XML 92 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v2.4.0.8

Commitments and Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Third-Party Power Purchase Agreements SCE enters into various agreements to purchase power and electric capacity, including:
• | Renewable Energy Contracts – California law requires retail sellers of electricity to comply with an RPS by delivering renewable energy, primarily through power purchase contracts. Renewable energy contract payments generally consist of payments based on a fixed price per megawatt hour. As of December 31, 2013, SCE had 108 renewable energy contracts that were approved by the CPUC and met critical contract provisions which expire at various dates between 2014 and 2035.
• | Qualifying Facility Power Purchase Agreements – Under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 ("PURPA"), electric utilities are required, with exceptions, to purchase energy and capacity from independent power producers that are qualifying co-generation facilities and qualifying small power production facilities ("QFs"). As of December 31, 2013, SCE had 139 QF contracts which expire at various dates between 2014 and 2030.
• | Other Power Purchase Agreements – In accordance with the SCE's CPUC-approved long-term procurement plans, SCE has entered into capacity agreements with third parties, including 32 combined heat and power contracts, 15 tolling arrangements, 4 power call options and 55 resource adequacy contracts. SCE's obligations under a portion of these agreements are limited to payments for the availability of such resources.
At December 31, 2013, the undiscounted future minimum expected payments for the SCE power purchase agreements that have been approved by the CPUC and have completed major milestones for construction were as follows:
(in millions) | Renewable Energy Contracts |  | QF Power Purchase Agreements |  | Other Purchase Agreements
2014 | $ | 796 |  |  | $ | 312 |  |  | $ | 1,033 |
2015 | 881 |  |  | 303 |  |  | 900 |
2016 | 936 |  |  | 245 |  |  | 701 |
2017 | 1,070 |  |  | 213 |  |  | 693 |
2018 | 1,091 |  |  | 170 |  |  | 571 |
Thereafter | 17,806 |  |  | 186 |  |  | 1,992 |
Total future commitments | $ | 22,580 |  |  | $ | 1,429 |  |  | $ | 5,890 |
Many of the power purchase agreements that SCE entered into with independent power producers are treated as operating and capital leases. The following table shows the future minimum expected payments due under the contracts that are treated as operating and capital leases (these amounts are also included in the table above). The future expected payments for capital leases are discounted to their present value in the table below using SCE's incremental borrowing rate at the inception of the leases. The amount of this discount is shown in the table below as the amount representing interest.
(in millions) | Operating Leases |  | Capital Leases
2014 | $ | 1,273 |  |  | $ | 33 |
2015 | 1,345 |  |  | 33 |
2016 | 1,271 |  |  | 33 |
2017 | 1,379 |  |  | 33 |
2018 | 1,272 |  |  | 33 |
Thereafter | 17,616 |  |  | 356 |
Total future commitments | $ | 24,156 |  |  | $ | 521 |
Amount representing executory costs |  |  |  | (118 | )
Amount representing interest |  |  |  | (194 | )
Net commitments |  |  |  | $ | 209 |
Operating lease expense for these power purchase agreements was $1.5 billion in 2013, $1.3 billion in 2012 and $1.4 billion in 2011. The timing of SCE's recognition of the lease expense conforms to ratemaking treatment for SCE's recovery of the cost of electricity and is included in purchased power. At December 31, 2013 and 2012, SCE's net capital leases reflected in utility plant on the consolidated balance sheets were $209 million and $216 million, including accumulated amortization of $39 million and $33 million, respectively. SCE had $6 million and $6 million included in "Other current liabilities" and $203 million and $210 million included in "Other deferred credits and other liabilities," representing the present value of the minimum lease payments due under these contracts recorded on the consolidated balance sheets at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Other Lease Commitments The following summarizes the estimated minimum future commitments for SCE's noncancelable other operating leases (excluding SCE's power purchase agreements discussed above):
(in millions) | Operating Leases – Other
2014 | $ | 76 |
2015 | 65 |
2016 | 52 |
2017 | 36 |
2018 | 30 |
Thereafter | 194 |
Total future commitments | $ | 453 |
