ComEd 2013 Annual Report Download - page 243

additional cover remedy; however,Generation believesthelikelihoodthat theU.S. EPAwouldrequire a complete excavation
remedy is remote.
OnAugust8, 2011,Cotter wasnotifiedbytheDOJ that Cotter is consideredaPRPwithrespecttothegovernment’s clean-up costs
for contamination attributable to lowlevel radioactiveresiduesat a former storageandreprocessingfacilitynamedLattyAvenue
near St.Louis, Missouri. TheLattyAvenue site is includedinComEd’s indemnification responsibilities discussedaboveaspart ofthe
sale ofCotter.Theradioactiveresidueshadbeen generatedinitiallyinconnection withthe processingofuraniumoresaspart ofthe
U.S. government’s Manhattan Project.Cotter purchasedtheresiduesin1969 for initial processingat theLattyAvenue facilityfor the
subsequent extraction ofuraniumandmetals. In1976, theNRCfoundthat theLattyAvenue site hadradiation levelsexceeding
NRCcriteriafor decontamination oflandareas. LattyAvenue wasinvestigatedandremediatedbytheUnitedStatesArmy Corpsof
Engineerspursuant to fundingunder theFormerlyUtilizedSitesRemedial Action Program. TheDOJ hasnot yet formallyadvisedthe
PRPs oftheamount that itis seeking, but itis believedto be approximately$90million.TheDOJ andthePRPs agreedto toll the
statute oflimitationsuntilAugust 2014sothat settlement discussionscouldproceed. Basedon Exelon’s preliminaryreview, it
appearsprobable that Exelon hasliabilityto Cotter under theindemnification agreement andhasestablishedan appropriate accrual
for this liability.
OnFebruary28, 2012,andApril12,2012,twolawsuitswere filedintheU.S. DistrictCourt for theEastern Districtof Missouri
against15and14defendants, respectively, includingExelon,Generation andComEd (the“Exelon defendants”) andCotter.The
suitsallegethat individualslivingintheNorthSt.Louis area developedsomeformofcancer due to thedefendants’ negligent or
reckless conductin processing, transporting, storing, handlingand/or disposingofradioactivematerials. Plaintiffs haveasserted
claims for negligence,strictliability, emotional distress, medical monitoring, andviolationsofthePrice-Anderson Act.Thecomplaints
do not containspecific damageclaims. OnMay30,2012,the plaintiffs filedvoluntarymotionsto dismiss theExelon defendantsfrom
bothlawsuits which were subsequentlygranted. SinceMay30,2012,several relatedlawsuitshavebeen filedinthesamecourt on
behalfofvariousplaintiffs againstCotter andother defendants, but not Exelon.The allegationsinthese relatedlawsuitsmirror the
initiallyfiledlawsuits. Intheevent ofafindingofliability, itis reasonablypossible that Exelon wouldbeconsideredliable due to its
indemnification responsibilitiesofCotter describedabove.OnMarch 27, 2013,theU.S. DistrictCourt dismissedall state common
lawactionsbroughtunder theinitial twolawsuits; andalsofoundthat the plaintiffs hadnot properlybroughttheactionsunder the
Price-Anderson Act.OnJuly8,2013,the plaintiffs filedamendedcomplaintsunder thePrice-Anderson Act.Cotter movedto dismiss
theamendedcomplaintsandhasmotionscurrentlypendingbefore thecourt.At this stageofthelitigation,Exelon cannot estimate a
rangeofloss, if any.
68th Street Dump. In1999, theU.S. EPA proposedto add the68thStreet DumpinBaltimore,Marylandto theSuperfundNational
Priorities List,andnotified BGE and19othersthat theyare PRPs at thesite.InMarch 2004, BGE andother PRPs formedthe68th
Street Coalition andenteredinto consent order negotiationswiththeU.S. EPAtoinvestigate clean-up optionsfor thesite under the
SuperfundAlternativeSitesProgram. InMay2006, asettlement amongtheU.S. EPAand19ofthePRPs, including BGE, with
respecttoinvestigation ofthesite becameeffective.Thesettlement requiresthePRPs, over thecourseofseveral years, to identify
contamination at thesite andrecommendclean-up options. ThePRPs submittedtheirinvestigation ofthe rangeofclean-up options
inthefirstquarter of2011.Although theinvestigation andoptionsprovidedto theU.S. EPA are still subjecttoU.S. EPAreviewand
selection ofaremedy, the rangeofestimatedclean-up coststo be allocatedamongall ofthePRPs is inthe rangeof$50million to
$64 million.OnSeptember 30,2013, U.S. EPAissuedtheRecordofDecision identifyingitspreferredremedial alternativefor the
site.Theestimatedcostfor the alternativechosen by U.S. EPAis consistent withthePRPs estimatedrangeofcostsnotedabove.
Basedon Exelon’s preliminaryreview, it appearsprobable that Exelon hasliabilityandhasestablishedan appropriate accrual for its
share oftheestimatedclean-up costs. BGE is indemnifiedbyawhollyownedsubsidiaryofGeneration for mostofthecostsrelated
to this settlement andclean-up ofthesite.
Rossville Ash Site. TheRossville Ash Site is a32-acre propertylocatedinRosedale,Baltimore County, Maryland, which wasused
for the placement offlyash from1983-2007. The propertyisownedbyConstellation Power SourceGeneration, LLC(CPSG). In
2008, CPSG investigatedandremediatedthe propertybyenteringitinto theMarylandVoluntaryCleanup Program (VCP) to address
any historic environmental concernsandready thesite for appropriate future redevelopment.Thesite wasacceptedinto the
programin 2010 andiscurrentlygoingthrough the process to remediate thesite andreceiveclosure from MDE. Exelon currently
estimatesthecosttoclosethesite to be approximately$6million, which hasbeen fullyreservedasofDecember 31,2013.
Sauer Dump. OnMay30,2012, BGE wasnotifiedbytheU.S. EPAthat itis consideredaPRPat theSauer DumpSuperfundsite in
Dundalk, Maryland. TheU.S. EPAoffered BGE andthree other PRPs the opportunityto conductanenvironmental investigation and
present cleanup recommendationsat thesite.Inaddition,theU.S. EPAis seekingrecoveryfromthePRPs of$1.7 million for past
cleanup andinvestigation costsat thesite.OnMarch 11,2013, BGE andthree other PRP’s signedan AdministrativeSettlement
237