ComEd 2015 Annual Report Download - page 412

Table of Contents
Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)
(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)
additional landfill cover. By letter dated January 11, 2010, the U.S. EPA requested that the PRPs perform a supplemental feasibility study for a
remediation alternative that would involve complete excavation of the radiological contamination. On September 30, 2011, the PRPs submitted the
final supplemental feasibility study to the U.S. EPA for review. Since, June 2012, the U.S. EPA has requested that the PRPs perform a series of
additional analyses and groundwater and soil sampling as part of the supplemental feasibility study, that are now scheduled to be completed in
mid-2016 to enable the EPA to propose a remedy for public comment by the end of 2016. Thereafter the U.S. EPA will select a final remedy and
enter into a Consent Decree with the PRPs to effectuate the remedy. A complete excavation remedy would be significantly more expensive than
the previously selected additional cover remedy; however, Generation believes the likelihood that the U.S. EPA would require a complete
excavation remedy is remote. The U.S. EPA is also reviewing a partial excavation remedy; however, until the current sampling is concluded there
is no basis to determine the likelihood and estimate of a partial excavation remedy. The current estimated cost of the landfill cover remediation for
the site is approximately $60 million, which will be allocated among all PRPs. Recent investigation has identified a number of other parties who
may be PRPs and could be liable to contribute to the final remedy. Further investigation is underway. Generation has accrued what it believes to
be an adequate amount to cover its anticipated share of such liability.
During December 2015, the U.S. EPA took two actions related to the West Lake Landfill designed to abate what it termed as imminent and
dangerous conditions at the landfill. The first involved installation of a non-combustible interim surface cover to protect against surface fires in
areas where radiological materials are believed to have been disposed. Generation has accrued what it believes to be an adequate amount to
cover its anticipated liability for this interim action. The second action involved EPA’s public statement that it will require the PRPs to construct a
barrier wall in an adjacent landfill to prevent a subsurface fire from spreading to those areas of the West Lake Landfill where radiological materials
are believed to have been disposed. At this time, EPA has not provided sufficient details related to the basis for and the requirements and design
of a barrier wall to enable Generation to determine the likelihood such a remedy will ultimately be implemented, assess the degree to which
Generation may have liability as a potentially responsible party, or develop a reasonable estimate of the potential incremental costs. It is
reasonably possible, however, that resolution of this matter could have a material, unfavorable impact on Generation’s and Exelon’s future results
of operations and cash flows. Finally, one of the other PRPs, the landfill owner and operator of the adjacent landfill, has indicated that it will be
making a contribution claim against Cotter for costs that it has incurred to prevent the subsurface fire from spreading to those areas of the West
Lake Landfill where radiological materials are believed to have been disposed. At this time, Generation and Exelon do not possess sufficient
information to assess this claim and are therefore unable to determine the impact on their future results of operations and cash flows.
On February 2, 2015, the U.S. Senate passed a bill to transfer remediation authority over the West Lake landfill from the U.S. EPA to the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). Such legislation would become final upon
passage in the U.S. House of Representatives and the signature of the President, and be subject to annual funding appropriations in the U.S.
Budget. Remediation under FUSRAP would not alter the liability of the PRPs, but could delay the determination of a final remedy and its
implementation.
On August 8, 2011, Cotter was notified by the DOJ that Cotter is considered a PRP with respect to the government’s clean-up costs for
contamination attributable to low level radioactive residues at a former storage and reprocessing facility named Latty Avenue near St. Louis,
Missouri. The Latty Avenue site is included in ComEd’s indemnification responsibilities discussed above as part of the sale
405
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.