20160331IRP Redacted Appendix B.pdf

PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
ii

This 2015 Integrated Resource Plan Update Report is based upon the best available information
at the time of preparation. The IRP action plan will be implemented as described herein, but is
subject to change as new information becomes available or as circumstances change. It is
PacifiCorp’s intention to revisit and refresh the IRP action plan no less frequently than annually.
Any refreshed IRP action plan will be submitted to the State Commissions for their information.

For more information, contact:
PacifiCorp
IRP Resource Planning
825 N.E. Multnomah, Suite 600
Portland, Oregon 97232
[phone]
[e-mail]
http://www.pacificorp.com

This report is printed on recycled paper

Cover Photos (Top to Bottom):
Wind Turbine: Marengo II
Solar: Residential Solar Install
Transmission: Populus to Terminal Tower Construction
Demand-Side Management: Wattsmart Flower
Thermal-Gas: Lake Side 1

PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX B

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 1
NAUGHTON UNIT 3 COMPLIANCE ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................... 1
Compliance Timeline ............................................................................................................................... 1
NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 2
Methodology............................................................................................................................................. 2
Annual Non-fuel Expenditure Assumptions ............................................................................................. 3
Resource Portfolio Results ....................................................................................................................... 4
PVRR(d) Results ...................................................................................................................................... 5
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................ 7
ATTACHMENT B-I: NAUGHTON UNIT 3 TIMELINES .................................................................................. 9
ATTACHMENT B-II: NAUGHTON UNIT 3 COMPLIANCE ALTERNATIVE ANNUAL EXPENDITURES ....... 11

PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
ii
INDEX OF TABLES CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX B
Table B.1 – CPP Emission Mass-Cap Assumptions (thousand short tons) .................................................. 3
Table B.2 – Line Item Detail of 2018 Early Retirement of Naughton Unit 3 as Compared to 2018 Gas
Conversion ($ million) ...................................................................................................................... 5
Table B.2 – Line Item Detail of 2018 Early Retirement of Naughton Unit 3 as Compared to 2018 Gas
Conversion ($ million), Continued .................................................................................................... 6
Table B-II.1 – Naughton Unit 3 Annual Expenditures for a 2018 Gas Conversion Case ........................... 11
Table B-II.2 – Naughton Unit 3 Annual Expenditures for a 2018 Early Retirement Case ......................... 11

INDEX OF FIGURES CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX B
Figure B.1 – Naughton Unit 3 Forward Price Curve Assumptions .............................................................. 3
Figure B.2 – Cumulative Increase/(Decrease) in Portfolio Resources Under the Naughton Unit 3 Early
Retirement Case ................................................................................................................................. 5
Figure B-I.1 – Naughton Unit 3 Natural Gas Conversion Schedule for a June 1, 2018 On-line Date ......... 9
Figure B-I.2 – Naughton Unit 3 Early Retirement Decommissioning Schedule for a December 31, 2017
Retirement Date ............................................................................................................................... 10
Figure B-I.3 – Naughton Unit 3 Demolition and Closure Schedule ........................................................... 10

PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
1
CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3
ANALYSIS
Executive Summary
Consistent with action item 4a in the 2015 IRP action plan PacifiCorp has updated its analysis of
regional haze compliance alternatives for the Naughton Unit 3 coal-fueled generating facility.
This updated analysis also satisfies the request by the Public Utility Commission of Oregon
(OPUC) in its 2015 IRP acknowledgement order.1 The analysis incorporates updates to
forecasted loads, resources, market prices, and other modeling inputs. The studies also reflect
updated costs that are specific to gas conversion of Naughton Unit 3, including the cost to
procure gas transportation and the most recent cost estimates for engineering, procurement, and
construction (EPC) to convert the unit to operate as a gas-fired facility.