Operating lease expense for other leases (primarily related to vehicles, office space and other equipment) were $78 million in 2013, $75 million in 2012 and $66 million in 2011. Nuclear Decommissioning Commitment SCE has collected in rates amounts for the future costs of removal of its nuclear assets, and has placed those amounts in independent trusts. The recorded liability to decommission SCE's nuclear power facilities is $3.3 billion as of December 31, 2013, based on decommissioning studies performed in 2010 for Palo Verde and a 2013 updated decommissioning cost estimate for the retirement of both San Onofre Units 2 and 3. Changes in the estimated costs, timing of decommissioning or the assumptions underlying these estimates could cause material revisions to the estimated total cost to decommission. SCE currently estimates that it will spend approximately $7.1 billion through 2053 to decommission its nuclear facilities. This estimate is based on SCE's decommissioning cost methodology used for ratemaking purposes, escalated at rates ranging from 1.5% to 7.3% (depending on the cost element) annually. These costs are expected to be funded from independent decommissioning trusts, which received contributions of $23 million in 2013, 2012 and 2011. SCE estimates annual after-tax earnings on the decommissioning funds of 4.2% to 5.7%. If the assumed return on trust assets is not earned, it is probable that additional funds needed for decommissioning will be recoverable through rates in the future. If the assumed return on trust assets is greater than estimated, funding amounts may be reduced through future decommissioning proceedings. Decommissioning expense under the ratemaking method was $23 million for 2013, 2012 and 2011. The ARO for decommissioning SCE's nuclear facilities was $3.3 billion and $2.6 billion at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. See Note 4 and Note 10 for discussion on the nuclear decommissioning trusts. Total expenditures for the decommissioning of San Onofre Unit 1 were $599 million from the beginning of the project in 1998 through December 31, 2013. Other Commitments The following summarizes the estimated minimum future commitments for SCE's other commitments:
(in millions) | 2014 |  | 2015 |  | 2016 |  | 2017 |  | 2018 |  | Thereafter |  | Total
Other contractual obligations | $ | 123 |  |  | $ | 105 |  |  | $ | 85 |  |  | $ | 66 |  |  | $ | 160 |  |  | $ | 612 |  |  | $ | 1,151 |
Costs incurred for other commitments were $153 million in 2013, $249 million in 2012 and $281 million in 2011. SCE has fuel supply contracts which require payment only if the fuel is made available for purchase. As a result of the decision to permanently retire San Onofre Units 2 and 3, SCE has submitted fuel contract delivery cancellation notices for the nuclear fuel contractual arrangements. As of December 31, 2013, SCE had accrued a liability of $33 million related to estimated costs associated with the cancellation and management of future deliveries of nuclear fuel and recorded a regulatory asset for recovery of costs in the future. See Note 9 for further discussion of SCE's decision to permanently retire San Onofre. Indemnities Edison International and SCE have various financial and performance guarantees and indemnity agreements which are issued in the normal course of business. Edison International and SCE have provided indemnifications through contracts entered into in the normal course of business. These are primarily indemnifications against adverse litigation outcomes in connection with underwriting agreements, and indemnities for specified environmental liabilities and income taxes with respect to assets sold. Edison International's and SCE's obligations under these agreements may or may not be limited in terms of time and/or amount, and in some instances Edison International and SCE may have recourse against third parties. Edison International and SCE have not recorded a liability related to these indemnities. The overall maximum amount of the obligations under these indemnifications cannot be reasonably estimated. SCE has indemnified the City of Redlands, California in connection with Mountainview's California Energy Commission permit for cleanup or associated actions related to groundwater contaminated by perchlorate due to the disposal of filter cake at the City's solid waste landfill. The obligations under this agreement are not limited to a specific time period or subject to a maximum liability. SCE has not recorded a liability related to this indemnity. Contingencies In addition to the matters disclosed in these Notes, Edison International and SCE are involved in other legal, tax and regulatory proceedings before various courts and governmental agencies regarding matters arising in the ordinary course of business. Edison International and SCE believe the outcome of these other proceedings will not, individually or in the aggregate, materially affect its results of operations or liquidity. San Onofre SCE believes that the actions taken and costs incurred in connection with the San Onofre replacement steam generators and outages have been prudent. Accordingly, SCE considers its operating, capital, and market power costs recoverable through base rates and the ERRA balancing account (as reduced by the impairment recorded in 2013). SCE cannot provide assurance that the CPUC will not disallow costs incurred or order refunds to customers of amounts collected in rates, or that SCE will be successful in recovering amounts from third parties. Disallowances of costs and/or refund of amounts received from customers could be material and adversely affect SCE's financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. SCE will pursue recoveries arising from available agreements, but there is no assurance that SCE will recover all of its applicable costs pursuant to these arrangements. See Note 9 for further details. Potential Claims by EME In December 2012, EME and certain of its wholly-owned subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. EME submitted its Plan of Reorganization in December 2013 ("December Plan of Reorganization"), which included the sale of substantially all of EME’s assets to NRG Energy, Inc. and the transfer of ownership of EME to unsecured creditors, to the Bankruptcy Court for confirmation. Under the December Plan of Reorganization, the remaining assets of EME, consisting of the NRG sale proceeds, certain EME tax benefits comprised of net operating loss and tax credits, carryforwards and causes of action against Edison International or others that were not released under the December Plan of Reorganization, would have re-vested in reorganized EME (“Reorganized EME”). EME has indicated that it is preparing a complaint containing claims similar to those alleged by the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in a motion filed in the Bankruptcy Court on August 1, 2013 against Edison International, SCE, certain other subsidiaries of Edison International, and present and former directors of Edison International, SCE and EME. Such motion was accompanied by a draft complaint which has not been filed or served. The draft complaint set forth a variety of allegations against the defendants, including, among other things, that $925 million in dividends paid by EME to Mission Energy Holding Company in 2007 are recoverable, that $183 million paid by EME under the Tax Allocation Agreement in September 2012 was improper, that EME was operated between 2010 and 2012 for Edison International’s benefit and not in accordance with fiduciary duties owed to EME and its creditors, that amending the Tax Allocation Agreement to have it expire on December 31, 2013 was a breach of fiduciary duty, that Edison International has historically overcharged EME for shared services, that Edison International and certain of its competitive subsidiaries are alter egos of, and should be substantively consolidated with, EME, and are therefore liable for EME’s debts, and that utilization by Edison International and SCE of bonus depreciation following EME’s filing for bankruptcy was a violation of the automatic stay in the EME bankruptcy. Edison International has not been served with a complaint by EME, but if served would vigorously contest such allegations. Edison International has filed claims against EME for payment of EME’s allocated or stand-alone pension and tax liabilities. On January 2, 2014, EME filed its objections to Edison International's claims and a motion to estimate certain claims including claims filed by Edison International. In February 2014, Edison International, EME and the Consenting Noteholders entered into a Settlement Agreement pursuant to which EME amended its Plan of Reorganization (“Amended Plan of Reorganization”). The Amended Plan of Reorganization, including the Settlement Agreement, is subject to the approval of the Bankruptcy Court. If the Settlement agreement is not approved or is not effectuated for any other reason, EME may still bring the complaint mentioned above. For more information on the Settlement Agreement, see Note 16. San Gabriel Valley Windstorm Investigation In November 2011, a windstorm resulted in significant damage to SCE’s electric system and service outages for SCE customers primarily in the San Gabriel Valley. The CPUC directed its Safety and Enforcement Division (“SED”) to conduct an investigation focused on the cause of the outages, SCE’s service restoration effort, and SCE’s customer communications during the outages. The SED issued its final report on January 11, 2013. The report asserts that SCE and others with whom SCE shares utility poles violated certain CPUC safety rules applicable to overhead line construction, maintenance and operation, which may have caused the failures of affected poles and supporting cables. The report also concludes that SCE’s restoration time was not adequate and makes other assertions. Additionally, the report contends that SCE violated CPUC rules by failing to preserve evidence relevant to the investigation when it did not retain damaged poles that were replaced following the windstorm. In February 2014, SCE entered into agreements with the SED to settle this matter and another, unrelated matter involving SCE's system. Both settlements are subject to CPUC approval. Four Corners Environmental Matters In October 2011, four private environmental organizations filed a CAA citizen lawsuit against the co-owners of Four Corners. The complaint alleges that certain work performed at the Four Corners generating units 4 and 5, over the approximate periods of 1985 – 1986 and 2007 – 2010, constituted plant “major modifications” and the plant's failure to obtain permits and install best available control technology ("BACT") violated the PSD requirements and the New Source Performance Standards of the CAA. The complaint also alleges subsequent and continuing violations of BACT air emissions limits. The lawsuit seeks injunctive and declaratory relief, civil penalties, including a mitigation project and litigation costs. In November 2012, the parties requested a stay of the litigation to allow for settlement discussion, and the matter is currently stayed. In December 2013, SCE sold