2.2.0.7falseCOMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES006080 - Disclosure - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIEStruefalsefalsefalse1USDfalsefalseu000Standardhttp://www.xbrl.org/2003/iso4217USDiso42170u002Dividehttp://www.xbrl.org/2003/iso4217USDiso4217http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instancesharesxbrli0u001Standardhttp://www.xbrl.org/2003/instancesharesxbrli0$20nve_NotesToFinancialStatementsAbstractnvefalsenadurationNo definition available.falsefalsefalsefalsefalsetruefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalse1falsefalsefalsefalse00falsefalsefalsexbrli:stringItemTypestringNo definition available.false31us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlockus-gaaptruenadurationNo definition available.falsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalse1falsefalsefalsefalse00<div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">NOTE 8.                       COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Environmental</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">   <font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline">NPC</font></font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">      NEICO</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 36pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">NEICO, a wholly-owned subsidiary of NPC, owns property in Wellington, Utah, which was the site of a coal washing and load-out facility.  The site has a reclamation estimate supported by a bond of approximately $5 million with the Utah Division of Oil and Gas Mining, which management believes is sufficient to cover reclamation costs.  Management is continuing to evaluate various options including reclamation and sale.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">   <font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline">SPPC</font></font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">      Valmy Generating Station</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 36pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">On June 22, 2009, SPPC received a request for information from the EPA—Region 9 under Section 114 of the Federal Clean Air Act requesting current and historical operations and capital project information for SPPC’s Valmy Generating Station located in Valmy, Nevada.  SPPC co-owns and operates this coal-fired plant.  Idaho Power Company owns the remaining 50%.  The EPA’s Section 114 information request does not allege any incidents of non-compliance at the plant, and there have been no other new enforcement-related proceedings that have been initiated by the EPA relating to the plant.  SPPC completed its response to the EPA in December 2009 and will continue to monitor developments relating to this Section 114 request.  SPPC cannot predict the impact, if any, associated with this information request.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Other Environmental Matters</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 36pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">NVE and the Utilities are subject to federal, state and local regulations regarding air and water quality, hazardous and solid waste disposal and other environmental matters.  As disclosed in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Financial Statements, Environmental, in the 2009 Form 10-K, NPC was subject to various environmental proceedings which were settled as of December 31, 2009.  NPC continues to comply with these environmental commitments.  As of June 30, 2010, environmental expenditures did not change materially from those disclosed in the 2009 Form 10-K.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Litigation Contingencies</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">   <font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline">NPC and SPPC</font></font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">  </font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">      Peabody Western Coal Company Royalty Claim</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 45pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">NPC owns an 11% interest in the Navajo Generating Station which is located in Northern Arizona and is operated by Salt River.  Other participants in the Navajo Generating Station are Arizona Public Service Company, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and Tucson Electric Power Company (together with Salt River and NPC, the “Navajo Joint Owners”).  NPC also owns a 14% interest in the Mohave Generating Station which is located in Laughlin, Nevada and was operated by Southern California Edison (SCE) prior to the time it became non-operational on December 31, 2005.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></font> </div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 45pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">On October 15, 2004, the Navajo Generating Station’s coal supplier, Peabody Western Coal Co. (Peabody WC), filed a complaint against the Navajo Joint Owners in Missouri State Court in St. Louis, alleging, among other things, a declaration that the Navajo Joint Owners are obligated to reimburse Peabody WC for any royalty, tax or other obligations arising out of a lawsuit that the Navajo Nation filed against Salt River, several Peabody Coal Company entities (including Peabody WC and collectively referred to as “Peabody”) and SCE in June 1999 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (DC Lawsuit).</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 45pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">The Navajo Joint Owners were first served in the Missouri lawsuit in January 2005.  The operating agent for the Navajo Generating Station, Salt River, defended the suit on behalf of the Navajo Joint Owners. In July 2008, the Court dismissed all counts against NPC, two without prejudice to their possible refiling at a later date.  NPC is unable to predict whether any liability may arise from any of these matters, including from the ultimate outcome of the DC Lawsuit.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 45pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">NPC is not a party to the DC Lawsuit although, as noted above, it is a participant in both the Navajo Generating Station and the Mohave Generating Station.  The DC Lawsuit consists of various claims relating to the renegotiations of coal royalty and lease agreements and alleges, among other things, that the defendants obtained a favorable coal royalty rate for the lease agreements under which Peabody mines coal for both the Navajo Generating Station and the Mohave Generating Station by improperly influencing the outcome of a federal administrative process pursuant to which the royalty rate was to be adjusted.  Initially, the DC Lawsuit sought $600 million in damages, treble damages and punitive damages of not less than $1 billion, and the ejection of defendants from all possessory interests and Navajo Tribal lands arising out of the primary coal lease.  In July 2001, the U.S. District Court dismissed all </font><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">claims against Salt River.   The action had been stayed since October, 2004 until March, 2008, when the U.S. District Court lifted the </font><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">stay.  On April 12, 2010, the Navajo Nation amended their complaint; it no longer seeks treble damages. The Court ordered substantial completion of factual discovery (except for certain depositions) by mid-August, 2010. Management cannot predict the timing or outcome of a decision on this matter.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">  </font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">   <font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline">SPPC</font></font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="FONT-STYLE: italic; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">      Farad Dam</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 45pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">SPPC sold four hydro generating units, (10.3 MW total capacity), located in Nevada and California, for $8 million to TMWA in June 2001.  The Farad Hydro (2.8 MW), has been out of service since the summer of 1996 due to a collapsed flume.  The current estimate to rebuild the diversion dam, if management decides to proceed, is approximately $20 million.  Under the terms of the contract with TMWA, SPPC is not entitled to receive the proceeds of sale relating to Farad unless and until it has reconstructed the Farad facility in a manner reasonably acceptable to TMWA or, alternatively SPPC assigns its casualty loss claim to TMWA and TMWA is reasonably satisfied regarding its rights with respect to such claim.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 45pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">SPPC filed a claim with the insurers Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Co. and Zurich-American Insurance Company (collectively, the “Insurers”) for the Farad flume and Farad Dam.  In December 2003, SPPC sued the Insurers in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada (the “Court”) on a coverage dispute relating to potential rebuild costs for Farad Dam.  The case went to trial before the Court in April 2008.  On September 30, 2008, the Court ruled that SPPC was not time barred from reconstructing Farad Dam, and has coverage for the full rebuild costs, subject to coverage sub-limits set forth in the insurance policies.  The Court further ruled that SPPC is entitled to recover $4 million for costs incurred to date on Farad Dam and that SPPC shall have three years to rebuild the dam from the date of the Court’s decision.  In the event Farad Dam is not rebuilt, the Court determined SPPC would be entitled to actual cash value of approximately $1.3 million.  SPPC has requested the Court to reconsider the cash value to reflect rebuild costs. On July 10, 2009, the Court declined SPPC’s request to reconsider the cash value and further ordered that the three year period to replace the dam commences as of July 10, 2009 (Order). In early August 2009, SPPC appealed the Court’s $1.3 million cash value determination with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (the “Ninth Circuit”). Subsequently, in August 2009, the Insurers appealed the Court’s insurance coverage decision with the Ninth Circuit.  All briefings have been completed.  It is expected that the Ninth Circuit will order arguments on the appeal either late in 2010 or early to mid 2011.</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="left"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Other Legal Matters</font></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; DISPLAY: block"><br /></div><div style="TEXT-INDENT: 45pt; DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">NVE and its subsidiaries, through the course of their normal business operations, are currently involved in a number of other legal actions, none of which, in the opinion of management, is expected to have a significant impact on their financial positions, results of operations or cash flows.</font></div>NOTE 8.                       COMMITMENTSfalsefalsefalseus-types:textBlockItemTypetextblockIncludes disclosure of commitments and contingencies. This element may be used as a single block of text to encapsulate the entire disclosure including data and tables.Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name FASB Interpretation (FIN)
-Number 14
-Paragraph 3
Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 5
-Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12
false12falseUnKnownUnKnownUnKnownfalsetrue