Enigma, Paradox, or Conundrum? Enigma, Paradox, or Conundrum? The Asset Manager’s Challenge to Do The Asset Manager’s Challenge to Do 

More With Le$$More With Le$$$$$$

St t i A t M t F P Pl t J 24 2012Strategic Asset Management For Power Plants January 24, 2012

Jason W. Cox

OutlineOutline

• Maintaining large assets while working within tightening budget constraintsbudget constraints

– Capex– Opex– Limited staff– Environmental costs

• How maximize the value of your assets across multiple marketsy p– Key metrics– Pitfalls to avoid

• Know when to fold ‘em• Know when to fold  em– Trading strategies– Plant retirements

2

DYNEGY DYNEGY FACTS FACTS ‐‐ 20022002

• Established in 1984# 30 F t 500 li t (2001)• # 30 on Fortune 500 list (2001)

• “DYN” ticker symbol; traded on NYSE• Member of S&P 5006 700+ l• 6,700+ employees 

• $33 Billion Revenues• $23 Billion Assets• 19 100 MW Generation Control• 19,100 MW Generation Control• 213 MM MWh Total Power Sales• 12.5 Bcf/d Natural Gas Sales• 562 MBbls/d Liquids Sales• 562 MBbls/d Liquids Sales • 30 MM Tons Coal Sales

DYNEGY HISTORY & MILESTONESDYNEGY HISTORY & MILESTONES

BGSL Storage

NNG Pipeline

C. Hudson Assets

Extant

BGSL Storage

Illinova

SDG&E Assets

Extant

Destec

Edison Assets 45% CAGR

IPO / Trident

Warren (Chevron)

20021995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

TOTAL ENERGY DELIVERY TOTAL ENERGY DELIVERY NETWORK NETWORK ‐‐ 20022002

Power Generation 18,800 MWPower Firm Transmission 5,050 MW

Liquids Supply & Assets:Natural Gas Processing 97 MBbls/d

Natural Gas Term Supply 5 Bcf/dNatural Gas Firm Transport 6 Bcf/dNatural Gas Storage 112 Bcf

Fuel Oil Storage 5 MMBbls Fractionation 224 MBbls/ dStorage 1091 MMBblsLNG 750 MMcf/dNNG Pipeline Miles 16,000

Fuel Oil Storage 5 MMBbls

Coal Supply 12.3 MMT/yrCoal Transportation 17 MMT/yr

Latin American Plants in Latin American Plants in Operation Operation ‐‐ 20022002

El CosaEl Cosa

Dr Bird

PESA

PanamaPanama

Asian Plants in Asian Plants in Operation Operation ‐‐ 20022002

ZhejiangUch

Zhuzhou

Zhejiang

DYNEGY ENERGY NETWORK: Europe 2002DYNEGY ENERGY NETWORK: Europe 2002

Nord Pool

UK

Dynegy office LausanneLausanne

HollandHollandLondonLondon

Dynegy officeMilanMilanContinental

Europe

Commercial Asset Management Commercial Asset Management ‐‐ 20022002

Focus on Portfolio Management StrategyCoordinate Fuel Management ServicesIntegrate Power Product Pricing & Sales

PowerFuels

Integrate Power Product Pricing & SalesEvaluate L-T Development & ExpansionsOptimize Generation Portfolio

GENERATIONGENERATIONWholesale MarketsRetail MarketsAncillary Services

PowerProduct Sales

Fuel SupplyFuel TransportationFuel Resale

FuelsManagement

GENERATIONASSETS

GENERATIONASSETS

Ancillary ServicesRisk Management

Fuel ResaleRisk Management

OptimizeDevelopment

Gen. DevelopmentEnergy TradingMktg. & Orig.

Optimize

BuildAcquireLease

Development

9

g gEquity & AlliancesControl

DYN Stock HistoryDYN Stock History

10

Enigma [ɪ'nɪgmə]n  

A person, thing, or situation that is mysterious, puzzling, or ambiguous

Dynegy Portfolio:Dynegy Portfolio:Post LS Power Post LS Power –– December 2009December 2009