its ownership interest in generating units 4 and 5 to APS. Under the sale agreement SCE remains responsible for its pro-rata share of certain environmental liabilities, including penalties in the event they arise from environmental violations prior to the sale. In addition, under the terms of the sale agreement, SCE retains the liability for its proportionate share of expenses occurring as a result of new environmental regulations applicable to the coal ash and combustion residuals deposited at the landfill at Four Corners during the period that SCE held its ownership interest in Four Corners if such new regulations are adopted. SCE is unable to estimate a possible loss or range of loss associated with these matters. Environmental Remediation Edison International records its environmental remediation liabilities when site assessments and/or remedial actions are probable and a range of reasonably likely cleanup costs can be estimated. Edison International reviews its sites and measures the liability quarterly, by assessing a range of reasonably likely costs for each identified site using currently available information, including existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations, experience gained at similar sites, and the probable level of involvement and financial condition of other potentially responsible parties. These estimates include costs for site investigations, remediation, operation and maintenance, monitoring and site closure. Unless there is a single probable amount, Edison International records the lower end of this reasonably likely range of costs (reflected in "Other long-term liabilities") at undiscounted amounts as timing of cash flows is uncertain. At December 31, 2013, Edison International's recorded estimated minimum liability to remediate its 19 identified sites in which the upper end of the range of the costs is at least $1 million at SCE was $110 million, including $73 million related to San Onofre. In addition to these sites, SCE also has 39 immaterial sites for which the total minimum recorded liability was $4 million. Of the $114 million total environmental remediation liability for SCE, $110 million has been recorded as a regulatory asset. SCE expects to recover $36 million through an incentive mechanism that allows SCE to recover 90% of its environmental remediation costs at certain sites (SCE may request to include additional sites) and $74 million through a mechanism that allows SCE to recover 100% of the costs incurred at certain sites through customer rates. Edison International's identified sites include several sites for which there is a lack of currently available information, including the nature and magnitude of contamination, and the extent, if any, that Edison International may be held responsible for contributing to any costs incurred for remediating these sites. Thus, no reasonable estimate of cleanup costs can be made for these sites. The ultimate costs to clean up Edison International's identified sites may vary from its recorded liability due to numerous uncertainties inherent in the estimation process, such as: the extent and nature of contamination; the scarcity of reliable data for identified sites; the varying costs of alternative cleanup methods; developments resulting from investigatory studies; the possibility of identifying additional sites; and the time periods over which site remediation is expected to occur. Edison International believes that, due to these uncertainties, it is reasonably possible that cleanup costs at the identified material sites and immaterial sites could exceed its recorded liability by up to $162 million and $7 million, respectively, all of which is related to SCE. The upper limit of this range of costs was estimated using assumptions least favorable to Edison International among a range of reasonably possible outcomes. SCE expects to clean up and mitigate its identified sites over a period of up to 30 years. Remediation costs for each of the next four years are expected to range from $6 million to $27 million. Costs incurred for years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 were $8 million, $10 million and $16 million, respectively. Based upon the CPUC's regulatory treatment of environmental remediation costs incurred at SCE, Edison International believes that costs ultimately recorded will not materially affect its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. There can be no assurance, however, that future developments, including additional information about existing sites or the identification of new sites, will not require material revisions to estimates. Nuclear Insurance Federal law limits public liability claims from a nuclear incident to the amount of available financial protection, which is currently approximately $13.6 billion. SCE and other owners of San Onofre and Palo Verde have purchased the maximum private primary insurance available ($375 million). The balance is covered by a loss sharing program among nuclear reactor licensees. If a nuclear incident at any licensed reactor in the United States results in claims and/or costs which exceed the primary insurance at that plant site, all nuclear reactor licensees could be required to contribute their