, the House Energy and Commerce Committee Energy and Power Subcommittee on Sept. 13 approved two bills delaying proposed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency emis-sions standards for industrial boilers and the cement industry.

“President Obama himself recently decid-ed to withdraw EPA’s proposal to revisit the ozone rule. That single proposal had the potential to be the most expensive environ-

mental regulation in history, and I’m pleased to see it taken off the table. However, we must recognize that there are many other proposed and recently finalized regulations that also pose a threat to jobs and the economy in my state of Michigan and all across the country,” Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., chairman of the full committee, said Sept. 13. “Today we will address two such sets of regulations — those impacting the cement industry and those affecting boilers used in manufacturing, commercial and institutional settings.”

Texas petitions to stay cross-state rule; EPA claims Luminant ‘rushed’ decision

mailto:[email protected] Dan Lowrey

House panel passes bills blocking EPA rules, urges Obama to protect jobs

mailto:[email protected] Kathleen Hart

With the recent power outages across the U.S. from extreme weather and other causes, utilities need to seize the opportu-nity to explain to consumers that smart grid technology will increase reliability, Edison Electric Institute President Tom Kuhn said Sept. 13, speaking during a morning session on the second day of the GridWeek confer-ence in Washington, D.C.

Utility CEOs see potential economic bene-fits of smart grid implementation, Kuhn said, adding that modernizing the grid could save

the utilities millions of dollars. “Our chal-lenge is to make customers see benefits on the customer side of the meter,” he said.

Joining Kuhn on GridWeek’s “Looking Forward Roundtable” was Erich Gunther, chairman of the GridWise Architecture Council, who said that while distributed generation is on the rise, the role of utilities will remain important. “As independent as people want to be, when something goes wrong people want to rely [on power],” he

Industry hopes public opinion of smart grid eventually matches ‘Angry Birds’ craze

mailto:[email protected] JP Finlay

Continued on p 13

Texas has filed a petition with the U.S. EPA for reconsideration and stay of the contro-versial Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, joining an industry chorus of concern about electric grid reliability once the rule takes effect Jan. 1, 2012.

The petition, filed recently by the Texas attorney general’s office, claims that the state has had little time to prepare for the new regulation. The attorney general con-

tends that Texas electric utilities “had rea-sonably believed” that CSAPR, prior to being finalized in July, would not apply to them. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has said the state had ample notice of its inclusion in the rule, which seeks to limit emissions of SO2 and NOx.

In an email statement to SNL Energy on Sept. 12, Lauren Bean, a spokeswoman for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, said the

petition was filed in response to concerns from the Public Utility Commission of Texas, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Texas Railroad Commission and the Texas Department of Agriculture.

“Attorney General Abbott is deeply con-cerned about these new federal regulations’ impact on the state of Texas, its electric grid, and the Texans whose access to something as basic as electricity is threatened,” she said.

mailto:[email protected]



Wednesday, September 14, 2011

© 2011, SNL Financial LC. All Rights Reserved. SNLEnergy

said. “We still need somebody to manage the infrastructure. Someone’s got to maintain that infrastructure.”

Gunther, who also serves as chairman and chief technology officer of EnerNex Corp., said the cost of renewables and storage devices will decrease over time. At the same time, he expects more renew-able and distributed generation to add capacity to the grid.

“We’ve had distributed generation for a very long time,” Gunther said. “Even with highly distributed generation, the role of the utility will still be there.”

Evan Gaddis, president of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, said he expects the use of energy and electricity to expand regardless of efficiency and conservation efforts. He told a story of the “refrigerator effect.” Gaddis and his wife purchased a new energy-efficient refrigerator for their home but then moved the old, less efficient fridge to the garage, where it remained in use. The point of the story is that people continue to add new appliances without removing older, less efficient appliances.

Energy usage worldwide is expected to increase 24% and in the U.S. by 10% over the next decade, according to Gaddis, all of which makes the smart grid more important. “When we talk about the smart grid, we’re talking about giving consumers a choice,” he said. “If we don’t educate the consumer and let them know what we’re doing, we don’t stand a chance.”

Along the same lines, Jay Morrison, vice president of regulatory issues for the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, said the consumers that his organization’s member co-ops serve have become suspicious of changes in technology. Rural customers want clear explanations of the benefits of adopting new technologies and no longer blindly accept change, he said.

Vimal Mahendru, president of the Indian Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers’ Association, delivered one of the funnier lines of the morning. As the panelists discussed consumer needs for reliability, a common theme used was the desire to play the game “Angry Birds” on mobile devices. “You talk about ‘Angry Birds,’” Mahendru said. “In India, it is more angry citizens.”

His comment, while meant in jest, underscored the fact that mil-lions of people in India still have no access to electricity. Because India still requires so much transmission development, the power industry will be able to begin with a smart grid in many areas, he said.

“Would we ever put in a dumb grid? Of course not. We’re putting in a smart grid,” Mahendru said. “The fact is India has evolved a lot. Imagine what the country can do with adequate electricity. Going forward, everything has to be smart. There is no space for dumb anymore.”

Though the U.S. does not face the same transmission challenges as India, consumer education remains important to smart grid develop-ment. “What we’re about here is not revolutionary, it’s evolutionary. It’s grid modernization,” Kuhn said. “Smart cities of the future will be much more electrified. I don’t think we can imagine all the technolo-gies that will come out in the next 10 years. The march of technology will be inevitable.”

COMPANY REFERENCED IN THIS ARTICLE:

EnerNex Corporation

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/feedback.aspx?Id=13296526&Action=estory� E-mail this story.

Constellation adapts VirtuWatt web application to multiple RTOs


Constellation Energy Group Inc. on Sept. 13 introduced a new version of its online energy management web application, which is designed to allow commercial and industrial customers to better monitor and manage electricity usage.

The software, VirtuWatt 3.0, provides users the ability to custom-ize data views, including grid load, temperature and electricity price correlation, and day-ahead and real-time locational marginal pricing, as well as create user-defined roles for data access and system func-tionality, the company said.

Constellation began working on VirtuWatt in 2007. The product now has more than 1,600 MW under its control and is expanding into individual buildings and the international sector, Constellation Energy Senior Vice President of Load Response Peter Kelly-Detwiler said in an interview after the product update rollout at the GridWeek conference in Washington, D.C.

Kelly-Detwiler said the Constellation product has exceeded his expectations in some ways and lags in others. “Access to real-time pricing combined with automation has enabled customers to be much more strategic about how and when they use electricity,” he said in a news release accompanying the introduction of the updated software. “VirtuWatt 3.0 takes that a step further by allow-ing users to view their usage at an enterprise versus facility level and to develop energy management strategies based on their own price or usage.”

Regarding a specific contract with one of the nation’s largest own-ers of commercial property, Vornado Realty Trust, Kelly-Detwiler said VirtuWatt created value for Vornado through operational control of systems. However, the product does run into challenges navigating the numerous ISOs and RTOs where clients operate, he said.

“The markets are so complex,” Kelly-Detwiler said. When first using the product, customers are sometimes hesitant to deploy all of VirtuWatt’s features. Over time, customers grow more comfortable with the product and employ more of its capabilities, he said.

Since VirtuWatt 3.0 serves commercial and industrial customers in the regions managed by PJM Interconnection LLC, ISO New England Inc., New York ISO, Electric Reliability Council of Texas Inc., California ISO and Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator, the software must respond to myriad baselines and rules, Kelly-Detwiler said. As the leader for load response at Constellation, the biggest hurdle he faces is not a software one but rather regulation from so many different entities.

“We’re still very much in the early pioneering days,” he said, adding that multiple times during software development regulatory change affected software production.

VirtuWatt is only offered to industrial and commercial customers. Though there have been internal discussions, Kelly-Detwiler said a residential product will not be on the market in the immediate future.

“We know that dynamic,” he said. “It’s taken over a decade to mas-ter the fundamentals of the market. Now we’re starting to see the competition.”

He added that RTOs now police capacity and compliance more stringently than in years past. Because VirtuWatt can handle compli-

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/feedback.aspx?Id=13296526&Action=estory




Published by: SNL Financial LC (ISSN 1556-6943) © 2011

Andrew Engblom, Editor E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +1.703.373.0168

Michael Lustig, Managing Editor, Energy GroupMike Chinn, President and CEO • Michael Carter, Director of SNL Energy • Nina Flynn, Subscriptions Manager

POWER DAILYTM

The Energy Industry Delivered to You Daily

SNL Financial • One SNL Plaza PO Box 2124 Charlottesville, VA 22902 • Phone: +1.434.9770.1600 • Fax: +1.434.293.0407http://www.snl.com mailto:[email protected]

Contact information:Editorial: E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +1.703.373.0150 Fax: +1.703.373.0159

Subscription Support: E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +1.434.951.7749 Fax: +1.434.293.0407Subscription Sales: E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +1.434.951.7797 Fax: +1.434.817.5330

Advertising: E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +1.434.951.7829 Fax: +1.434.817.5330

ance concerns, Kelly-Detwiler expects the product will continue to attract customers.

COMPANIES REFERENCED IN THIS ARTICLE:

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4058979California ISO

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057042Constellation Energy Group Inc. CEG

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4065908Electric Reliability Council of Texas Inc

Independent Electricity System Operator

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4060718ISO New England Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4061775New York ISO

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4062332PJM Interconnection LLC

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13295241-13105�PR: Constellation Energy Launches Its Next Generation Energy Management Application for Commercial Users


Vermont Yankee trial begins in federal court, viewed as 1st step in legal battle

mailto:[email protected] Matthew Bandyk

A federal district judge is hearing arguments in Entergy Corp.’s law-suit against the state of Vermont in which the company is seeking to stop the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant from being forced to shut down in March 2012 due to a lack of approval from the Vermont Legislature.

The trial, which began Sept. 12 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont, is viewed as one step in a legal battle that both sides have said will likely go to a higher court.

In July, Judge J. Garvan Murtha rejected Entergy’s request for a preliminary injunction that would have allowed Vermont Yankee to stay open past the March deadline if the case was still pending by that date. But Murtha also said that to minimize any harm to Entergy, the case should go to trial in September “with a timely decision to follow.”

However, even if a timely decision does follow the end of the trial, state officials and Entergy representatives have said they will appeal if the decision is not favorable to their side.

“I can’t imagine this case will be resolved at the district court level of Vermont and that will be the end of it,” Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell said in April shortly after the lawsuit was announced.

In August, Entergy Chairman and CEO J. Wayne Leonard said that litigation is likely to continue “for an extended period of time” even with the expedited trial schedule.

Despite the concern that the plant could be shut down due to the lack of an injunction, Entergy has remained committed to an Oct. 8 refueling outage that will likely take about 30 days to complete. Murtha cited a $35 million cost for the refueling outage in his July ruling.

Opponents of the plant have used the trial as an opportunity to voice their concerns about Vermont Yankee. Former staff physicist for the Union of Concerned Scientists James Leas, speaking at a rally for plant opponents on Sept. 10, said he saw some signs in Murtha’s earlier decision that the judge could give weight to Entergy’s claims of “irreparable harm” during the trial.

“I am concerned that the decision says that Entergy’s money con-cerns, Entergy’s preemption argument and Entergy’s request for a permanent injunction will all get serious consideration at the trial,” Leas said.

Others are reexamining alleged environmental damages created by the plant. In a letter published on the Burlington (Vt.) Free Press website Sept. 13, Vermont Democratic Party Acting Chairman Jake Perkinson criticized Entergy for not taking more action following the Vermont Department of Health’s recent discovery of tritium in the Connecticut River near Vermont Yankee.

“The company’s refusal so far to increase extraction wells and test the construction office building well is further evidence that Entergy Louisiana doesn’t do business like we do in Vermont,” Perkinson wrote.

The state department found the tritium at low but detectable levels in water samples from the river. In its own tests, Entergy found that the tritium was not detectable. Vermont Department of Health Radiological and Toxicological Sciences Program Chief Bill Irwin said Sept. 13 that water samples tested a week after the initial detec-tion also were positive for tritium. But tritium was not detected in samples tested a week after the second test, he said.

The testing, however, will continue. “We still have more samples in the pipeline,” Irwin said.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4058979






http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13295241-13105



http://www.snl.com




Perkinson’s letter also implied that Vermont Yankee might have been the source of strontium-90 that the state department found in fish nine miles upstream from the plant.

Irwin said the department cannot yet conclude that Vermont Yankee was the source of the radioactive material. “It’s a difficult pro-cess to specifically identify the source when a particular radioactive material is somewhat widely scattered throughout the earth from weapons fallout,” he said.

But the department is planning to partner with New Hampshire and Massachusetts to test for radioactive materials in surrounding waterways. If those tests show that fish in other waters have similar contamination to the fish near Vermont Yankee, the department may conclude that worldwide fallout, and not the plant specifically, is the source, Irwin said.

A spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee LLC, the Entergy subsidiary that directly owns the plant, was not available for com-ment Sept. 13.


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4007889Entergy Corp. ETR

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4189791Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee LLC


Washington seeks clarification of NRC’s Yucca Mountain repository vote

mailto:[email protected] Kathleen Hart

The office of Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna sent a letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Sept. 12 asking the agency for an explanation of its tie vote on the Atomic Safety Licensing Board’s ruling that the Department of Energy may not withdraw its application for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.

The NRC on Sept. 9 announced a 2-2 tie vote and issued an ambig-uous order that prompted some House energy leaders to assume the license application is still alive and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to draw the opposite conclusion.

Following the NRC’s Sept. 9 order, Reid stated that the agency’s vote “brings the Yucca Mountain saga closer to its final conclusion.” He added that he was pleased that the commission “is ready to wrap up all work on Yucca licensing by the end of this month.”

The Sept. 12 letter from Andrew Fitz, senior counsel in the Washington attorney general’s office, was filed on behalf of all of the parties, including the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, involved in litigation against the NRC for not issuing a decision on the Yucca Mountain safety application as prescribed by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act.

“The order is contradictory,” Fitz wrote. “As we understand the NRC’s Internal Commission Procedures, an NRC split vote that fails to affirm or reverse the Atomic Safety Licensing Board’s (ASLB) June 29, 2010 decision would leave the denial of DOE’s motion to withdraw intact. Therefore, the licensing proceeding should continue. The order, however, directs the ASLB to, ‘by the close of the current fis-cal year, complete all necessary and appropriate case management activities, including disposal of all matters currently pending before it…,’ as if NRC had reversed the ASLB’s decision.”

Fitz asked the NRC to clarify the meaning of its order by Sept. 15.

Congress in 1987 designated Yucca Mountain as the only option for a long-term storage nuclear waste site and reaffirmed that deci-sion in 2002. However, the Obama administration has abandoned work on the repository project.

In its Sept. 9 memorandum and order, the NRC stated: “On June 30, 2010, the participants were invited to submit briefs as to whether the commission should review, and reverse or uphold, the board’s decision denying the Department of Energy’s motion to withdraw its construction authorization application with prejudice. Upon consid-eration of all filings in this matter, the commission finds itself evenly divided on whether to take the affirmative action of overturning or upholding the board’s decision.

“Consistent with budgetary limitations, the board has taken action to preserve information associated with this adjudication. In further-ance of this, we hereby exercise our inherent supervisory authority to direct the board to, by the close of the current fiscal year, complete all necessary and appropriate case management activities, including disposal of all matters currently pending before it and comprehen-sively documenting the full history of the adjudicatory proceeding.”

The NRC also sent a notice to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit notifying the court of the agency’s deci-sion.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13298784-11305�Industry Document: Letter from Andrew A. Fitz


IAEA: Fukushima disaster to temper growth rate in nuclear power

mailto:[email protected] Jonathan Crawford

In the wake of the March disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nucle-ar power plant in Japan, the International Atomic Energy Agency revised downward its projections for the growth rate in nuclear power.

The IAEA projects between 90 and 350 nuclear reactors will be added globally by 2030, Director General Yukiya Amano said in remarks at the intergovernmental organization’s Vienna headquar-ters on Sept. 12. That compares to projections in 2010, which called for between 143 reactors on the low end and 416 reactors on the high end. Currently, there are 432 reactors in the world.

“This represents continuous and significant growth in the use of nuclear power, but at a slower growth rate than in our previous projections,” he said.

IAEA spokesman Giovanni Verlini noted that the projections are revised on an annual basis based on a variety of factors, including changes in economic conditions.

The projected slowdown in the global growth rate stems from “an accelerated phase-out of nuclear power in Germany, some immedi-ate shutdowns and a government review of the planned expansion in Japan and temporary delays in expansion in several other coun-tries,” Amano said.

Among the most notable changes in nuclear energy policy after the Fukushima disaster came from Germany. The German govern-ment said May 30 that it would close all of its nuclear plants by 2022. The country gets about 25% of its electricity supply from 17 nuclear plants that generate a combined total of roughly 25,000 MWe.

Nuclear Energy Institute spokesman Mitch Singer said the num-bers are still largely positive. “It’s still a healthy growth. The projec-








Power Risk AnalysisWorkshop

Get hands-on exposure to best practices and methodologies for risk management in the power sector.

The need to manage price volatility and capture the value of flexibility has prompted energy stakeholders to develop risk tools for energy assets similar to those widely used in the fixed income, equity and foreign exchange markets.

The Power Risk Analysis Workshop from SNL Energy features recognized experts presenting hands-on training in how to make value-at-risk work in practice. You’ll learn best practices for designing, implementing and leveraging quantitative modeling of practically any energy scenario that has inherent risk.

Just as important, the class size is limited to allow significant time for direct instruction and hands-on modeling under the tutelage of some of today’s most sought-after experts. You’ll leave with templates in hand, knowing how to develop models and where to go to get the data you need.

Don’t delay. Reserve your space today.

What you’ll take awayTake-home risk tools, models and templates you can put to immediate use

Best practices for designing, implementing and leveraging quantitative modeling of energy scenarios that have inherent risk

Comprehensive risk management methodologies, geared specifically to the energy sector, taught by acknowledged experts using real-world examples

Practical hands-on experience

When and whereNovember 9-10, 2011New York, NY

Registration is easyOnline: www.snlcenter.com/PowerRisk

Phone: (434) 951-7786

Fee: $1,795

InstructorsMichael J.B. CarterDirectorSNL Energy

Bhaswar ChatterjeeDirectorDeutsche Bank Securities, Inc.

Gary Dorris, Ph.D.President and Co-founderAscend Analytics, LLC

Steve PiperAssociate DirectorSNL Energy

Kenneth Skinner, Ph.D.Vice President and COOIntegral Analytics

Continuing education creditsCFA CPE: 11 hours Complete details available on the program website.

Also of interest:Essentials of Regulatory Finance

Principles of Power Valuation

SNL Exnet Power and Utilities M&A Symposium



tions are still pretty high. The world understands that you have demand for electricity growing at a healthy rate moving forward for the next couple of decades,” he said.

Singer noted there were 65 reactors under construction as of September, with another 155 reactors currently on order or planned.

Countries that have operating nuclear power plants, particularly in Asia, with the exception of Japan, are expected to see most of the future growth, Amano said. Projected nuclear power growth rates in China and India have not been swayed by the Fukushima disaster, with the two eco-nomic powerhouses “remaining the main centers of expansion,” he said.

Amano noted that the underlying fundamentals will continue to drive growth in nuclear power, unaffected by Fukushima, includ-ing increasing global demand for energy, concerns about climate change and dwindling reserves of oil and gas.


Brookfield to combine businesses into $13B renewable power giant

mailto:[email protected] Amjad Ali

Brookfield Asset Management Inc. and Brookfield Renewable Power Fund announced a plan Sept. 13 to combine the fund and the power gen-erating assets owned by Brookfield’s subsidiary, Brookfield Renewable Power Inc., to create Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners LP.

All outstanding assets of the fund, as well as Brookfield Power’s Brazilian, U.S. and Canadian power assets will be combined into the new entity, which will be a global, publicly traded partnership focused on renewable power generation. The combination will be affected by way of a plan of arrangement under the Business Corporations Act (Ontario).

Fund unit holders will receive one limited partnership unit of Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners for every fund unit held. The fund’s Canadian and U.S. unit holders will have the opportunity to exchange their fund units for Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners units on a tax-deferred basis.

Following the combination, it is expected that Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners will have 265.2 million units outstand-ing on a fully exchanged basis and that Brookfield will, directly and indirectly, own 73% of Brookfield Renewable Energy on a fully exchanged basis. The existing public unit holders of the fund will own 27% of Brookfield Renewable Energy.

Subject to security holder approvals, subsidiaries of Brookfield Renewable Energy will be responsible for all obligations related to about C$1.1 billion of unsecured public corporate bonds issued by Brookfield Power, and C$250 million of preferred shares. Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners will provide guarantees of the bonds and preferred shares.

Brookfield Power will enter into an energy revenue agreement for all uncontracted generation output in the U.S. at a price of $75/MWh, escalated annually at 40% of the increase in the Consumer Price Index during the previous year, prior to contributing these assets to Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners. In addition, Brookfield Power will amend its existing power purchase agreements for the fund’s Ontario assets to increase the price to an average of C$88/MWh from about C$68/MWh. All third-party power purchase agree-ments for generating assets in Brazil will be transferred to Brookfield Renewable Energy. As such, Brookfield Renewable Energy will pos-sess a portfolio that is virtually fully contracted with an average con-tract duration for the entire portfolio of 24 years, Brookfield said.

Brookfield Renewable Energy will assume ownership of all Brookfield Power’s development projects — about 2,000 MW of potential capacity — and will be responsible for all future investment related to the further development and construction of the existing development pipeline. Brookfield Power will not receive an up-front payment for any project in its development pipeline but will be paid only if such project is put into commercial operation or sold and such payments will be based on equal sharing of the value of the project in excess of a priority return on each party’s invested capital.

On completion of the combination, Brookfield Renewable Energy will own one of the world’s largest, publicly traded, pure-play renew-able power portfolios with 4,400 MW of installed capacity and long-term average generation of 17,000 GWh annually. The portfolio will include 168 hydroelectric generating stations on 67 river systems and two wind farms. Brookfield Renewable Energy will also have three wind farms and four hydro facilities under construction that will grow the aggregate capacity of the portfolio to 4,800 MW and average annual generation to more than 18,000 GWh. The portfolio will be diversified across 10 power markets in Canada, U.S. and Brazil, providing significant geographic and operational diversification.

Pursuant to a master services agreement, Brookfield will provide executive oversight of the business and will second senior officers to Brookfield Renewable Energy, including the CEO, COO and CFO.

The independent committee retained CIBC World Markets Inc. to be its financial adviser and to provide a formal valuation of the trust units of the fund and the limited partnership units of Brookfield Renewable Energy. The valuation determined that as of Sept. 12 and subject to the assumptions, limitations and qualifications contained therein, the fair market value of the limited partnership units of Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners ranged from C$5.70 billion to C$7.29 billion, or C$21.50 to C$27.50 per unit, and the fair market value of the trust units of the fund ranged from C$2.28 billion to C$2.83 billion, or C$21.00 to C$26.00 per trust unit.

The board of trustees of Brookfield Renewable Power Trust formed a special committee of trustees to consider the proposed combina-tion, which unanimously recommended that the board of trustees approve the combination. The board of directors of Brookfield Renewable Power Preferred Equity Inc. has similarly approved the combination and unanimously recommended that preferred share-holders vote to approve the combination.

Upon successful completion of the transaction, Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners intends to establish an initial distribu-tion of $1.35 per unit.

The transaction will require approval by 66.7% of the fund’s unit holders and a majority of unit holders other than Brookfield and related persons present at the meeting in person or by proxy and Ontario court approvals. In addition, Brookfield will seek approval from 66.7% of the holders of preferred shares and Brookfield Power’s unsecured bondholders, which are conditions to closing.


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4066647Brookfield Asset Management Inc. BAM

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4095389Brookfield Renewable Power Fund BRC.UN

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4098127Brookfield Renewable Power Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4295675Brookfield Renewable Power Preferred Equity Inc

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13293947-13604�PR: Brookfield Announces Strategic Combination of its Renewable Power Businesses












Wide range of intervenors weigh in with NC regulators on Duke/Progress merger

mailto:[email protected] Abby Gruen

A broad spectrum of stakeholders filed testimony with the North Carolina Utilities Commission Sept. 8 to highlight concerns that the proposed merger between Duke Energy Corp. and Progress Energy Inc. would harm their interests.

Both companies are headquartered in North Carolina, Duke in Charlotte and Progress in Raleigh. It has been reported that, if the merger closes, the workforce at Progress’ headquarters could be cut by as much as half, from its current level of about 2,000 employees.

From environmental groups to low-income advocates, interve-nors asked the commission for specific assurances that the rights of North Carolina customers and workers, and in one case a city in South Carolina, would be protected if the Duke/Progress merger is approved.

“The commission should not approve the agreement and stipula-tion until and unless it addresses workforce issues that could impact system reliability and dependability,” the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers said in a statement, urging the NCUC to reject the merger because it did not prohibit involuntary layoffs in the operational workforce.

Duke is offering a voluntary severance program to some groups of employees, and Duke regional public affairs manager Tom Williams said Aug. 23: “No layoffs will be effective until the merger closes, but we’re trying to avoid layoffs as best we can with buyout offers.”

The city of Orangeburg, S.C., said the merger would have a nega-tive impact on the municipality’s rates when its current power supply deal with SCANA Corp. subsidiary South Carolina Electric & Gas Co. expires at the end of 2021.

“[I]t will effectively prevent both Duke and Progress from offering to sell low-cost power to [the Orangeburg Department of Public Utilities] and other utilities who are not ‘native load customers’ as defined in the [joint dispatch agreement],” John Bagwell, director of the electric division of the city of Orangeburg, said in his testimony.

Wal-Mart Stores East LP, as part of an ad hoc group of commercial customers that included Sam’s East Inc., asked the commission to impose a formula to disburse the promised merger-related $650 mil-lion of guaranteed fuel savings to customers.

Steve Chriss, senior manager, energy regulatory analysis for Wal-Mart Stores Inc., said the merged company should be required to accelerate the pace of savings over the current proposed five-year term.

“Given the inherent volatility of fuel costs, leaving the bulk of ‘guaranteed savings’ to be captured many years from now will not adequately protect ratepayers and could introduce uncertainty into whether the ‘savings’ truly results from the merger,” Chriss said.

North Carolina-based manufacturer Blue Ridge Paper Products asked the commission to require that the merged utility make substantial infrastructure investments. Blue Ridge said its pulp and paper facilities located in Canton, N.C., and Waynesville, N.C., in Progress Energy’s service territory, have experienced chronic elec-tricity outages and voltage sags over the years.

“The commission should direct Progress Energy to consult with its customers in western North Carolina and thereafter develop a plan to improve electric reliability in the region,” Blue Ridge manager Michael Ferguson said. “The plan should be submitted to the com-mission and be enforceable as a condition of the merger.”

Low-income ratepayer advocate Roger Colton testified for the North Carolina Waste Awareness and Reduction Network and asked that Duke Energy implement an “arrearage management program,” and among other things, provide a payment to the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency of $27 million per year for 10 years to supplement the funding of low-income weatherization.

The Southern Environmental Law Center filed testimony on behalf of a number of national and regional groups including the Environmental Defense Fund and the Sierra Club.

Richard Hahn, principal consultant with La Capra Associates Inc., testified on behalf of conservationists and said the commission did not have adequate information to review the merger.

“[T]he merger would have a number of adverse impacts on the environment, including increased emissions from coal-fired genera-tion,” said Hahn, who contended that the merger would hurt renew-able energy development.

The commission will begin to hold hearings on the Duke/Progress merger beginning Sept. 20. (Dockets E-7, Sub 986 and E-2, Sub 998)


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4121470Duke Energy Corp. DUK

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057036Progress Energy Inc. PGN

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057061SCANA Corp. SCG

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057099South Carolina Electric & Gas Co.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13285412-13871�Regulatory Filing: Duke Energy Corp (DUK)

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297209-13609�Misc: Duke Energy Corp (DUK)







Sierra Club targets Chicago coal plants; Midwest Gen calls campaign ‘extreme’

mailto:[email protected] Dan Lowrey

The Sierra Club is calling on Chicago’s mayor to take steps to end pollution from two coal-fired power plants within city limits and is launching a massive advertising campaign to raise public awareness of the health risks from the plants.

The Fisk Street and Crawford power plants, operated by Midwest Generation LLC, have been subject of frequent environmental criti-cism. A new city ordinance proposed to limit particulate matter and carbon dioxide emissions from the plants was reintroduced by the city council and looks to have enough votes to pass. While Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel has been critical of the two plants in the past, it is unclear if he will approve the ordinance. Emanuel has previously said the company should either install equipment to greatly reduce pollution or convert to the plants to burn natural gas.

In a news release Sept. 13, the Sierra Club said it would be putting up ads in trains, newspapers and billboards featuring a six-year old boy who lives next to the Crawford coal plant and has asthma. The

















ad shows a picture of a coal-fired plant with text overlaid reading “Chicago’s coal-burning power plants have a new filter.” Below that is a picture of a boy using an inhaler with text stating “His name is Peter.”

“It is time that the entire city became aware of the damage these plants are doing to the children on the Southwest side,” said Christine Nannicelli with the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign. “One in four Chicagoans live within a three-mile radius of these smokestacks. More people live near the polluting Fisk and Crawford plants than any other coal plants in the country.”

Nannicelli added, “The coal burned in these plants is brought in from Wyoming. The power is sold out of state, and the profits go to a California-based company. The only thing Chicagoans are getting from these plants is asthma attacks.”

The Beyond Coal campaign, which has been posting similar ads in cities nationwide, received a tremendous financial boost recently when New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg pledged $50 million to support the cause.

In a Sept. 13 statement, Midwest Gen called the Sierra Club’s cam-paign extreme and said it is already taking actions to clean up the plants.

“This campaign takes the extreme position that the use of coal to generate electricity — the source of 50% of our nation’s energy supply — should be eliminated,” the company said. “We believe the more responsible course for preserving a reliable, affordable supply of electricity is to continue to reduce emissions from these plants as we have been doing over the last decade. We are now completing the installation of new pollution controls to bring us in compliance with state and federal regulations that take effect in 2012, and our plants already comply with proposed, federal mercury regula-tions that don’t take effect until 2012. These are tough regulations designed to protect the public health, and we’re meeting them.”

Midwest Gen also questioned the asthma link drawn by the Sierra Club, saying the impact of all potential causes of asthma should be taken seriously, but actual data compiled by health experts shows that the areas around Fisk and Crawford do not have higher asthma rates than other neighborhoods. The company also argues that Fisk and Crawford are key components of the electricity grid that serves Chicago and the region.

Midwest Gen has also been critical of the CO2 restrictions being sought by the city council, with a company spokesman saying in July that the restrictions are “physically impossible” to implement because they can only be achieved with natural gas-fired technol-ogy, not coal.

The 542-MW Crawford plant emitted almost 2.8 million tons of CO2 in 2010, according to SNL Energy data. The 326-MW Fisk plant emitted 1.8 million tons of CO2 that year.

COMPANY REFERENCED IN THIS ARTICLE:

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4065836Midwest Generation LLC

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13296914-13607�Industry Document: Sierra Club Launches Massive Ad Campaign to Move Chicago Beyond Coal


Sen. Bingaman urges DOE not to delegate authority to FERC

mailto:[email protected] Marcy Crane

Acknowledging that the provision of the Federal Power Act that gives the Department of Energy the authority to study grid conges-tion and designate national interest electric transmission corridors “is flawed and has proved ineffective,” Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., nevertheless sent a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Sept. 9 urging him not to delegate that authority to FERC.

“I still believe that Congress needs to amend Section 216 to give the commission greater siting authority,” Bingaman, chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, said. “But the decision to rewrite Section 216 is for Congress to make.”

The Energy Policy Act of 2005, or EPAct 2005, added a new Section 216 that directs the DOE to conduct triennial congestion studies and designate as national interest electric transmission corridors areas of the country experiencing significant transmission constraints. Section 216 also gives FERC backstop authority to site transmission projects within those national interest electric transmission corridors under five specific circumstances.

The DOE recently solicited comments on two FERC staff docu-ments outlining a proposal under which the DOE would delegate its EPAct 2005 authority to conduct triennial congestion studies and designate national interest electric transmission corridors. Calling the current dynamic ineffective, FERC staff said “unifying fed-eral authority with respect to siting interstate transmission projects would allow a more efficient, directed process.”

State regulators panned the proposal, insisting that it “runs coun-ter to congressional intent,” and Bingaman, one of the principal authors of Section 216 and an avowed proponent of giving FERC additional siting authority, apparently agrees.

“The simple fact is that the states, rather than the commission, have always had exclusive, plenary jurisdiction over electric transmission siting, and Congress has been reluctant to transfer that authority to the commission,” Bingaman said. “Congress was willing, in enacting Section 216, to give the commission ‘limited federal backstop sit-ing authority,’ … but only within areas that the Secretary of Energy had already independently determined were suffering ‘transmission capacity constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers,’ and even then, only within certain narrowly prescribed parameters spelled out in the statute.”

Bingaman said the two documents that together outline staff ’s proposal “appear to be based upon, or at least inspired by,” a paper prepared by former FERC Chairman Joseph Kelliher, who currently serves as executive vice president for federal regulatory affairs for NextEra Energy Inc. According to Bingaman, Kelliher’s paper asserts that Section 216 “was not well conceived or well drafted” and that Congress’ “mistake” in bifurcating the federal role between the DOE and FERC can be fixed by an administrative “reimplementation” of the law.

While Bingaman acknowledged that the DOE has the legal right to delegate its authority to study congestion and designate national interest electric transmission corridors to FERC, he insisted that doing so is a step that should not be taken lightly because the bifur-cation of authority was “an essential part of the hard-won compro-mise embodied in Section 216.”







“‘Unifying’ in the commission authorities that Congress intention-ally separated would eliminate one of the important checks-and-balances that Congress thought essential to limit the transfer of jurisdiction, and it would pave the way for the commission to use the newly consolidated powers in ways never intended by Congress,” Bingaman said.

Bingaman explained that he also is troubled by FERC staff ’s pro-posal to have the commission designate “industry-initiated, ‘project-specific’” national interest electric transmission corridors. “While this may ‘allow a more efficient, directed process,’ than the one enacted by Congress,” he said, “it would, in effect, rewrite, rather than simply ‘re-implement,’ Section 216.”

The senator further noted that he has authored legislation that, if passed, would “strengthen Section 216 and correct many of its shortcomings.” He accordingly told the federal agencies that “rewrit-ing Section 216 under the guise of reinterpreting it” would be “ill-advised,” as such a move would “do serious harm to our efforts to strengthen the federal siting role through legislation.”

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13292139-14122�Industry Document: On DOE Delegating Grid Authority


New transmission line for Rio Grande Valley wins endorsement of ERCOT committee


An Electric Reliability Council of Texas Inc. technical committee voted to endorse a new project, submitted by American Electric Power Service Corp., to bring another transmission line to the Lower Rio Grande Valley region. The project now moves to the ERCOT board for a Sept. 20 vote.

ERCOT staff presented an overview of the transmission project to the technical advisory committee, and TAC members voted to endorse the project, ERCOT spokeswoman Dottie Roark said Sept. 12.

The proposed 345-kV project would run from Laredo to the Lower Rio Grande Valley and be built by Electric Transmission Texas LLC. ETT is a joint venture of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. and American Electric Power Co. Inc., the parent company of AEP Service Corp.

“It’s gone through two panels at ERCOT,” AEP spokesman Larry Jones said of the proposed line. “That will pave the way for begin-ning the process for filing an application with the Public Utility Commission of Texas.”

The technical advisory committee’s report cited some of the prob-lems that the Rio Grande Valley experiences, including issues with two existing large transmission lines that serve the area and run parallel to the coast.

“Any new line must be geographically diverse from the two exist-ing 345-kV lines that support the [Lower Rio Grande Valley]. The basis for this is twofold,” the report said. “First, both of the existing 345-kV lines run near the Texas Gulf Coast which make[s] them susceptible to tropical storm and hurricane related forced outages. Also, both lines originate from the Lon Hill switching station in the Corpus Christi area which leaves the [Lower Rio Grande Valley] dependent upon one switching station for electrical service.”

The report noted that new transmission is necessary in the area to prevent blackouts and increase stability. The report analyzed nine different options and found three suitable for ERCOT, including the ETT proposal. The ETT proposal was selected from the three options because it combines cost effectiveness with a preferred geographic route that will allow for needed infrastructure and maintenance with a summer peak 2016 delivery date.

The project “went through a second engineering panel and pretty much sailed through that,” Jones said. “The bigger story is going to be next week when it goes before the actual board.”


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4006321American Electric Power Co. Inc. AEP

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4113412American Electric Power Service Corp.


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4155019Electric Transmission Texas LLC

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057049MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13292269-13353�Regulatory Filing: ERCOT


DOE finalizes $1.2B loan guarantee for 250-MW Abengoa solar project

mailto:[email protected] Andrew Engblom

The U.S. Department of Energy said Sept. 13 that it has finalized a $1.2 billion loan guarantee for the development of the 250-MW Mojave solar project in San Bernardino County, Calif.

The project will be the first utility-scale deployment of Abengoa Solar Inc.’s latest solar collector assembly in the U.S., which the DOE described as a “significant improvement over the prior generation of solar concentrating technology installed in the United States in the 1980s and 90s.”

Abengoa’s solar collector assembly technology was originally developed in connection with an award from DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The updated technology includes a lighter, stronger frame designed to hold parabolic mirrors that are easier and less expensive to build and install. The new heat-collec-tion element increases thermal efficiency by up to 30% compared to the first generation of concentrated solar power plants, the depart-ment said.

An estimated 80% of the total costs of the project, including both capital equipment and labor, are expected to be sourced in the United States, according to DOE. A New Mexico facility will provide the receiver tubes for the plant, a new facility in Arizona will supply the parabolic trough mirrors and different suppliers in several states across the country will provide key equipment.

“Investments in solar generation facilities like the Mojave Solar Project are critical to our effort to create good, clean energy jobs in America and compete with countries like China in the global clean energy race,” Energy Secretary Steven Chu said. “This project will supply local utilities with energy, help drive down the cost of solar power, and fund more than 900 American jobs, all at minimal risk to the taxpayer.”














The project is supported by a power purchase agreement with PG&E Corp. unit Pacific Gas and Electric Co., which will purchase the power produced by the plant for a 25-year contract period. Abengoa Solar is a unit of Abengoa SA.


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4242343Abengoa SA

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4200207Abengoa Solar Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4004218Pacific Gas and Electric Co.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057057PG&E Corp. PCG

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13298860-11820�Industry Document: Energy Department Announces $1.2 Billion Loan Guarantee to Support California Concentrating Solar Power Plant


Duke announces plans to build 2nd wind farm in Pennsylvania

mailto:[email protected] Amy Poszywak

Duke Energy Corp. said Sept. 13 that it will build a new wind farm in north-central Pennsylvania and sell output from the plant to Delaware Municipal Electric Corp. under a 25-year agreement.

Duke subsidiary Duke Energy Renewables will build, own and operate the 69-MW Laurel Hill facility in Lycoming County, Pa., the company said in a news release. The wind farm will comprise 30 2.3-MW Siemens wind turbines.

Construction started at the facility in August, and it is expected to enter commercial operation by September 2012.

“The remarkable growth we’ve seen in Duke Energy Renewables’ wind and solar business lines this year is a testament to custom-ers like DEMEC that understand the long-term value of affordable renewable energy,” Duke Energy Renewables President Greg Wolf said in a statement.

Laurel Hill marks Duke Energy Renewables’ second wind farm in Pennsylvania. The company owns and operates the 70-MW North Allegheny Wind project in Blair and Cambria counties, which it acquired from Gamesa Energy USA in 2009.

Since 2007, Duke Energy has invested more than $1.75 billion to grow its commercial wind and solar power businesses, according to the news release.

On Aug. 8, Duke announced plans to build the 200-MW Los Vientos I wind farm in Willacy County, Texas, and in July, Duke acquired the 131-MW Cimarron II wind power project in Gray County, Kan., from Competitive Power Ventures Holdings LLC subsidiary CPV Renewable Energy Co.

In May, Duke announced plans to build, own and operate the 168-MW Ironwood facility in Ford County, Kan., which is expected to enter commercial operation by mid-2012. Later in May, Duke said it reached an agreement to purchase CH Energy Group Inc. subsidiary

Central Hudson Enterprises Corp.’s Shirley Wind facility in Brown County, Wis.


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4089218Central Hudson Enterprises Corp.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057039CH Energy Group Inc. CHG

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4059387Competitive Power Ventures Holdings LLC

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4214604CPV Renewable Energy Co.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4099794Delaware Municipal Electric Corp.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4121470Duke Energy Corp. DUK

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4289702Duke Energy Renewables

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4121261Gamesa Energy USA

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13295418-13864�PR: Duke Energy to Build Second Pennsylvania Wind Farm


Pattern Energy, Samsung to acquire Ontario wind project

mailto:[email protected] Wijdan Khaliq

Pattern Energy Group LP said it has partnered with Samsung Renewable Energy Inc. to acquire Acciona SA’s planned Armow wind power project in Ontario.

The Armow wind farm will use Siemens Energy Inc. turbine com-ponents that will be manufactured in Ontario. Pattern and Samsung said Sept. 12 that they plan to increase the generating capacity of the wind project, to be built in the township of Kincardine, Ontario, to 180 MW. According to SNL Energy data, the plant, first announced last year, is planned as an 80-MW facility.

Construction on the project is expected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2014.

“Together with Samsung, we will be assuming all of the existing real estate contracts with landowners and will actively take over per-mitting and development of the project,” Pattern Energy CEO Mike Garland said in a news release.

“As part of our commitment to Ontario under the green energy investment agreement, Samsung and its partners are establishing four manufacturing plants in Ontario and developing up to 2,500 MW of renewable energy projects, creating approximately 16,000 direct and indirect jobs,” Samsung C&T Corp. Senior Executive Vice President Cheol-Woo Lee stated in the news release.

Pattern and Samsung have signed power purchase agreements with the Ontario Power Authority for the Armow project and three additional wind power projects under development in Ontario, the 270-MW South Kent Wind project in Chatham-Kent, the 270-MW K2 Wind project in the township of Ashfield-Colborne-Wawanosh and 150 MW of wind from the Grand Renewable Energy Park, a wind and solar power project in Haldimand County. The projects total to about 870 MW, according to the news release.





















Samsung Renewable Energy is a subsidiary of Samsung Group, while Siemens Energy is a subsidiary of Siemens AG.


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4147764Acciona SA

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4101708Ontario Power Authority

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4240009Pattern Energy Group LP

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4185919Samsung Group

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4275545Samsung Renewable Energy Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4164886Siemens AG

Siemens Energy Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297137-12844�PR: Pattern Energy and Samsung Renewable Energy Acquire Armow Wind Power Project in Ontario


Calif. lawmakers send bills to governor to speed renewable permits in desert

mailto:[email protected] Jeff Stanfield

Bills that make it easier for renewable energy project developers to get permits to build in the desert of Southern California have been sent to Gov. Jerry Brown for signing after passing in the closing days of the state legislative session by veto-proof majorities in the Senate and Assembly.

Senate Bill 16 and S.B. 267, both authored by Sen. Michael Rubio, were written to increase jobs in the Central Valley of California by removing obstacles to renewable energy development.

“Our competitive advantage here in the Central Valley is that we have plenty of sunlight and wind ready to be harnessed and put to work,” Rubio said in a news release in early 2011. “But building these renewable energy projects has become difficult because of permit-ting barriers that state government has created.”

S.B. 16 requires the Department of Fish and Game to expedite renewable energy permits and increases permit fees developers must pay to the department to pay for the process.

Under the California Endangered Species Act, the department is responsible for reviewing “incidental take” permits for renewable energy projects. The purposes of the permits are to allow developers to build in or near the habitats of endangered or threatened species provided steps are taken to minimize the harm to animal and plant life and to capture and remove the species if necessary.

However, permit processing times have varied greatly, and there has been no specific timeframe under which applicants can rely, according to a Senate staff analysis of the legislation.

The measure specifies that within 45 days after the department receives an application for a project, the department must deter-mine whether the application is complete or incomplete and if the latter, inform the applicant what further information is needed. The department must approve or reject an incidental take permit appli-cation for an eligible project 60 days or less from the date the appli-cation is deemed complete, unless a longer period is agreed upon by the department and the applicant.

The assembly passed S.B. 16 on Sept. 1, and the Senate passed it Sept. 2. The bill was subject to the approval of Assembly Bill 13, which the governor approved Aug. 29. That bill authorized the department to design and implement mitigation actions for pro-posed wind and geothermal power plants subject to the Desert

Renewable Energy Conservation Plan for a vast planning area across Southern California.

This bill additionally requires the department, until Jan. 1, 2016, to collect permit application fees of $25,000, $50,000, or $75,000 per project, depending on the project size, to pay for the department’s permit processing expenses. If the permit application fee is insuf-ficient to complete permitting work due to the complexity of a proj-ect, the bill requires the department to collect an additional fee from the owner or developer to pay for its estimated costs, not to exceed an additional $200,000 per project.

A measure to exclude proposed solar photovoltaic and wind energy generation projects from having to undertake water use assessments, S.B. 267, was enrolled and presented to the governor Sept. 6 after the assembly unanimously approved it 78-0 Aug. 25 and the Senate voted 37-1 to concur in assembly amendments Aug. 30. On Sept. 9, the Legislature recessed until Jan. 4.

Wind and photovoltaic solar projects do not use significant water and should not be required to conduct further studies on water use, a Senate staff analysis of the bill said.

The bill revises the definition of a project to exclude a photovoltaic or wind facility approved after the bill takes effect that demands no more than 75 acre-feet of water annually, the analysis said. “To apply a requirement that is clearly intended for large water users will stymie the state’s ongoing efforts to encourage renewable energy projects,” the analysis said.

Current law that the bill would amend requires a water supply assessment if a project would demand as much or more water than that required by a 500-dwelling-unit project, which would use more than 220 acre-feet per year on a national average and 268 acre-feet for new California homes.

However, if the facility is more than 40 acres, the water supply assessment is required anyway. Solar and wind facilities have been proposed to cover hundreds and even thousands of acres, so even if they do not use much water, the existing law would snare them in a lengthy water assessment process.

The Sierra Club argued against the bill, the analysis said, quoting the group as saying, “With California’s water supply under intense pressure from climate change, increasing population and development, the water supply assessment process is the best safeguard to ensure a community’s vital water supply is not exhausted due to poor planning.”

A renewable energy report that the California Energy Commission released Aug. 31 said utility-scale solar thermal and PV power plants can require large amounts of water for dust control and soil grading during construction. With sandy, dry and windy conditions typical in the des-ert region, the amount of water used for construction activities can be considerable, depending on the amount of ground disturbance. Solar facilities also require water for mirror washing, though water needs for photovoltaic panel washing are estimated at one-tenth of the require-ments for concentrating solar power mirror-washing, the report said.

Water is limited in desert areas, and groundwater basins are often already in an overdraft condition. Fresh water is an increasingly criti-cal resource, not only in the desert regions but throughout California, the report said. Increasingly, power plants may be competing with other local users for diminishing water supplies, the report said. Also, intermittent streams that contain water for only part of the year are found across much of the California desert region.

These streams typically have relatively long periods where no flow occurs punctuated by episodic flows that have a relatively short duration and high intensity. Still, many of these streams are protect-ed by both federal and state regulations because they are important sources of sediment, water, nutrients, seeds and organic matter for












downstream ecosystems and also provide habitat for many species, the report said.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13281132-14386�Industry Document: Renewable power in California: Status and Issues

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297488-11560�Industry Document: Bill Analysis

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297507-13608�Industry Document: Complete Bill History

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297531-12846�Industry Document: Senate Bill No. 16

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297554-12331�Industry Document: Assembly Bill No. 13

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297620-13102�Industry Document: Bill Analysis

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297632-12844�Industry Document: Complete Bill History


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297696-11304�Industry Document: Streamlined Renewable Energy Projects Equals Jobs


Mass. lawmakers consider wind energy siting reformmailto:[email protected] Kelly Harrington

A panel of Massachusetts lawmakers is considering bills aimed at the siting of wind turbines in the state.

The Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy already hosted one hearing this month on bills that would dictate how and where wind turbines are sited. A second is scheduled Sept. 26 on Cape Cod, Mass.

State Rep. Frank Smizik is a sponsor of H.1775, which would stream-line the siting process for certain land-based wind projects. The bill, like others scheduled for hearing, was introduced in January.

With similarities to H.1759 and S.1666, H.1775 would set an expe-dited permitting process for wind projects of at least 2 MW. The bill calls for a wind energy permitting board to review projects. It also would help reduce delays due to appeals, Smizik said. “This is a way to have a system that makes sense,” he said.

The plan is similar to one the Massachusetts House approved in 2010. The Senate, however, did not hold a vote before the session ended. Smizik said the proposal was brought back because Massachusetts has a way to go to meet a goal set by Gov. Deval Patrick to have 2,000 MW of wind power in the state or adjacent federal waters by 2020.

“We have about 40 MW of wind, so in order to meet our goals we have to do more, and this will help us do more,” he said.

Another bill, H.1757, would prohibit the siting of wind turbines within 3,000 feet of a residence or residentially zoned property. The proposal would apply only to turbines built after the law goes into effect. H.2620 would let coastal cities and towns designate certain coastal areas as “exclusion zones” for wind turbine development.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13296378-12073�Industry Document: House No. 01775

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13296438-13096�Industry Document: House No. 01757

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297270-11826�Industry Document: House Bill No. 02620

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13297742-12587�Industry Document: House Bill No. 01759



Demand response compliance filings at FERC draw protests

mailto:[email protected] Glen Boshart

Filings submitted by the ISO New England Inc. and New York ISO to comply with a FERC final demand response compensation rule have drawn many protests, with most of the controversy surrounding eligi-bility requirements for participation in demand response programs.

FERC’s final rule, Order 745, requires RTOs and ISOs that operate organized energy markets to pay demand response resources the same market price for energy that power generators receive, provid-ed that certain capability and benefit conditions are met. The RTOs and ISOs subject to the rule submitted compliance filings earlier this summer detailing conforming tariff provisions and identifying price thresholds to estimate when customer net benefits would occur.

The problem, according to several demand response provider groups, is that the ISO-NE and NYISO are seeking to bar from par-ticipation legitimate demand response customers. In New England, the provider groups targeted a provision (ER11-4336) that would exclude customers whose load reductions result in exports of gen-eration previously used to serve those loads.

“Though ISO-NE seeks to camouflage this restriction on eligibility as a baseline issue, in fact ISO is simply redefining baselines to suit its discrim-inatory agenda,” asserted the Consumer Demand Response Initiative, an informal coalition of businesses, trade associations, nonprofit orga-nizations, and education and health care institutions. “The ISO offers no credible evidence or argument, and indeed none is available, that the resources currently participating in demand response in New England that provide such load reductions” do not meet the benefits test.

Another protest by several industrial groups and demand response providers said while the ISO-NE is not overtly trying to “stonewall” com-pliance with Order 745, it nevertheless has not been “fully forthcoming about the historic new barrier to demand response that its compliance filing subtly creates, nor is the filing nearly complete in placing demand response on that level playing field with generation.”

The goal of Order 745 is to eliminate barriers to demand response by providing adequate compensation, yet several RTOs and ISOs are trying to erect new barriers that exclude large groups of participat-ing demand response customers, the group noted.

The “absurdity of an ISO-NE ‘compliance’ filing that proposes to exclude hundreds of megawatts of highly reliable (and all-too frequently, essential) existing demand response is particularly pro-found,” the group added. According to the group, Order 745 clearly states that the only reason to exclude a resource is if the resource fails to meet the benefits test, yet the ISO-NE has somehow con-cluded that load served by customer owned or operated generation should also be excluded.

In addition, the group asserted that the ISO-NE’s proposal to require that the demand of each individual end-use customer facility be metered at the customer’s “retail” delivery point “is intended to, and does, virtually eliminate demand response participation by customers who rely on cus-tomer-owned or -operated “behind the meter” generation.

“Importantly, this is true even though the customer who relies on its own generation at the moment of ISO-NE need can help to bal-ance supply and demand and save all consumers money, i.e., satisfy the commission’s net benefits test,” the group stated.

Offering a completely different take on the subject, the Electric Power Supply Association said the ISO-NE’s filing includes provisions that would permit behind the meter generation to qualify as Order 745 demand response and therefore receive the full energy price.





















Doing so “inappropriately provides payment to behind the meter generator energy market participation for energy which is not sold as these entities are simply self-providing their own consumption,” the association asserted. “This outcome results in a double payment since … a customer can self-supply its own energy through on site generation, not decrease consumption, and get paid the [locational marginal price] for megawatts of generation that only the customer receiving the payment gets to consume.”

Two Constellation Energy Group Inc. subsidiaries said they sup-port one of the ISO-NE’s exclusionary decisions, i.e., not to permit market participants to self-schedule demand reductions in the day-ahead or real-time energy markets.

Because demand resources are not dispatched, the subsidiaries explained, the ISO-NE must redispatch other resources to accommodate any self-scheduled demand response. Thus, demand resources “could not possibly be balancing supply and demand and, in fact, are contrib-uting to less efficient system balancing, potentially causing additional uplift costs that customers must pay to compensate the generators that are backed down as a result of self-scheduled demand response.”

NYISO proposal raises similar concerns

Protesters raised similar concerns in response to the NYISO’s pro-posal (ER11-4338). For instance, a group calling itself the demand response supporters, which includes EnerNOC Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc., asked FERC to reject the NYISO’s failure to recognize and compensate demand response that occurs as a result of custom-ers dispatching behind-the-meter generation resources, “and make clear that customers engaging in price-responsive load reductions of their metered load must be properly compensated, irrespective of their use” of behind the meter generation.

The same group also took aim at the NYISO’s proposed “unfair and unduly burdensome penalty provisions” that are noncompliant with Order 745.

Taking aim at a different issue, the Occidental Chemical Corp. protested the proposed use of the NYISO’s current demand response cost allocation methodology, arguing that the ISO failed even to attempt to explain why that methodology allocates costs in propor-tion to the benefits of demand response.

Similarly, the New York Association of Public Power protested the NYISO’s proposal to allocate demand response costs to all transmission customers, including those with fixed price bilateral power contracts.

Occidental is a subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum Corp.


http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4057042Constellation Energy Group Inc. CEG

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4190174EnerNOC Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4060718ISO New England Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4061775New York ISO

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4062000Occidental Chemical Corp.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4010841Occidental Petroleum Corp. OXY

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=3005566Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13296837-13093�Regulatory Filing: ISO-NE





House panel continued

Amid growing political pressure, Obama on Sept. 2 asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the controversial draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. “Work is already underway to update a 2006 review of the science that will result in the recon-sideration of the ozone standard in 2013. Ultimately, I did not sup-port asking state and local governments to begin implementing a new standard that will soon be reconsidered,” Obama said.

However, the president emphasized that he is committed to protecting public health and the environment and will “continue to vigorously oppose efforts to weaken EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act or dismantle the progress we have made.”

Arguing that EPA’s regulations for emissions from boilers and cement kilns “pose a clear and present danger to job creation,” Upton said the two bills “are about a common-sense, pro-jobs approach to regulations. They simply require EPA to promulgate cement plant and boiler regulations that reduce emissions using reasonable and achievable targets and timetables.”

On a voice vote, the subcommittee approved H.R. 2250, the EPA Regulatory Relief Act, and H.R. 2681, the Cement Sector Regulatory Relief Act. The bills now go to the full committee for consideration.

H.R. 2250, introduced by Reps. Morgan Griffith, R-Va., and G.K. Butterfield, D-Ga., provides a legislative stay of the EPA’s boiler and incinerator rules and requires the agency to re-propose emissions standards. H.R. 2681, introduced by Reps. John Sullivan, R-Okla., and Mike Ross, D-Ark., calls for additional time for the EPA to develop what advocates of the legislation consider to be “workable rules for cement manufacturing facilities.”

Republicans on the subcommittee argued that the EPA’s current rules could lead to the closure of up to 20% of the nation’s cement plants in the next two years, which they said would send thousands of American jobs to countries such as China and Mexico.

“Neither the cement nor the boiler bill was part of the president’s jobs speech last week, but both should have been, as these bills clear away impediments to job creation in the years ahead,” said Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., chairman of the subcommittee.

“The president talks about jobs. These are two great examples of easing the regulatory burden so we keep and maintain and grow good-paying jobs in America,” added Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill.

Several Republicans on the subcommittee said they support Obama’s call for boosting infrastructure jobs. However, they argued that EPA’s cement industry standards would cause large numbers of domestic cement facilities to close, making it necessary to import the cement needed to build and repair U.S. bridges and highways from China and Mexico.

However, the Natural Resources Defense Council warned that the subcommittee vote is “just the beginning” of a Republican assault on the nation’s health and environmental protections. “It’s official: House Republicans have fired the opening shot in their latest war against our environmental and health protections. Instead of focus-ing on jobs and the economy, they are busy stopping the cleanup of air pollution that costs lives and robs consumers by raising health care costs,” Franz Matzner, NRDC’s climate and air legislative director, said in a Sept. 13 statement.

“Up next, according to the plan recently released by House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor, are a series of assaults on protections that studies show would prevent tens of thousands of premature deaths and untold illnesses and save billions of dollars in medical bills and lost worker productivity,” Matzner said. “And for what? Creating more pollution does not create more jobs — and it certainly doesn’t make















America healthier. All this does is gives House Republicans another way to please big corporate donors and Tea Party extremists.”

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13298469-11815�Industry Document: NRDC: House GOP Begins Latest Assault on Health, Environmental Protections

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13298510-13103�Industry Document: Subcommittee Approves Legislation to Protect Jobs from EPA’s Unworkable Rules


“Although we won’t comment on the particulars of our legal strategy, Texans can rest assured that the attorney general’s office will pursue every available legal remedy to prevent the EPA from imposing this legally flawed rule, and the electricity disruptions and blackouts that state utility officials have said EPA’s rule will cause.”

The state said in its petition that extending the implementation deadline of the rule would allow it to expand options for maintaining electric grid reliability such as controlling the timing of unit outages and expanding demand response, which could avert emergency conditions. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas Inc. painted sever-al grim scenarios that could play out if the deadline is not extended. ERCOT, which manages the flow of electric power to 23 million Texas customers, concluded that at best, the grid would experience a loss of generating capacity of between 1.2 GW and 1.4 GW. At worst, sys-tem capacity could be reduced by 6 GW during October, November and December, assuming increased unit maintenance outages due to repeated daily dispatch of traditionally baseload coal units and limited availability of low-sulfur coal imported from other states.

CSAPR challenges continue to mount

On Sept. 12, Texas generator Luminant Generation Co. LLC said it will have to idle several coal-burning units and switch others to low-sulfur Powder River Basin coal in response to CSAPR, which would eliminate about 1,300 MW, or 9%, of its operating capacity and result in about 500 lost jobs. Luminant also said that, like the attorney general’s office, it filed a petition with the EPA for reconsideration and stay of the rule in early August, “on which the agency has not acted.” The company has since moved on to its next option by filing a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to invalidate CSAPR as it applies to Texas.

EME Homer City Generation LP, the operator of a beleaguered coal-fired power plant in western Pennsylvania, also has filed suit in the same federal court seeking to stay the rule to prevent “untold economic hardship and other grave harm across the country.”

Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, said the agency did “extensive outreach” to industry to ensure that there were an array of compliance options for CSAPR. Those efforts included specific talks with Luminant, according to a statement issued by McCarthy on Sept. 12.

“We have continued to work specifically with Luminant, making the administrator, deputy administrator and EPA technical staff avail-able to assess their needs and continue to ensure they have options to meet these important new standards — including exploring addi-tional flexibility for the company and encouraging more reliance on technologies the company has already installed,” McCarthy said. “As

Texas petitions continued

recently as [Sept. 11], EPA offered to share additional information that shows the potential for a no-shutdown, no-layoff solution for statewide compliance. It is unfortunate that company leadership rushed to a decision that needlessly puts their workers’ jobs at risk.”

McCarthy further noted that Luminant’s new CSAPR compliance plan “represents an abrupt change of direction” for the company, which previously had made business decisions to comply with prior clean-air regulations that were “very similar” to CSAPR.

“It is not EPA’s role to tell private corporations which business deci-sions to make, but we firmly believe that there are better alternatives for Luminant,” McCarthy said. “We remain committed to working with them, and sharing additional information, to find ways forward that protect health and save the jobs of Luminant’s workers.”

Gov. Perry makes presence felt

Texas officials seized on Luminant’s announcement as further evi-dence of the need to stem over-burdensome regulations in the face of a slowing economy.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a leading candidate for Republican presi-dential nomination, was quick to lambast the Obama administration for the lost Luminant jobs. “The Obama administration continues to put up road blocks for our nation’s job creators by imposing burden-some regulations based on assumptions, not facts, that will result in job losses and increased energy costs with no definite environ-mental benefit,” Perry said in a news release Sept. 12. “Yet again, this administration is ignoring Texas’ proven track record of cleaning our air while creating jobs, opting instead for more stifling red tape. As expected, the only results of this rule will be putting Texans out of work and creating hardships for them and their families, while put-ting the reliability of Texas’ grid in jeopardy.”

A recent SNL Energy analysis shows that CSAPR will result in mas-sive emissions-reduction obligations for Texas coal plants.

Texas is not the only state appealing for more time to comply with the new rule. In Nebraska, the state attorney general’s office is working on a lawsuit that would give utilities more time to comply, according to the Lincoln Journal Star.

Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning met recently with utility operators and local leaders to discuss concerns over the regulation, according to the report. “It was a brainstorming session to see if there was any legal action that could be used to halt or postpone the regulation that goes into effect next year,” said Tim Luchsinger, director of utilities for the city of Grand Island.



http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4110664EME Homer City Generation LP

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/snapshot.aspx?id=4115477Luminant Generation Co. LLC

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13295867-12581�Industry Document: Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, 76 Fed. Reg. 48,208 (Aug. 8,2011)

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/doc.aspx?CDID=A-13296042-12850�Industry Document: Statement by Gov. Rick Perry on Announced Job Losses Due to EPA Rule













Market Story

Power markets mixed amid shifting fall fundamentalsmailto:[email protected] Peter Marrin

Power prices across the United States moved in mixed directions Tuesday, Sept. 13, with markets notching higher in the Northeast and Texas but slouching in the Midwest and western U.S.

Traders looked to shifty fall fundamentals, and aimless natural gas markets offered mixed signals for the U.S. power markets with the front-month October gas contract rallying past key support at $4/MMBtu only to relinquish gains and settle below the mark at $3.980/MMBtu, still up 9.5 cents on the day.

Despite a string of losses in prior sessions, spot gas products also notched slightly higher with gains of less than 5 cents at most mar-kets.

In addition, iffy nuclear supply is becoming more closely watched as the fall refueling and maintenance season promises to take down another 21 reactors before the end of the year, according to private sources that see another three units shutting by Sept. 19. Among the units are Duke Energy Corp.’s McGuire 1 in North Carolina, Southern Co.’s Vogtle 2 in Georgia and Exelon Corp.’s Byron 2 in Illinois.

However, at some markets, neither the higher gas prices nor the possible loss of nuclear supply helped to support prices as prices instead looked to generally mild weather and lower loads.

Northeast markets defy load outlook to notch gains with gas

A mostly lower load outlook could not pressure East Coast markets any lower Tuesday as traders instead looked to higher gas prices and the onset of nuclear depletions helping to keep buyers active ahead of a round of cooler weather, including the season’s first frost in some northern areas.

Prices pushed higher in the Northeast, despite a lower load outlook. The NEPOOL-Mass hub in New England saw trades in the low $50s, up more than $3 on the day with light-load trades in the mid-$30s. Likewise in New York, Zone G in the east was priced in the upper $50s to lower $60s while Zone A in the west saw trades in the upper $30s, each steady to higher on the day.

According to the regional grid operators, New England load is called to reach 19,240 MW Wednesday, down about 100 MW, while New York demand will peak near 24,065 MW on Wednesday, down about 250 MW.

A depleted nuclear supply picture in the mid-Atlantic helped encourage gains at PJM West despite a mixed load outlook as the key mid-Atlantic power market traded up to $2 higher on the day in the mid- to upper $50s with off-peak traded in the low $30s.

Looking at load, in the coastal Mid-Atlantic region of PJM, demand is called to peak near 44,000 MW on Tuesday and near 45,000 MW on Wednesday. However, demand is seen plunging elsewhere, dropping in the PJM Western region from a peak near 54,262 MW on Tuesday to 48,850 MW on Wednesday.

Gas gains help support ERCOT markets even as load tanks

Despite a substantial drop in demand across Texas into the second half of the workweek, power prices pushed higher across ERCOT on Tuesday as traders instead focused attention on a possible increase in power plant fueling costs with a bump higher in gas prices.

ERCOT Houston remained highest priced in the low $60s, up almost $9 on the day, followed by ERCOT North, which was up $7 on the day in the upper $50s, and ERCOT South, which was up $4 in the mid-$50s. Off-peak products were generally dealt in the low $20s.

Forecasters see much colder air diving down from Canada this week, reaching well into the Mississippi Valley and helping to cut elec-tric demand after a near summerlong heat wave gripped the southern Plains.

Demand in ERCOT is seen reaching 64,441 MW on Tuesday and just 60,642 MW on Wednesday.

“After chilling the northern half of the nation, the cool air origi-nating from Canada will provide much-needed relief for a part of the country that has been dealing with a record-breaking summer,” AccuWeather.com meteorologist Bill Deger said. “Nowhere will the change be more evident than across the southern Plains, where high temperatures above the century mark today will be replaced by 70s and 80s for a few days.”

The last time temperatures in Dallas failed to reach 85 degrees was May 19, but this streak could come to an end by Sept. 15. However, the 6- to 10-day temperature outlook shows warm temperatures return-ing to the southern Plains in the next week.

Midwest power markets chill despite cold Canadian air

Even as cooler air drops in from Canada this week, bringing some of the country’s first heating demand in almost six months, power prices could not find footing higher in the Midwest, the region most at risk from the cold.

Instead, deals remained soft with AEP-Dayton remaining highest priced in the low $40s, down $4 on the day, while Cinergy was pegged in the low to mid-$30s, down more than $5 on the day.

According to MDA EarthSat Weather, overnight low temperature records will be challenged in parts of the Midwest ISO and PJM Interconnection this week, resulting in an early dose of heating demand.

“An unusually strong cold front progresses through the Midwest and East this week, bringing with it a noticeable drop in temperatures, especially at night,” the forecasters said. “The peak of the cold occurs across the Midwest Thursday and Friday.”

MDA EarthSat sees temperatures dipping to as low as 35 degrees in Minneapolis by Sept. 15, which would break the previous record of 36 degrees, from 2007. Early Sept. 16, Minneapolis is forecast to tie its record low of 38 degrees, from 1873. Chicago also looks to a low of 38 degrees, one degree from its record, from 1984.




Market Story continued

“This cold shot will be the first sure sign that winter is not too far off, as widespread 30s appear likely in the Midwest by later this week,” said Bob Haas, operations manager and meteorologist at MDA EarthSat. “The increased heating demand associated with the chill won’t last for more than a few days though, as warming trends should return by early next week.”

In PJM in the Midwest, the AEP region in Ohio should see peak load near 17,400 MW on Wednesday, down 1,600 MW on the day, while demand in ComEd is called to reach just 12,200 MW on Wednesday, down more than 1,500 MW.

West Coast markets mixed, mostly lower

Being largely spared the shift in temperatures across the Midwest and East, markets on the West Coast found guidance from lower load forecasts, generally weaker gas prices and returning nuclear supply.

With the California ISO projecting a peak near 35,368 MW on Wednesday, down about 800 MW on the day, prices followed suit as

South Path-15 and North Path-15 dropped about $1 each with trad-ing in the upper $30s and mid-$30s, respectively. Light-load products changed hands in the mid- to upper $30s.

Also offering a push lower was the return of Edison International’s San Onofre facility, where both units have returned to near full capac-ity after a massive outage knocked out power for almost 1.5 million customers throughout Greater San Diego late last week.

Losses spilled into the Northwest, where Mid-Columbia shed $1 to move on either side of $30, and COB eased very modestly to continue in the mid- and upper $30s. Light-load products were dealt in the low to mid-$20s at Mid-C and in the upper $20s at COB.

In the Southwest, some hubs such as Palo Verde managed to add some slight value with lingering heat but remained reasonable with trades in the upper $30s to near $40. Mead, however, moved the other way, shedding close to $3.50 on the day to average below Palo Verde. Light-load deals were priced in the mid-$20s throughout the region.

From the latest rate case rulings to commissionprofiles with rankings, RRA (RegulatoryResearch Associates, an SNL company) hasbeen the leading authority on utility securitiesand regulation for 30 years.

See real-time news or review 30 years of archived rate case analysis. Get hard-to-find data

such as Allowed Return on Equity or Authorized Rate Base.Customize aggregated rate case data screens. Compare commissionerprofiles and regulatory topics across several jurisdictions with one-click ease.

RRA gives you the regulatory news and insight you need to makesmart energy investment decisions.

RRA. The presidingauthority on utilities

regulation.

mailto:[email protected] http://www.snlenergy.com

Yo u r s i n g l e s o u r c e f o r e n e r g y i n t e l l i g e n c e .


http://www.snlenergy.com



Energy Pricing Trends

Peak Electricity Index (Day Ahead prices for Delivery on Sep 14, 11)Volume Change All Peak

Wgtd. From Volume Trading HoursDelivery Average Sep 13, 11 Wgtd. Average %� Trade ($/MWh) Volume VolumePoint ($/MWh) ($/MWh) 1 Day 1 Year Median Low High (MWh) (MWh)

MIDWESTA.D. 41.00 -4.50 -9.89 6.49 - - - - - Cinergy 34.50 -5.00 -12.66 -2.82 - - - - - Michigan 39.00 -5.00 -11.36 10.64 - - - - - Minnesota 27.00 -6.75 -20.00 0.93 - - - - - N. Illinois (CE) 34.00 -5.25 -13.38 5.43 - - - - -

NORTHEASTNY Zone A 37.50 -3.00 -7.41 -9.64 - - - - - NY Zone G 60.00 5.25 9.59 18.23 - - - - - NY Zone J 65.75 8.50 14.85 20.64 - - - - - Nepool-Mass 50.58 3.08 6.48 4.83 50.50 50.50 50.75 150 2,400 Ontario 35.00 -1.75 -4.76 -1.41 - - - - - PJM West 55.10 -2.53 -4.39 17.16 54.88 53.00 57.00 750 12,000

OTC BROKERBroker ERCOT-Hou. 60.00 -10.50 -14.89 25.00 - - - - - Broker ERCOT-North - - - - - - - - - Broker ERCOT-S.C. - - - - - - - - - Broker ERCOT-South 54.50 -15.50 -22.14 14.50 - - - - - Broker ERCOT-West 56.00 -14.00 -20.00 23.95 - - - - -

SOUTHERCOT-Hou. 60.00 -11.50 -16.08 25.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 100 1,600 ERCOT-North 55.83 -12.94 -18.82 17.59 56.00 54.48 56.75 1,850 29,600 ERCOT-NE - - - - - - - - - ERCOT-S.C. - - - - - - - - - ERCOT-South 54.50 -15.50 -22.14 14.42 54.50 54.50 54.50 50 800 ERCOT-West 56.00 -14.00 -20.00 23.95 - - - - - Entergy 38.00 -5.50 -12.64 20.63 - - - - - Fla. In-State 41.50 0.50 1.22 -1.19 - - - - - Fla.-Ga. Bdr. 39.50 0.50 1.28 -2.47 39.50 39.00 40.00 100 1,600 Southern 39.50 -0.50 -1.25 16.18 39.50 39.50 39.50 50 800

WESTCOB 36.50 -0.50 -1.35 -13.10 36.50 35.00 38.00 75 1,200 Mead 38.75 -0.75 -1.90 -1.27 - - - - - Mid-C 29.91 -0.98 -3.17 -24.66 30.00 29.75 31.25 200 3,200 NP-15 36.00 -0.50 -1.37 -5.88 - - - - - Palo Verde 39.00 -1.67 -4.11 5.41 38.75 38.00 39.50 75 1,200 SP-15 37.25 -1.50 -3.87 -3.25 - - - - -

Off-Peak Electricity Index (Day Ahead prices for Delivery on Sep 14, 11)Volume Change

Wgtd. From Volume TradingDelivery Average Sep 13, 11 Wgtd. Average %� Trade ($/MWh) VolumePoint ($/MWh) ($/MWh) 1 Day 1 Year Median Low High (MWh)

SOUTHERCOT-North 23.22 0.99 4.45 -8.73 23.23 23.00 24.00 800 Fla.-Ga. Bdr. 28.00 1.00 3.70 19.15 28.00 28.00 28.00 75

WESTCOB 28.00 0.00 0.00 - 28.00 28.00 28.00 25 Mid-C 24.42 -0.42 -1.69 -13.50 24.25 23.75 25.25 225



Gas Index (Day Ahead prices for Delivery on Sep 14, 11)Volume Change

Wgtd. From Volume TradingTrading Average Sep 13, 11 Wgtd. Average %� Trade ($/mmBtu) VolumeHub ($/mmBtu) ($/mmBtu) 1 Day 1 Year Median Low High (mmBtu)

GULF COASTANR-Patterson (LA) 3.949 0.082 2.12 3.76 3.948 3.900 3.953 75,800 Agua Dulce 3.930 0.080 2.08 1.55 - - - - Carthage 3.823 0.060 1.59 2.03 3.835 3.800 3.900 48,300 Col Gulf Mainline 3.916 0.064 1.66 3.03 3.903 3.880 3.965 128,895 Col Gulf Onshore 3.975 0.068 1.74 3.41 3.980 3.960 3.985 68,100 FGT Zone 2 3.980 0.067 1.71 1.27 3.980 3.980 3.980 9,151 FGT Zone 1 3.980 0.080 2.05 1.02 3.980 3.980 3.980 4,000 FGT Zone 3 4.128 0.036 0.88 7.70 4.130 4.060 4.170 74,500 Henry Hub 3.961 0.047 1.20 3.29 3.950 3.935 4.010 77,900 Houston Ship Channel 3.908 0.003 0.08 -0.48 3.908 3.900 3.915 10,000 Katy 3.917 0.058 1.50 0.62 3.915 3.900 3.940 98,900 Moss Bluff 3.980 0.030 0.76 2.37 - - - - NGPL Gulf Line 3.930 0.050 1.29 3.97 - - - - NGPL Louisiana 3.950 0.060 1.54 2.60 - - - - NGPL South TX 3.889 0.084 2.21 1.20 3.899 3.840 3.915 66,500 Sonat 3.962 0.071 1.82 3.53 3.955 3.950 3.985 101,900 Stingray 4.080 0.040 0.99 6.81 - - - - TETCO M1 (24-inch) 3.953 -0.037 -0.93 4.63 3.940 3.930 3.980 15,000 TETCO M1 (30-inch) 4.006 0.088 2.25 3.62 4.015 3.930 4.040 141,250 TETCO M2 4.114 0.189 4.82 0.12 4.195 4.030 4.210 71,000 TX Eastern (E. LA) 3.936 0.066 1.71 3.42 3.940 3.910 3.970 38,600 TX Eastern (E. TX) 3.720 -0.030 -0.80 1.92 3.720 3.720 3.720 4,500 TX Eastern (S. TX) 3.840 0.040 1.05 3.73 3.840 3.840 3.840 10,300 TX Eastern (W. LA) 3.943 0.008 0.20 3.41 3.945 3.930 3.950 28,000 Tennessee Zone 0 3.915 0.108 2.84 3.46 3.920 3.860 3.990 53,500 Tennessee Zone 1 3.967 0.077 1.98 4.23 3.965 3.935 4.030 209,317 Texas Gas (LA) 3.900 0.062 1.62 1.19 3.900 3.900 3.900 24,400 Texas Gas (Zone 1) 3.930 0.081 2.10 2.80 3.925 3.900 4.015 125,000 Transco Z2 3.962 0.098 2.54 2.25 3.968 3.950 3.968 15,000 Transco Z 4 3.999 0.089 2.28 3.65 4.015 3.980 4.020 96,043 Transco Z 3 3.990 0.044 1.12 3.37 3.995 3.970 4.030 88,400 Transco Z 1 3.940 0.090 2.34 1.91 - - - - Transco Z 5 4.250 0.130 3.16 4.42 - - - - Trunkline (E. LA) 3.917 -0.002 -0.05 2.27 3.920 3.910 3.945 25,900 Trunkline (W. LA) 3.920 0.000 0.00 3.98 - - - - Trunkline Zone 1A 3.912 0.062 1.61 3.36 3.911 3.908 3.913 12,600

MID-CONTINENTANR-ML7 4.180 0.080 1.95 2.70 - - - - ANR-SW 3.830 0.048 1.27 4.90 3.835 3.820 3.840 9,400 Alliance 4.066 0.116 2.94 3.67 4.063 4.040 4.180 148,300 Centerpoint East 3.837 0.042 1.11 4.49 3.830 3.815 3.850 39,900 Centerpoint No/So 3.820 0.020 0.53 4.37 - - - - Centerpoint West 3.800 0.000 0.00 4.97 3.800 3.800 3.800 4,400 Chicago 4.065 0.082 2.06 4.45 4.068 3.980 4.150 138,000 Cons Energy Citygate 4.167 0.017 0.41 6.71 4.162 4.155 4.185 29,400 Delivery So. Star 3.838 0.065 1.72 5.93 3.840 3.805 3.900 43,365 Emerson 3.886 0.064 1.67 2.18 3.868 3.860 3.920 104,200 Enogex E Zone Pool 3.930 0.110 2.88 4.05 - - - - Enogex W Zone Pool 3.930 0.110 2.88 10.08 - - - - Michcon Detroit CG 4.191 0.042 1.01 3.48 4.183 4.173 4.235 108,400 NGPL Amarillo 3.960 0.120 3.13 7.32 3.960 3.960 3.960 6,601 NGPL Forgan, OK 3.885 0.053 1.38 6.82 3.885 3.860 3.960 200,600 NGPL Tex/Ok 3.903 0.034 0.88 4.30 3.908 3.870 3.940 107,600 NNG Demarc 4.004 0.074 1.88 2.67 4.000 3.990 4.100 80,816 NNG Ventura 4.009 0.108 2.77 3.59 4.010 3.970 4.040 409,881 Northern Mid-10 3.780 0.040 1.07 3.85 3.780 3.780 3.780 5,000 ONG at Tulsa 3.903 0.033 0.85 7.55 3.905 3.890 3.950 35,000 PEPL 3.884 0.067 1.76 6.35 3.875 3.850 4.270 80,600 Rex East 4.120 0.110 2.74 3.05 4.120 4.090 4.170 224,402

Energy Pricing Trends continued



NORTHEASTAlgon Gates 4.338 0.088 2.07 2.34 4.340 4.325 4.360 58,500 Algonquin PA-NJ 4.330 0.087 2.05 3.37 - - - - Dawn, Ont. 4.284 0.038 0.89 -0.46 4.285 4.265 4.345 179,600 Dominion N 4.070 0.060 1.50 0.49 - - - - Dominion S 4.065 0.065 1.63 3.86 4.070 4.015 4.160 129,500 Iroquois Waddington 4.403 0.066 1.52 -0.29 4.405 4.388 4.425 23,500 Iroquois Z 2 4.440 0.122 2.83 -0.47 4.435 4.425 4.450 58,000 Lebanon 4.105 0.115 2.88 3.66 4.110 4.090 4.135 30,000 Leidy 4.275 0.275 6.88 3.76 4.275 4.260 4.290 10,000 Natl Fuel Gas NY-PA 4.270 0.080 1.91 2.15 - - - - Niagara 4.305 0.085 2.01 0.77 4.305 4.305 4.305 5,000 TCO pool 4.013 0.036 0.91 2.77 4.013 3.990 4.060 137,285 Tennessee Zone 6 4.317 0.102 2.42 0.98 4.320 4.300 4.360 78,900 Tennessee Zone 5 4.297 0.093 2.21 6.10 4.300 4.270 4.330 22,500 Tennessee at Dracut 4.260 0.060 1.43 5.97 - - - - Tetco M-3 4.200 0.056 1.35 0.33 4.210 4.150 4.350 486,500 Transco Z 6 NY 4.303 0.105 2.50 2.99 4.295 4.250 4.355 29,926 Transco Z 6 non-NY 4.261 0.064 1.52 0.83 4.260 4.250 4.275 31,800

WESTAECO Storage Hub 3.496 0.070 2.04 -0.20 3.490 3.470 3.525 425,789 CIG, Rocky Mountains 3.785 0.004 0.11 16.18 3.770 3.760 3.820 11,000 Cheyenne Hub 3.790 0.058 1.55 11.50 3.790 3.790 3.790 5,000 El Paso - S Mainline 4.109 0.029 0.71 9.02 4.105 4.100 4.150 120,000 El Paso - Waha Pool 3.820 0.010 0.26 3.52 - - - - El Paso Bondad 3.770 0.080 2.17 9.28 3.770 3.760 3.770 54,000 El Paso Permian 3.828 0.038 1.00 3.38 3.830 3.760 3.830 65,800 El Paso SJ 3.752 0.036 0.97 5.60 3.750 3.740 3.800 163,946 Empress 3.267 0.089 2.80 -4.25 3.275 3.240 3.283 150,800 Houston Pipeline 4.000 0.064 1.63 2.83 4.000 4.000 4.000 5,000 Kern River Station 4.148 0.059 1.44 11.81 4.153 4.140 4.155 57,500 Kern River 3.810 0.035 0.93 19.06 3.810 3.810 3.810 9,000 Kingsgate 3.819 0.055 1.46 5.21 3.820 3.813 3.820 18,700 NW Dom.-SJ Basin 3.760 0.010 0.27 14.04 3.760 3.760 3.760 1,500 NW Opal, WY 3.817 0.046 1.22 19.10 3.825 3.795 3.840 162,500 NW Stanfield, OR 3.855 0.061 1.61 4.93 3.855 3.855 3.855 10,000 NW Sumas 3.753 0.054 1.46 6.32 3.750 3.735 3.760 110,066 NW-S of Green River 3.733 0.015 0.40 12.10 3.750 3.715 3.760 18,650 NoCal Border-Malin 3.900 0.061 1.59 6.62 3.900 3.898 3.903 70,500 PG&E Gate 4.274 0.060 1.42 6.56 4.275 4.230 4.300 269,900 PG&E South 4.137 0.063 1.55 11.18 4.140 4.130 4.150 52,000 Questar 3.700 -0.020 -0.54 12.46 3.700 3.700 3.700 1,100 Rex West 3.765 0.050 1.35 -2.46 3.755 3.730 3.778 16,900 SoCal Border 4.149 0.043 1.05 11.35 4.155 4.120 4.210 268,500 SoCal Citygate 4.182 0.038 0.92 11.25 4.180 4.180 4.210 228,300 TransW E of Thoreau 3.780 0.057 1.53 6.45 3.810 3.750 3.860 86,300 Waha Hub 3.871 0.063 1.65 3.14 3.890 3.830 3.960 53,200 West Coast Sta. 2 3.119 0.045 1.46 -5.48 3.120 3.110 3.130 127,533

Additional delivery points and other energy pricing information are available at http://www.snl.com/interactivex/marketdata.aspx.

Energy Pricing Trends continued

Gas Index (Day Ahead prices for Delivery on Sep 14, 11) continuedVolume Change

Wgtd. From Volume TradingTrading Average Sep 13, 11 Wgtd. Average %� Trade ($/mmBtu) VolumeHub ($/mmBtu) ($/mmBtu) 1 Day 1 Year Median Low High (mmBtu)

http://www.snl.com/interactivex/marketdata.aspx



SNL Gas Spark SpreadDAY AHEAD PRICES FOR DELIVERY SEP 13, 11 Gas Avg. Power Avg. Spark Spreads at Various Heat Rates ($) ImpliedGas Location Power Location ($/mmBtu) ($/MWH) 7,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Heat RateTCO pool Cinergy 3.98 39.50 11.66 7.68 -0.27 -8.22 -16.18 9,932.11Henry Hub Entergy 3.91 43.50 16.10 12.19 4.36 -3.47 -11.30 11,113.95NW Sumas Mid-C 3.70 30.89 5.00 1.30 -6.10 -13.50 -20.90 8,350.91NNG Demarc Minnesota 3.93 33.75 6.24 2.31 -5.55 -13.41 -21.27 8,587.79Chicago N. Illinois (CE) 3.98 39.25 11.37 7.39 -0.58 -8.55 -16.51 9,854.38Algon Gates Nepool-Mass 4.25 47.50 17.75 13.50 5.00 -3.50 -12.00 11,176.47PG&E Gate NP-15 4.21 36.50 7.00 2.79 -5.64 -14.07 -22.50 8,661.60Niagara NY Zone A 4.22 40.50 10.96 6.74 -1.70 -10.14 -18.58 9,597.16Iroquois Z 2 NY Zone G 4.32 54.75 24.52 20.21 11.57 2.93 -5.70 12,679.48Transco Z 6 NY NY Zone J 4.20 57.25 27.86 23.67 15.27 6.87 -1.52 13,637.45Dawn, Ont. Ontario 4.25 36.75 7.03 2.78 -5.71 -14.20 -22.69 8,655.20El Paso SJ Palo Verde 3.72 40.67 14.66 10.94 3.51 -3.92 -11.35 10,944.56Tetco M-3 PJM West 4.14 57.63 28.62 24.48 16.19 7.90 -0.39 13,906.85SoCal Border SP-15 4.11 38.75 10.01 5.90 -2.31 -10.52 -18.73 9,437.41

Forward Power Deals ($/MWh)For the period Sep 13, 11 Volume TradingElectricity wgtd. Low High volumedelivery average trade trade reportedpoint Term ($/MWh) ($/MWh) ($/MWh) (MW)

PEAKNortheast

PJM West Oct 01, 11-Oct 31, 11 45.45 45.45 45.45 50

Nuclear Outage ReportFor the period Sep 13, 11 Current power Previous power NameplateUnit Operator State level (%) level (%) capacity (MW)Perry BWR 1 FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating OH 64 98 1,311.6 Salem PWR 1 PSEG Nuclear LLC NJ 41 44 1,170.0 Sequoyah PWR 2 Tennessee Valley Authority TN 65 75 1,220.5



Forecast or Actual Above/Below NormalDay Date Index � �%

UNITED STATESMonday Sep 12, 11 34.1 2.3 7.2 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 39.4 8.3 26.6Wednesday Sep 14, 11 33.0 2.6 8.6Thursday Sep 15, 11 24.0 -5.5 -18.6Friday Sep 16, 11 19.2 -9.6 -33.3Saturday Sep 17, 11 18.3 -10.1 -35.5Sunday Sep 18, 11 22.6 -5.2 -18.8Monday Sep 19, 11 26.8 -0.5 -1.8

GREAT LAKESMonday Sep 12, 11 31.3 6.3 25.3 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 33.7 9.9 41.6Wednesday Sep 14, 11 15.1 -7.3 -32.6Thursday Sep 15, 11 6.3 -14.9 -70.1Friday Sep 16, 11 7.8 -12.6 -61.6Saturday Sep 17, 11 3.9 -15.5 -80.0Sunday Sep 18, 11 12.6 -6.0 -32.1Monday Sep 19, 11 19.4 1.6 9.1

GREAT PLAINSMonday Sep 12, 11 43.7 14.7 51.0 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 37.5 10.4 38.4Wednesday Sep 14, 11 12.4 -13.0 -51.3Thursday Sep 15, 11 10.1 -14.2 -58.5Friday Sep 16, 11 8.0 -15.0 -65.1Saturday Sep 17, 11 7.2 -14.7 -67.3Sunday Sep 18, 11 15.5 -5.9 -27.7Monday Sep 19, 11 19.3 -1.3 -6.3

LOWER MISSISSIPPIMonday Sep 12, 11 42.7 -.2 -.6 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 50.2 7.8 18.3Wednesday Sep 14, 11 45.4 3.4 8.1Thursday Sep 15, 11 31.3 -9.1 -22.6Friday Sep 16, 11 28.4 -11.1 -28.1Saturday Sep 17, 11 31.8 -7.4 -18.9Sunday Sep 18, 11 35.1 -3.5 -9.1Monday Sep 19, 11 36.7 -1.2 -3.3

MIDATLANTICMonday Sep 12, 11 25.9 -2.0 -7.0 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 39.8 12.5 45.9Wednesday Sep 14, 11 39.1 12.5 46.8Thursday Sep 15, 11 19.2 -5.5 -22.4Friday Sep 16, 11 9.3 -14.6 -61.1Saturday Sep 17, 11 9.8 -13.6 -58.1Sunday Sep 18, 11 13.7 -9.2 -40.2Monday Sep 19, 11 16.6 -5.7 -25.5

Forecast or Actual Above/Below NormalDay Date Index � �%

NEW ENGLANDMonday Sep 12, 11 28.6 7.4 34.8 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 38.7 18.3 89.5Wednesday Sep 14, 11 36.9 17.5 90.0Thursday Sep 15, 11 20.8 2.5 13.8Friday Sep 16, 11 5.9 -11.8 -66.6Saturday Sep 17, 11 5.8 -11.5 -66.6Sunday Sep 18, 11 6.5 -10.4 -61.6Monday Sep 19, 11 9.0 -7.2 -44.6

PACIFICMonday Sep 12, 11 25.5 .4 1.7 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 27.0 2.1 8.5Wednesday Sep 14, 11 25.3 0.6 2.3Thursday Sep 15, 11 20.4 -4.1 -16.6Friday Sep 16, 11 19.0 -5.2 -21.6Saturday Sep 17, 11 18.0 -6.0 -24.9Sunday Sep 18, 11 22.3 -1.5 -6.3Monday Sep 19, 11 31.1 7.4 31.0

ROCKY MOUNTAINSMonday Sep 12, 11 30.5 5.2 20.7 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 29.2 5.2 21.7Wednesday Sep 14, 11 12.9 -10.2 -44.2Thursday Sep 15, 11 15.8 -6.7 -29.7Friday Sep 16, 11 21.4 -0.1 -0.3Saturday Sep 17, 11 23.7 3.1 15.0Sunday Sep 18, 11 23.5 3.7 18.8Monday Sep 19, 11 19.6 0.8 4.1

SOUTH ATLANTICMonday Sep 12, 11 42.7 2.4 5.9 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 48.0 8.1 20.3Wednesday Sep 14, 11 51.2 11.6 29.4Thursday Sep 15, 11 45.6 6.5 16.6Friday Sep 16, 11 31.7 -7.0 -18.2Saturday Sep 17, 11 24.9 -13.5 -35.2Sunday Sep 18, 11 28.3 -9.8 -25.7Monday Sep 19, 11 31.8 -5.9 -15.5

SOUTHWESTMonday Sep 12, 11 39.7 -2.0 -4.8 Tuesday Sep 13, 11 44.8 3.5 8.6Wednesday Sep 14, 11 41.0 0.1 0.3Thursday Sep 15, 11 36.6 -4.2 -10.2Friday Sep 16, 11 35.2 -5.2 -12.9Saturday Sep 17, 11 37.1 -3.1 -7.7Sunday Sep 18, 11 40.0 0.0 0.0Monday Sep 19, 11 45.1 5.6 14.0

Dominion Energy Index

The Dominion Energy Index, maintained by The Dominion Energy Services Corp., measures actual and forecast demand for heating and cooling energy. It is designed to be more precise than the current heating degree days and cooling degree days indexes. The first reading in each regional list is the actual energy demand measured the day the forecast is made. The forecast energy demand for the following week for a given region follows the actual reading in the table. “Normals” for each region for each day have been calculated using 30-year weather averages.



NYMEX Natural Gas FuturesFor the period Sep 13, 11 Prior Settle High Low Settle ChangeContract ($/mmBtu) ($/mmBtu) ($/mmBtu) ($/mmBtu) ($/mmBtu)Oct-2011 3.885 - - 3.980 0.095Nov-2011 3.966 - - 4.054 0.088Dec-2011 4.172 - - 4.257 0.085Jan-2012 4.292 - - 4.374 0.082Feb-2012 4.310 - - 4.391 0.081Mar-2012 4.285 - - 4.363 0.078Apr-2012 4.262 - - 4.335 0.073May-2012 4.290 - - 4.361 0.071Jun-2012 4.332 - - 4.401 0.069Jul-2012 4.378 - - 4.445 0.067Aug-2012 4.406 - - 4.472 0.066Sep-2012 4.411 - - 4.477 0.066Oct-2012 4.442 - - 4.507 0.065Nov-2012 4.607 4.624 4.570 4.667 0.060Dec-2012 4.867 4.883 4.840 4.923 0.056Jan-2013 5.002 - - 5.057 0.055Feb-2013 4.978 - - 5.033 0.055Mar-2013 4.912 - - 4.967 0.055Changes in settlement price with zero volume mean the settlement price is implied. No actual trading took place for these contracts on the given day. Price is based on delivery at the Henry Hub in Louisiana, which serves markets throughout the U.S. East Coast, the Gulf Coast, the Midwest, and up to the Canadian border.

Sep 13, 11 Price Change (%)Product ($/ton) 1 day 1 week

NYMEX Big SandyOctober 2011 75.08 0.71 0.07Q4 2011 75.33 0.80 0.07

CSX/RailOctober 2011 77.00 0.81 0.81Q4 2011 77.00 1.34 0.55

PRB 8,800October 2011 14.28 0.00 -0.35Q4 2011 14.45 0.00 -0.55

PRB 8,400October 2011 11.25 0.00 -0.44Q4 2011 11.60 -0.43 -0.43

Sep 13, 11 Price Change (%)Product ($/credit) 1 day 1 week

SO22010 1.63 0.00 0.002011 1.50 0.00 0.002012 1.38 0.00 0.002013 1.38 0.00 0.002014 0.75 -33.63 -33.632015 0.75 -33.63 -33.63

NOx2010 10.00 0.00 0.002011 10.00 0.00 0.002012 5.00 -20.00 -20.00

SNL Daily OTC Coal and Emissions Assessments



Data provided by Evolution Markets and Amerex Brokers

Data is compiled from a range of market indicatives and do not necessarily represent completed trades. CA and WA RPS figures do not contain data from Evolution Markets. Data for SNL RECs index provided by: Evolution Markets: http://new.evomarkets.com/ Tradition Financial Services: http://www.tfsbrokers.com/ Clear Energy Brokerage and Consulting: http://www.clearenergybrokerage.com/ Karbone: http://www.karbone.com/ Please contact data providers for more detailed or specific transaction data or REC markets not covered by SNL index. Source: SNL Energy

Week ending 09/09/11

SNL RECs Index

NJ Solar REC 2011 628.52NJ Solar REC 2012 179.82NJ Solar REC 2013 170.00OH Contiguous REC 2010 0.65OH In-State Solar 2011 375.33OH Located REC 2011 16.00PA Solar REC 2011 70.00PA Solar REC 2012 81.25PA Tier 1 REC 2011 1.39PA Tier 1 REC 2012 1.48PA Tier 2 REC 2010 0.14PA Tier 2 REC 2011 0.19PA Tier 2 REC 2012 0.50RI Existing REC 2011 0.88RI NEW REC 2011 25.00TX REC 2010 1.33TX REC 2011 1.34TX REC 2012 1.44WA RPS 11-14 4.00WA RPS 15-18 8.75

Product Term Price Product Term Price Product Term PriceCA RPS-REC 2011 4.50CA RPS-REC 11-13 5.13CA RPS-REC 11-16 6.25CT Class I REC 2011 24.96CT Class I REC 2012 24.92CT Class I REC 2013 25.29CT Class II REC 2011 0.45CT Class II REC 2012 0.85CT Class III REC 2011 10.92CT Class III REC 2012 10.88CT Class III REC 2013 11.75DC Solar REC 2011 185.00DC Tier I REC 2011 0.88DE EXISTING REC 2010 0.88DE NEW REC 2010 1.43DE NEW REC 2011 1.10DE Solar REC 2010 98.75MA APS 2011 NAMA APS 2012 19.25MA Class I 2011 27.33

MA Class I 2012 28.13MA Class I 2013 28.50MA Class II WTE 2011 2.56MA Solar 2011 528.75MD Solar 2010 NAMD Solar 2011 219.66MD Tier I 2010 0.66MD Tier I 2011 0.91MD Tier II 2010 0.18ME Class I 2011 14.88ME Class I 2012 16.25NH Class I 2011 25.25NH Class II 2011 NANH Class III 2011 25.25NH Class IV 2011 NANJ Class I REC 2011 1.31NJ Class I REC 2012 1.29NJ Class I REC 2013 1.78NJ Class II REC 2011 0.37NJ Class II REC 2012 0.58

©2011, SNL Financial LC. All Rights Reserved. Confidential Subject Matter. WARNING! SNL Power Daily with Market Report contains copyrighted subject matter and confiden-tial information owned solely by SNL Financial LC (“SNL”). Reproduction, distribution or use of this newsletter in violation of this license constitutes copyright infringement in violation of federal and state law. SNL hereby provides consent to use the “email this story” feature to redistribute articles within the subscriber’s company. Although the information in this report has been obtained from sources that SNL believes to be reliable, SNL does not guarantee its accuracy.KeyQuarkFileCreation30518

Correction: In the Sept. 13 SNL Energy Power Daily, “US power dailies open week mixed to slightly higher” misidentified a nuclear plant shut-down for refueling. Peach Bottom 3 was shut down.

http://new.evomarkets.com/

http://www.tfsbrokers.com/

http://www.clearenergybrokerage.com/

http://www.karbone.com/

texas petitions to stay cross-state rule; epa claims luminant … · 2011. 9. 14. · india,...

Documents