ComEd 2015 Annual Report Download - page 101

Table of Contents
matter, SO2 and NOx. Following five years of litigation, the EPA is finalizing the Cross State Air Pollution Rule that requires 28 upwind states in
the eastern half of the United States to significantly improve air quality by reducing power plant emissions that cross state lines and contribute to
ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution in downwind states.
 On December 16, 2011, the EPA signed a final rule to reduce emissions of toxic air
pollutants from power plants and signed revisions to the NSPS for electric generating units. The final rule, known as MATS, requires coal-fired
electric generation plants to achieve high removal rates of mercury, acid gases and other metals, and to make capital investments in pollution
control equipment and incur higher operating expenses. The initial compliance deadline to meet the new standards was April 16, 2015; however,
facilities may have been granted an additional one or two year extension in limited cases. Numerous entities challenged MATS in the D.C. Circuit
Court, and Exelon intervened in support of the rule. In April 2014, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an opinion upholding MATS in its entirety. On
appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in June 2015 that the EPA unreasonably refused to consider costs in determining whether it is appropriate
and necessary to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, did not vacate the rule; rather, it
was remanded to the D.C. Circuit Court to take further action consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion on this single issue. As such, the
MATS rule remains in effect. Exelon will continue to participate in the remanded proceedings before the D.C. Circuit Court as an intervenor in
support of the rule.
 Exelon supports comprehensive climate change legislation or regulation, including a cap-and-trade program for GHG
emissions, which balances the need to protect consumers, business and the economy with the urgent need to reduce national GHG emissions. In
the absence of Federal legislation, the EPA is moving forward with the regulation of GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. In addition, there
have been recent developments in the international regulation of GHG emissions pursuant to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (“UNFCCC” of “Convention”). See ITEM 1.—BUSINESS,“Global Climate Change” for further discussion.
Water Quality. Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act requires that cooling water intake structures at electric power plants reflect the best
technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts, and is implemented through state-level NPDES permit programs. All of
Generation’s power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the regulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating
systems (e.g., cooling towers) are potentially most affected by changes to the existing regulations. Those facilities are Calvert Cliffs, Clinton,
Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Ginna, Gould Street, Handley, Mountain Creek, Mystic 7, Nine Mile Point Unit 1, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom,
Quad Cities, Riverside, Salem and Schuylkill. See ITEM 1.—BUSINESS ,“Water Quality” for further discussion.
Solid and Hazardous Waste. In October 2015, the first federal regulation for the disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCR) from power
plants became effective. The rule classifies CCR as non-hazardous waste under RCRA. Under the regulation, CCR will continue to be regulated by
most states subject to coordination with the federal regulations. Generation has previously recorded reserves consistent with state regulation for
its owned coal ash sites, and as such, the regulation is not expected to impact Exelon’s and Generation’s financial results. Generation does not
have sufficient information to reasonably assess the potential likelihood or magnitude of any remediation requirements that may be asserted under
the new federal regulations for coal ash disposal sites formerly owned by Generation. For these reasons, Generation is unable to predict whether
and to what extent it may ultimately be held responsible for remediation and other costs relating to formerly owned coal ash disposal sites under
the new regulations.
94
Source: BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO, 10-K, February 10, 2016 Powered by Morningstar® Document Research℠
The information contained herein may not be copied, adapted or distributed and is not warranted to be accurate, complete or timely. The user assumes all risks for any damages or losses arising from any use of this information,
except to the extent such damages or losses cannot be limited or excluded by applicable law. Past financial performance is no guarantee of future results.