share of the liability in the form of a deferred premium. Based on its ownership interests, SCE could be required to pay a maximum of approximately $255 million per nuclear incident. However, it would have to pay no more than approximately $38 million per incident in any one year. If the public liability limit above is insufficient, federal law contemplates that additional funds may be appropriated by Congress. This could include an additional assessment on all licensed reactor operators as a measure for raising further federal revenue. NEIL, a mutual insurance company owned by entities with nuclear facilities, issues primary property damage, decontamination and excess property damage and accidental outage insurance policies. At San Onofre and Palo Verde, property damage insurance covers losses up to $500 million, including decontamination costs. Decontamination liability and excess property damage coverage exceeding the primary $500 million also has been purchased in amounts greater than the federal requirement of a minimum of approximately $1.06 billion. Property damage insurance also covers damages caused by acts of terrorism up to specified limits. Additional outage insurance covers part of replacement power expenses during an accident-related nuclear unit outage. The accidental outage insurance at San Onofre has been canceled as a result of the permanent retirement, but that insurance continues to be in effect at Palo Verde. If losses at any nuclear facility covered by the arrangement were to exceed the accumulated funds for these insurance programs, SCE could be assessed retrospective premium adjustments of up to approximately $52 million per year. Insurance premiums are charged to operating expense. Wildfire Insurance Severe wildfires in California have given rise to large damage claims against California utilities for fire-related losses alleged to be the result of the failure of electric and other utility equipment. Invoking a California Court of Appeal decision, plaintiffs pursuing these claims have relied on the doctrine of inverse condemnation, which can impose strict liability (including liability for a claimant's attorneys' fees) for property damage. Prolonged drought conditions in California have also increased the risk of severe wildfire events. On September 1, 2013, Edison International, renewed its liability insurance coverage, which included coverage for SCE's wildfire liabilities up to a $500 million limit (with a self-insured retention of $10 million per wildfire occurrence). Various coverage limitations within the policies that make up this insurance coverage could result in additional self-insured costs in the event of multiple wildfire occurrences during the policy period (September 1, 2013 to May 31, 2014). SCE also has additional coverage for certain wildfire liabilities of $450 million, which applies when total covered wildfire claims exceed $550 million, through May 31, 2014. SCE may experience coverage reductions and/or increased insurance costs in future years. No assurance can be given that future losses will not exceed the limits of SCE's insurance coverage. Spent Nuclear Fuel Under federal law, the Department of Energy ("DOE") is responsible for the selection and construction of a facility for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The DOE did not meet its contractual obligation to begin acceptance of spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998. Extended delays by the DOE have led to the construction of costly alternatives and associated siting and environmental issues. Currently, both San Onofre and Palo Verde have interim storage for spent nuclear fuel on site sufficient for the current license period. In June 2010, the United States Court of Federal Claims issued a decision granting SCE and the San Onofre co-owners damages of approximately $142 million (SCE share $112 million) to recover costs incurred through December 31, 2005 for the DOE's failure to meet its obligation to begin accepting spent nuclear fuel from San Onofre. SCE received payment from the federal government in the amount of the damage award in November 2011. SCE has returned to the San Onofre co-owners their respective share of the damage award paid. In December 2013, the CPUC approved SCE's proposal to return the SCE share of the award to customers based on the amount that customers actually contributed for fuel storage costs; resulting in approximately $94 million of the SCE share being returned to customers and the remaining $18 million being returned to shareholders. SCE, as operating agent, filed a lawsuit on behalf of the San Onofre owners against the DOE in the Court of Federal Claims in December 2011 seeking damages of approximately $98 million for the DOE's failure to meet its obligation to begin accepting spent nuclear fuel for the period from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010. Additional legal action would be necessary to recover damages incurred after December 31, 2010. All damages recovered by SCE are subject to CPUC review as to how these amounts would be distributed among customers, shareholders, or to offset fuel decommissioning or storage costs.

X
- Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration