Environmental Developments

Water Quality

Once-Through Cooling Issues

In March 2011, the US EPA proposed standards under the federal Clean Water Act that would affect cooling water intake structures at generating facilities. The standards are intended to protect aquatic organisms by reducing capture in screens attached to cooling water intake structures (impingement) and in the water volume brought into the facilities (entrainment). The regulations are expected to be finalized by July 2012. The required measures to comply with the proposed standards regarding entrainment are subject to the discretion of the permitting authority, and SCE is unable at this time to assess potential costs of compliance, which could be significant for San Onofre.

In addition to the proposed draft US EPA standards, the existing California once-through cooling policy may result in significant capital expenditures at San Onofre and may affect its operations. If other coastal power plants in California that rely on once-through cooling are forced to shut down or limit operations, the California policy may also significantly impact SCE's ability to procure generating capacity from those plants, which could have an adverse effect on system reliability and the cost of electricity.

Coal Combustion Wastes

US EPA regulations currently classify coal ash and other coal combustion residuals as solid wastes that are exempt from hazardous waste requirements. In June 2010, the US EPA published proposed regulations relating to coal combustion residuals that could result in their reclassification. Two different proposed approaches are under consideration.

The first approach, under which the US EPA would list these residuals as special wastes subject to regulation as hazardous wastes, could require SCE to incur additional capital and operating costs. The second approach, under which the US EPA would regulate these residuals as nonhazardous wastes, would establish minimum technical standards for units that are used for the disposal of coal combustion residuals, but would allow procedural and enforcement mechanisms (such as permit requirements) to be exclusively a matter of state law. Many of the proposed technical standards are similar under both proposed options (for example, surface impoundments may need to be retrofitted, depending on which standard is finally adopted), but the second approach is not expected to require the retrofitting of landfills used for the disposal of coal combustion residuals.

Greenhouse Gas Regulation

There have been a number of federal and state legislative and regulatory initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions. Any climate change regulation or other legal obligation that would require substantial reductions in GHG emissions or that would impose additional costs or charges for GHG emissions could significantly increase the cost of generating electricity from fossil fuels as well as the cost of purchased power, which could adversely affect SCE's business. In the case of utilities, like SCE, these costs are generally borne by customers.

Significant developments include the following:

•

In June 2010, the US EPA issued the Prevention of Significant Deterioration ("PSD") and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, known as the "GHG tailoring rule." This regulation generally subjects newly constructed sources of GHG emissions and newly modified existing major sources to the Prevention of Significant Deterioration air permitting program (and later, to the Title V permitting program under the CAA), beginning in January 2011. A challenge to the GHG tailoring rule (along with other GHG regulations and determinations issued by the US EPA) is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.


•	Under a pending court settlement, the US EPA was to propose performance standards for GHG emissions from new and modified power plants. The specific requirements will not be known until the regulations are finalized.


•	In December 2011, the California Air Resources Board ("CARB") regulation was officially published establishing a California cap-and-trade program. The first compliance period under the regulations is for 2013 GHG emissions. CARB regulations implementing a California cap-and-trade program and the cap-and-trade program itself continue to be the subject of litigation.

•

In April 2011, California enacted a law requiring California retail sellers of electricity to procure 33% of their customers' electricity requirements from renewable resources, as defined in the statute. Specifically, the new law establishes multi-year compliance periods and requires the CPUC and the CEC to establish the quantity of renewable resources to be procured according to the limitations set forth in the statute. On December 1, 2011, the CPUC approved a decision setting procurement quantity requirements for CPUC-regulated retail sellers that incrementally increase to 33% over several periods between January 2011 and December 31, 2020. The quantity would remain at 33% of retail sales for each year thereafter. The full impact of the new 33% law will depend on how the CPUC and CEC implement the law, which remains uncertain.

Greenhouse Gas Litigation Developments

In June 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed public nuisance claims against five power companies, ruling that the CAA and the US EPA actions it authorizes displace federal common law nuisance claims that might arise from the emission of GHGs. The court also affirmed the Second Circuit's determination that at least some of the plaintiffs had standing to bring the case. The court did not address whether the CAA also preempts state law claims arising from the same circumstances.

An appeal before the Ninth Circuit of a federal district order dismissing a case against SCE's parent company, Edison International, and other defendants, had been deferred pending the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling described above. In the case, which was brought by the Alaskan Native Village of Kivalina, the plaintiffs seek damages of up to $400 million for the cost of relocating the village, which they claim is no longer protected from storms because the Arctic sea ice has melted as the result of climate change. The stay of the appeal has been lifted and argument before the Ninth Circuit was held in November 2011.

In May 2011, private citizens filed a purported class action complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, naming a large number of defendants, including SCE and other Edison International subsidiaries. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants' activities resulted in emissions of substantial quantities of GHGs that have contributed to climate change and sea level rise, which in turn are alleged to have increased the destructive force of Hurricane Katrina. The lawsuit alleges causes of action for negligence, public and private nuisance, and trespass, and seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. The claims in this lawsuit are nearly identical to a subset of the claims that were raised against many of the same defendants in a previous lawsuit that was filed in, and dismissed by, the same federal district court where the current case has been filed.