The Naughton plant is located near Kemmerer, Wyoming. Unit 3 of the three-unit plant is owned
and operated by PacifiCorp and was commissioned in 1971. Naughton Unit 3 has a capacity of
330 MW. In its final action, EPA indicated support for the conversion of Naughton Unit 3 to
natural gas and that it would expedite action relative to consideration of the gas conversion once
the state of Wyoming submitted the requisite state implementation plan (SIP) amendment.
PacifiCorp has obtained a construction permit and revised regional haze BART permit from the
state of Wyoming to convert Naughton Unit 3 to natural gas in 2018. Wyoming has not yet
submitted a revised regional haze SIP incorporating this alternative compliance approach to
EPA.

PacifiCorp’s updated analysis compares early retirement at the end of 2017 to the natural gas
conversion of Naughton Unit 3 by mid-2018 across a range of scenarios. This analysis shows
that the early retirement alternative is lower cost than the assessed natural gas conversion
alternative. However, recognizing that Naughton Unit 3 is an important generation resource to
the state of Wyoming and PacifiCorp’s customers, PacifiCorp will continue to review emerging
technologies, re-assess traditional gas conversion technologies and costs, and consider other
potential alternatives that could be applied to Naughton Unit 3 to allow continued operation
beyond year-end 2017.
Naughton Unit 3 Compliance Alternatives
Compliance Timeline
PacifiCorp has considered an early retirement compliance alternative to the planned 2018 natural
gas conversion of Naughton Unit 3. Timelines for the natural gas conversion and early retirement
alternative are discussed below.

1 Order No. 16-071 in PacifiCorp’s 2015 Integrated Resource Plan, Docket LC 62, dated February 29, 2016.
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
2
Natural Gas Conversion

A schedule to convert Naughton Unit 3 to 100 percent natural gas fueling is presented in
Attachment B-I, Figure B-I.1. The implementation schedule assumes the unit would be
converted to natural gas fueling in 2018 after coal fueling is discontinued December 31, 2017.
Thereafter, a five-month tie-in outage is planned. The following scope of work is anticipated to
be required:

 Installing new low oxides of nitrogen natural gas burner system;
 Main windbox modifications;
 Modifying the boiler flame scanner system;
 Installing new boiler burner front natural gas piping;
 Installing an induced flue gas recirculation system, provided to reduce oxides of nitrogen
and carbon monoxide emissions;
 Potential air preheater basket modifications;
 Flue gas ductwork and equipment modifications;
 Potential boiler and flue gas path equipment structural reinforcement;
 Electrical and control system modifications; and
 Installing a natural gas delivery system.

Early Retirement

A schedule for an early retirement scenario of Naughton Unit 3 by an assumed date of January 1,
2018 is presented in Attachment B-I, Figure B-I.2. Unit retirement work would include:

 Unit 3 will be decommissioned and cleaned of all fluids;
 All hazardous materials will be removed and properly disposed of;
 Demolition, removal and disposal of electric generating equipment and ancillary systems
will occur after 2029 when Units 1 and 2 are retired; and
 Reclamation and final closure of the site.

Naughton Unit 3 Analysis
Methodology
Present value revenue requirement differential (PVRR(d)) analyses are used to quantify the
benefit or cost of regional haze environmental compliance alternatives relative to a benchmark.
In the case of Naughton Unit 3, a natural gas conversion is compared to an early retirement
alternative benchmark. The PVRR(d) for a given environmental compliance alternative is
calculated as the difference in system costs between two System Optimizer model simulations—
a benchmark simulation and a simulation for an alternative compliance scenario.

This confidential appendix presents the updated studies on the compliance alternatives of
Naughton Unit 3 that were provided in PacifiCorp’s 2015 IRP. The updated studies reflect the
changes in load forecast, market prices, existing resources, as well as the costs to convert the
unit. The studies are performed under different emission compliance scenarios: without Clean
Power Plan (CPP) emission control constraints and with CPP emission control constraints that
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
3
are consistent with EPA’s mass-based federal implementation plan proposed for the CPP. Two
book-end CPP assumptions are implemented in the studies: one assumes that PacifiCorp would
not be able to receive set-aside incentives that encourage early development of renewable
resources (“FIP” mass-cap), while the other assumes PacifiCorp would be able to receive these
allowance set-asides, which would result in less stringent emission mass-cap constraints (“Set-
aside” mass-cap). Table B.1 shows PacifiCorp’s share of emission mass-cap goals that would be
applicable to PacifiCorp’s affected units.2 The mass-cap constraints are implemented by applying
a company-wide cap on emissions of the affected units.

Table B.1 – CPP Emission Mass-Cap Assumptions (thousand short tons)
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
“FIP” 42,441 40,779 38,626 41,063 40,095 38,930 38,184 37,376 36,482
“Set-aside” 47,905 46,155 43,889 42,948 41,929 40,702 39,917 39,066 38,126

The Naughton Unit 3 compliance analysis was performed using medium, high and low price
curve scenarios. The medium price scenario is based on PacifiCorp’s December 2015 official
forward price curve (OFPC), consistent with medium price assumptions used to develop the
portfolio for the 2015 IRP Update. Figure B.1 summarizes heavy load hour (HLH) and light load
hour (LLH) wholesale power prices and natural gas prices assumed for this analysis.3

Figure B.1 – Naughton Unit 3 Forward Price Curve Assumptions
*Note, for presentation purposes, power prices reflect the average of Mid-Columbia and Palo Verde prices. Opal is
the natural gas market hub most applicable to natural gas conversion alternatives studied in the Naughton Unit 3
analysis.
Annual Non-fuel Expenditure Assumptions
Annual non-fuel planned expenditures include environmental capital costs, run-rate capital costs,
run-rate operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, fixed firm natural gas transportation costs, and
natural gas ………………. costs, as applicable. In addition, liquidated damage (LD) costs
associated with the existing coal supply agreement (CSA), which extends through 2021, are
included in PacifiCorp’s analysis. Detailed annual non-fuel planned expenditures for the
Naughton Unit 3 natural gas conversion and early retirement compliance alternatives are
provided in Attachment B-II.

2 Cholla Unit 4 is excluded based on the assumption that PacifiCorp’s share of mass-cap in the state of Arizona is
sufficient to cover the emission from the unit during limited time period. 3 HLH prices cover to hours ending 7 through 22 PPT, Monday through Saturday, excluding NERC holidays. LLH
prices cover all other hours.
0
20
40
60
80
100
HLH Power Prices ($/MWh)
Dec '15 OFPC High Low
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
LLH Power Prices ($/MWh)
Dec '15 OFPC High Low
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Opal Gas Prices ($/MMBtu)
Dec '15 OFPC High Low
Confidential Subject to General Protective Order
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
4
The 2018 Naughton Unit 3 natural gas conversion case includes ……………. in 2018 run-rate
capital expenditures to complete the conversion and further includes annual fixed costs for
natural gas transportation, including levelized costs for a new pipeline lateral, which would be
required to transport natural gas from ……… to the Naughton plant.4

Under either the 2018 natural gas conversion or the 2018 early retirement case, PacifiCorp would
be subject to LD payments under an existing CSA between PacifiCorp and Westmoreland
Kemmerer, Inc. that provides for coal deliveries to the Naughton plant from January 1, 2017
through December 31, 2021. LD payments applicable to either alternative total …………….
over the period 2018 through 2021.
Resource Portfolio Results
In the 2018 early retirement case, the loss of Naughton Unit 3 creates an incremental capacity
need beginning in the summer of 2018, which drives the need for replacement resources over the
2018 to 2034 timeframe. Figure B.2 summarizes the cumulative change in resource portfolio
capacity when Naughton Unit 3 is retired at the end of 2017 as compared to the unit being
converted to natural gas by June 2018, and under the “FIP” mass-cap constraint. Positive values
show cumulative resource portfolio additions and negative values show the cumulative capacity
of resources that are removed from the portfolio when Naughton Unit 3 retires at end of 2017.
Notable resource portfolio changes resulting from an early retirement relative to conversion
include:

 In the medium natural gas price scenario:
o Prior to 2028 and after Naughton Unit 3 is assumed to retire at the end of 2017 as
opposed to being converted to gas fueled unit, front office transactions (FOTs)
and demand side management resources (DSM) fill the capacity resource needs.
o 2028 onwards, given that significant amount of DSM has been added to the
system, combined cycle combustion turbines (CCCTs) are reduced and delayed.
 In the high natural gas price scenario:
o Prior to 2028 and after Naughton Unit 3 is assumed to retire at the end of 2017 as
opposed to being converted to gas fueled unit, FOTs and DSM fill the capacity
resource needs.
o In 2028, when Naughton Unit 3 retires early, a 635 MW CCCT is replaced with a
477 MW CCCT, which, in turn, accelerates a 635 MW CCCT from 2033 to 2032.
o In 2018, 33 MW of wind resources are added when Naughton Unit 3 retires. With
52 MW of solar resources added in 2033 and 2034, a 100 MW of wind resource
on the west side of the system is displaced.
 In the low natural gas price scenario:
o Prior to 2028 and after Naughton Unit 3 is assumed to retire at the end of 2017 as
opposed to being converted to a gas-fueled unit, FOTs and DSM fill the capacity
resource needs.
o In 2028, under the Naughton Unit 3 early retirement scenario, a 423 MW CCCT
is replaced with a 635 MW CCCT, which, together with the addition of FOTs and
DSM, displaces 1,025 MW of CCCTs on the east and west sides of the system.
4 It is assumed that ……………. would complete ……….. and charge PacifiCorp for its estimated …………… cost.
The …………….. costs are treated as a lease with an assumed ….. interest rate, which effectively converts the up-
front payment to a …………….. annual expense.
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
5

Figure B.2 – Cumulative Increase/(Decrease) in Portfolio Resources Under the Naughton
Unit 3 Early Retirement Case

PVRR(d) Results
Table B.2 summarizes PVRR system cost detail for the 2018 early retirement case and the 2018
natural gas conversion case along with the PVRR(d) benefit/(cost) of early retirement for the
medium, high and low natural gas price scenarios, with and without CPP mass-cap constraints.

Table B.2 – Line Item Detail of 2018 Early Retirement of Naughton Unit 3 as Compared to
2018 Gas Conversion ($ million)

(800) (600) (400) (200) - 200 400 600 800
MW
Medium Gas
DSM FOTs Gas Renewable Gas Conversion
(800) (600) (400) (200) - 200 400 600 800
MW
Low Gas
DSM FOTs Gas Renewable Gas Conversion
(800) (600) (400) (200) - 200 400 600 800
MW
High Gas
DSM FOTs Gas Renewable Gas Conversion
SO Model Results for Gas Price Scenarios without CPP Constraints by Cost Category
Naughton Unit 3 Retire Early
(PVRR $ million)
Naughton Unit 3 Conversion
(PVRR $ million)
PVRR(d) (Benefit)/Cost of Early
Retirement
Scenario High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas
SO Model Simulation Early Retirement Early Retirement Early Retirement Gas-Fired Gas-Fired Gas-Fired n/a n/a n/a
System Variable Costs
Fuel/FOTs
Variable O&M/Wind&Solar PPA
Emissions
Net System Balancing
Total Variable
System Fixed Costs
New Resource Capital/Run-rate
Existing Resource Capital/Run-rate
Decomissioning/Stranded Cost
Contracts
Incremental DSM
Transmission
Total Fixed
Total Costs
1/ Includes adjustments for changes in Naughton coal supply contracts when Naughton Unit 3 ceases coal-fired operation.
2/ Fixed costs include levelized costs for incremental environmental upgrade investments, total O&M for coal resources, and fixed O&M and run-rate capital for all resources.
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
6
Table B.2 – Line Item Detail of 2018 Early Retirement of Naughton Unit 3 as Compared to
2018 Gas Conversion ($ million), Continued

The following summarizes line-item PVRR(d) results for the early retirement case as compared
to the gas conversion case under medium natural gas price assumptions and under the “FIP”
mass-cap constraint. The values below are quoted on a present value revenue requirement basis
calculated through the 20-year planning horizon:

 Fuel cost at Naughton Unit 3 decrease by ………….., which is offset by increased system
fuel and FOT costs totaling ………….—driven by the need to replace lost generation.
 Net system balancing benefits increase by approximately …………., offsetting the
increase in system fuel and FOT costs.
 Early retirement of Naughton Unit 3 results in approximately …………… of savings in
run-rate capital and operating cost of the unit and capital cost to convert the unit.
 With more Class 2 DSM resources under the early retirement case, system DSM costs are
increased by …………….
SO Model Results for Gas Price Scenarios with Assumed FIP Mass-Cap by Cost Category
Naughton Unit 3 Retire Early
(PVRR $ million)
Naughton Unit 3 Conversion
(PVRR $ million)
PVRR(d) (Benefit)/Cost of Early
Retirement
Scenario High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas
SO Model Simulation Early Retirement Early Retirement Early Retirement Gas-Fired Gas-Fired Gas-Fired n/a n/a n/a
System Variable Costs
Fuel/FOTs
Variable O&M/Wind&Solar PPA
Emissions
Net System Balancing
Total Variable
System Fixed Costs
New Resource Capital/Run-rate
Existing Resource Capital/Run-rate
Decomissioning/Stranded Cost
Contracts
Incremental DSM
Transmission
Total Fixed
Total Costs
1/ Includes adjustments for changes in Naughton coal supply contracts when Naughton Unit 3 ceases coal-fired operation.
2/ Fixed costs include levelized costs for incremental environmental upgrade investments, total O&M for coal resources, and fixed O&M and run-rate capital for all resources.
SO Model Results for Gas Price Scenarios with Assumed Set-Aside Mass-Cap by Cost Category
Naughton Unit 3 Retire Early
(PVRR $ million)
Naughton Unit 3 Conversion
(PVRR $ million)
PVRR(d) (Benefit)/Cost of Early
Retirement
Scenario High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas High Gas
Base Case
(Dec' 2015
OFPC)Low Gas
SO Model Simulation Early Retirement Early Retirement Early Retirement Gas-Fired Gas-Fired Gas-Fired n/a n/a n/a
System Variable Costs
Fuel/FOTs
Variable O&M/Wind&Solar PPA
Emissions
Net System Balancing
Total Variable
System Fixed Costs
New Resource Capital/Run-rate
Existing Resource Capital/Run-rate
Decomissioning/Stranded Cost
Contracts
Incremental DSM
Transmission
Total Fixed
Total Costs
1/ Includes adjustments for changes in Naughton coal supply contracts when Naughton Unit 3 ceases coal-fired operation.
2/ Fixed costs include levelized costs for incremental environmental upgrade investments, total O&M for coal resources, and fixed O&M and run-rate capital for all resources.
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
7
 In aggregate, variable and fixed cost expenditures for Naughton Unit 3 decrease by …….
……..., which is partially offset by increased fixed and variable costs of rest of the
system totaling ………….. The net benefit under the 2018 Naughton Unit 3 early
retirement case relative to the 2018 natural gas conversion case is …………..

The following summarizes line-item PVRR(d) results for the early retirement case as compared
to the gas conversion case under high natural gas price assumptions and under the “FIP” mass-
cap constraint. The values below are quoted on a present value revenue requirement basis
calculated through the 20-year planning horizon:

 Fuel cost at Naughton Unit 3 decrease by ………….., which is offset by increased system
fuel and FOT costs totaling …………..—driven by the need to replace the lost
generation.
 Net system balancing benefits increase by approximately ……………, offsetting the
increase in system fuel and FOT costs.
 Early retirement of Naughton Unit 3 results in approximately …………… of savings in
run-rate capital and operating cost of the unit and capital cost to convert the unit.
 With more Class 2 DSM resources under the early retirement case, system DSM costs are
increased by …………...
 In aggregate, variable and fixed cost expenditures for Naughton Unit 3 decrease by ……
……..., which is partially offset by increased fixed and variable costs of rest of the
system totaling …………... The net benefit under the 2018 Naughton Unit 3 early
retirement case relative to the 2018 natural gas conversion case is …………….

The following summarizes line-item PVRR(d) results for the early retirement case as compared
to the gas conversion case under low natural gas price assumptions and under the “FIP” mass-
cap constraint. The values below are quoted on a present value revenue requirement basis
calculated through the 20-year planning horizon:

 Fuel cost at Naughton Unit 3 decrease by …………., which is offset by increased system
fuel and FOT costs totaling …….…….—driven by the need to replace the lost
generation.
 Net system balancing benefits increase by approximately ………….., offsetting the
increase in system fuel and FOT costs.
 Early retirement of Naughton Unit 3 results in approximately ……………. of savings in
run-rate capital and operating cost of the unit and capital cost to convert the unit.
 With more Class 2 DSM resources under the early retirement case, system DSM costs are
increased by …………….
 In aggregate, variable and fixed cost expenditures for Naughton Unit 3 decrease by ……
……..., which is partially offset by increased fixed and variable costs of rest of the
system totaling ………….. The net benefit under the 2018 Naughton Unit 3 early
retirement case relative to the 2018 natural gas conversion case is …………...

Conclusion

In July 2015 the competitive bid event was reopened using an Addendum 6. The “short-listed”
bidders from the previous request for proposals were asked to refresh all pricing and commercial
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
8
terms to current market conditions. Refreshed proposals were received from the short-listed
bidders on November 2, 2015. With updated forecasted loads, resources, market prices, and
capital costs to convert the unit, PacifiCorp’s financial analysis shows that the 2018 early
retirement of Naughton Unit 3 is lower cost than a 2018 gas conversion alternative. Recognizing
that Naughton Unit 3 is an important generation resource to the state of Wyoming and
PacifiCorp’s customers, PacifiCorp will continue to review emerging technologies, re-assess
traditional gas conversion technologies and costs, and consider other potential alternatives that
could be applied to Naughton Unit 3 to allow continued operation beyond year-end 2017.

PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
9
Attachment B-I: Naughton Unit 3 Timelines

Figure B-I.1 – Naughton Unit 3 Natural Gas Conversion Schedule for a June 1, 2018 On-
line Date

PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
10
Figure B-I.2 – Naughton Unit 3 Early Retirement Decommissioning Schedule for a
December 31, 2017 Retirement Date

Figure B-I.3 – Naughton Unit 3 Demolition and Closure Schedule

PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
11
Attachment B-II: Naughton Unit 3 Compliance Alternative Annual
Expenditures

Table B-II.1 – Naughton Unit 3 Annual Expenditures for a 2018 Gas Conversion Case
Naughton Unit 3 Environmental Capital
(Nominal $m, with AFUDC)
Description 2015 2017 Total
Mercury …… …… ……
CWA …… …… ……
Effluent …… …… ……
Total …… …… ……
Naughton Unit 3 Run-rate Operating Cost (Nominal $m, Capital with AFUDC)
Description 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
O&M …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Capital …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
CSA LDs …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Fixed Gas Trans. …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Total …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……

Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034
O&M …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Capital …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
CSA LDs …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Fixed Gas Trans. …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Total …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……

Table B-II.2 – Naughton Unit 3 Annual Expenditures for a 2018 Early Retirement Case
Naughton Unit 3 Environmental Capital
(Nominal $m, with AFUDC)
Description 2015 2017 Total
Mercury …… …… ……
CWA …… …… ……
Effluent …… …… ……
Total …… …… ……
Naughton Unit 3 Run-rate Operating Cost (Nominal $m, Capital with AFUDC)
Description 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
O&M …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Capital …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
CSA LDs …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Total …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……

Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034
O&M …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Capital …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
CSA LDs …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
Total …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… …… ……
PACIFICORP – 2015 IRP UPDATE APPENDIX B – NAUGHTON UNIT 3 ANALYSIS
12

[This page is intentionally left blank]