Dispatch Diversity

Peaking37%

Baseload29%

Geographic Diversity

Midwest43%

Northeast25%

Fuel DiversityCombined Cycle34%Simple Cycle Fuel Oil

Intermediate34%

3%

West32%

25%

Total Gas‐fired59%

Coal31%

Fuel Oil10%

12,950 MW

Note: Plum Point is currently under construction.  11

Blackstone Buyout HeadlinesBlackstone Buyout Headlines

• Dynegy Inc. Agrees to Be Acquired by Blackstone (8/16/2010)Dynegy Inc. Agrees to Be Acquired by Blackstone (8/16/2010)

• Dynegy in danger, Investor revolt stirs over Blackstone's $4.7B 

deal (10/7/2010)

• Dynegy and Blackstone Agree on Increased Merger 

Consideration (11/17/2010)

• Dynegy, Blackstone End Merger Agreement (11/23/2010)

12

Icahn Buyout HeadlinesIcahn Buyout Headlines

• Icahn Beats Blackstone Bid ‐ Dynegy Approves Acquisition 

(12/15/2010)

• Dynegy Deal Fight! Seneca Turns on Carl Icahn (12/20/2010)

• Some Dynegy investors still fighting Icahn deal (2/12/2011)

• Dynegy‐Icahn deal fails, management to exit  (2/21/2011)

13

Current Structure of Operating Entities Current Structure of Operating Entities (as of (as of 11/811/8/11)/11)

Dynegy Inc. (DI)Bankruptcy Remote Entity

Entities in Chapter 11                  Entities not included in DH Chapter 11 filing(1)

Entity included in Chapter 11 filing

Dynegy Holdings, LLC 

(DH)Dynegy Gas 

Investments, LLC 

DynegyAdministrative 

Dynegy Northeast Generation, Inc. (DNE)

,(DGI)

Dynegy Gas ld

Dynegy Coal HoldCo, LLC (Coal HoldCo)

Services Co.

Dynegy Danskammer, L.L.C.

Hudson Power, L.L.C. HoldCo, LLC (Gas HoldCo)

Dynegy

Dynegy  Midwest 

Generation, LLC (CoalCo)

Public equity issued by Dynegy Inc.

Dynegy Roseton, L.L.C.

Dynegy  Power, LLC (GasCo)

14(1) There are other Dynegy entities not depicted that are also not included in the filing

Net Debt of $176 million as of 11/8/2011, excluding entities in Chapter 11Substantially all Adjusted EBITDA and Cash Flow from Operations is generated from non‐filed entities

Dynegy Fleet Dynegy Fleet –– January 2012January 2012

15

Dynegy Regional Diversity Dynegy Regional Diversity –– 20122012

16

Asset Management StructureAsset Management StructureExecutive Management Team (EMT)

Broad Commercial StrategyEmplo a Fle ible Commercial Strateg to Maintain Long Term Market Upside PotentialEmploy a Flexible Commercial Strategy to Maintain Long-Term Market Upside Potential

While Protecting Against Downside Risks

Operations CommercialTrading

EMT Sub-delegation

Asset Manager

Trading• Safe and efficient operation of plants

• Prepare and manage annual budget process

• Help develop and execute strategy

• Optimize assets ithi fi f

• Metrics to evaluate the deployment of discretionary capital

within confines of sub-delegation

Sub-delegation

- Tenor

- VaR

Risk Control

VaR

VisionVision

• Let departmental experts be experts

– Operators focus on Operations, Commercial focus on commercialization

– Asset Managers set strategy to drive process

– Set the guard rail boundaries so that functional experts can drive fast in the left 

lane or slow in the right lane but stay within boundaries

L k l ili d d ll d f i di l– Look at volatility around dollars spent and focus time accordingly

• Be a facilitator

– Ask the hard questions

– Turn over the rocks

– Cooperation not Competition

How do we do itHow do we do it??

• Study the Past– Discover why Actual results vary from Forecasted resultsDrill down to 3 main goals to achieve– Drill down to 3 main goals to achieve

– Goals are set, known, and achievable• Asset Management sets rails

C i l O– Commercial OpsXXXX MW’s up to 18 months

– OriginationXXXX MW’s up to 5 yearsXXXX MW s up to 5 years

– OpenXXXX MW’s exposed to commodity pricing

– O&MO&MJustification process for projectsEyes and ears for remote locations (plants & regional offices)Clear the way for operators to be operatorsInvolved in budgeting process

Natural Gas and Power Natural Gas and Power Hub PricesHub Prices

270

320

120

170

220

PJMWH

NP15

20

70

120

1/1/2007 1/1/2008 1/1/2009 1/1/2010 1/1/2011 1/1/20121/1/2007 1/1/2008 1/1/2009 1/1/2010 1/1/2011 1/1/2012

10

12

14

Henry Hub Historical Cash Price

2

4

6

8

10

$/mmbtu

20

0

Maintaining assets within budget constraintsMaintaining assets within budget constraints

96%

IMA ‐ Coal Plants

600

650

Dynegy Capex & Opex

92%

93%

94%

95%

arket A

vailability

IMA‐MW

IMA‐NE

450

500

550

ons of $

Capex

89%

90%

91%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

In‐M

a

250

300

350

400Millio Capex

Opex

60%

70%

Capacity Factor ‐ Combined Cycle 

200

250

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Axis Title Cap Fact ‐MW

Cap Fact ‐ NE

Cap Fact ‐WE

21

0%

10%

2008 2009 2010 2011

PRIDE:PRIDE: Producing Results through Innovation Producing Results through Innovation by Dynegy Employeesby Dynegy Employees

2. Gross Margin Improvement

2012 PRIDE targets adjusted upward         to include $25 million in gross margin 

3. Balance Sheet Efficiency

PRIDE initiatives will free up $453 MM of liquidity during 

1. Fixed Cash Cost Reduction

2011 recurring G&A and OpEx $49MM lower than 2010; Additional savings of 

$137$106

$400

$600 $537 (1,3)$488(2,3) $452(3)

$25

$18$15

$20

$25$453

$133

$300

$400

$500

improvements 2011‐2012$36MM expected in 2012

$400 $382$450

$0

$200

2010 Actual 2011 Forecast 11/10/11

2012 Target

O E G&A

$7

$0

$5

$10

2011 Target 2012 Target

GMI

$320

$0

$100

$200

2011 Target 2012 Target

CashOpEx G&A

• Rationalized insurance coverage• Discontinued non‐essential contract services

• Reduced chemical costs

• Increasing unit capacity or dispatch• Driving heat rate improvements through internal benchmarking

• Developing program of actions and targets 

• Freeing up cash collateral in 2011 and 2012 by increasing usage of first lien agreements

• Lowering non‐fuel inventory

GMI Cash

• Trimmed vehicle fleet by one‐third• Reduced staffing• Streamlined IT vendor spend• Restructured leases• Leveraging cross‐fleet spend to reduce prices on materials and services

for IMA improvement• Reducing station power at various facilities

• Driving down procurement process costs and improving days payable outstanding

• Salvaging non‐operating assets

22(1) Excludes non‐recurring G&A expense of $26 million for proposed transaction costs (2) Excludes non‐recurring G&A expense of $19 million for proposed transaction costs and executive separation agreement expense (3) Excludes non‐recurring OpEx of $50 million associated with the Roseton and Danskammer leases.  The status of the leases and related obligations are subject to future determination.

prices on materials and services

PRIDE  ‐ Driving EBITDA improvements and adding liquidity

Challenges to doing more with lessChallenges to doing more with less

• Limited staffing– Multiple rounds of reductions since 2002 (from 6,700 employees)– Approximately 1,500 Employees total (as of March 3, 2011)

334 in Houston1,185 at plants sites or regional office 748 employees under collective bargaining agreements

• Environmental costs– CSAPRCSAPR– MACT / HAP– Consent DecreeOnce Through Cooling (Federal and State programs)– Once‐Through Cooling (Federal and State programs)

– Coal Ash Regulation– GHG NSPS (expected NOPR in 2012)– Reporting requirements

23

Coal SegmentCoal SegmentEnvironmental Compliance PlanEnvironmental Compliance Plan

Regulation HighlightsCross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) − Expect lower emissions as environmental equipment on Baldwin units becomes operational

50,000

60,000Coal Segment CSAPR SO2 Allocations 2012/2014 (tons)

− NOx allocations sufficient Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAPs)/ Maximum Achievable  Control Technology (MACT)− Most units meet proposed limits, rule has not been finalized− Wood River 4 testing alternatives for Particulate Matter and Mercury compliance

− Wood River 5 testing alternatives for Mercury complianceCoal Combustion Residuals (CCR)

Fi l l t ti i t d til 2013

45,460 49,016

29,000 26,256

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

− Final rule not anticipated until 2013− Impact to Coal segment is predicated upon final rule; capital expenditures are 

expected but still under reviewEPA Proposed Clean Water Act Regulations(316(b))− Compliance period between 2015‐2020− No significant capital expenditures anticipated

Pl E i l Pl b R l i

00

2010 Actual Emissions 2012 Allowances

2013 Consent Decree SO  Cap 2014 Allowances2

CSAPR HAPs/MACT CCR 316(b)Anticipate effective January 1, 2012 Anticipate effective January 1, 2015 Anticipate final rule ‐ 2013 Anticipate final rule ‐ 2012

Baldwin 1  Allowances exceed emissions Meets proposed limits Ash pond Minor modifications expected

Baldwin 2  Allowances exceed emissions Meets proposed limits Ash pond Minor modifications expected

Plant Environmental Plan by Regulation

Baldwin 3  Allowances exceed emissions Meets proposed limits Ash pond Minor modifications expected

Havana 6  Allowances exceed emissions Meets proposed limits Ash pond Minor modifications expected

Hennepin 1‐2  Covered by fleet allowances Meets proposed limits Landfill under construction Modifications expected

Wood River 4‐5 Covered by fleet allowancesTesting w/alternative sorbents to meet

proposed limits Ash pond Modifications expected

24

Coal segment expected to benefit from emission control investments

Gas SegmentGas SegmentEnvironmental Compliance PlanEnvironmental Compliance Plan

CSAPR 316(b) NY NOx RACT Rule CA Water Intake Policy AB32

Effective January 1, 2012 Anticipate final rule ‐ 2012  Effective July 1, 2014 Effective 2013Facility has closed cycle cooling, but 

Plant Environmental Plan by Regulation

Casco Bay N/A minor modifications may be required N/A N/A N/A

Independence Sufficient allowances 2012 & 2014 N/A – Uses public water supplyFacility has SCR equipment, should 

meet requirements N/A N/A

Kendall Sufficient allowances 2012 & 2014Facility has cooling towers, but minor 

modifications may be required N/A N/A N/A

Ontelaunee Sufficient allowances 2012 & 2014 N/A – Uses public water supply N/A N/A N/A

CA W t I t k P li t d t bCompliance by 12/31/15; R i i lt ti

Morro Bay N/ACA Water Intake Policy expected to be 

more stringent N/AReviewing alternative 

technologies N/A

Moss Landing N/ACA Water Intake Policy expected to be 

more stringent N/A

Compliance by 12/31/17;Reviewing alternative 

technologies

Moss Landing 1&2 will need to procure California Carbon 

Allowances (CCA)

Regulation HighlightsRegulation HighlightsCSAPR − SO2 and NOx allocations should exceed projected emissions unless increase in plant capacity factors

316(b)− Compliance period anticipated to begin between 2015‐2020

CA Water Intake Policy− Exploring alternative control measures at Moss Landing and Morro Bay that are commercially viable and capable of achieving compliance

CA Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32)− Morro Bay and Moss Landing 6 & 7 are not impacted; tolled2020

− For CA units, major modifications may be required, however, still under review

NY NOx Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Rule− Independence only facility impacted, should meet requirements

Morro Bay and Moss Landing 6 & 7 are not impacted; tolled units pass through carbon credit costs to tolling counterparty

− The CCA market is currently an illiquid market, therefore, costs to Moss Landing 1&2 still under review 

25

Gas segment well positioned to comply with environmental regulations 

Commercial Strategy Commercial Strategy –– Past to PresentPast to Present

50%

60%

$6

$7VO

2010 Forward Pricing for 2011 Natural Gas Price and Volatility

Value of options as a hedging tool is currently reduced:

Volatility− A component to determine premium prices for options

30%

40%

50%

$4

$5

$6 LATILIT

PRICE

− Greater volatility, higher premium prices− Greater range in price of underlying commodity (e.g. natural gas), greater the volatility

Forward hedging opportunities with options in 2010 were more robust

Range: ~30-37%

20%$3Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Aug Sep

Y

Cal '11 HH ‐ $/MMBtu Vol ‐ Cal11

2011 Forward Pricing for 

robust− 2011 Natural Gas prices dropped ~$2.00/MMBtu− Volatilities ranged from 30‐37%− Higher premiums made options more attractive as a hedging tool

Forward hedging opportunities with options in 2011 not as

40%

50%

60%

$5

$6

$7VOLAT

PRI

g2012 Natural Gas Price and Volatility

Forward hedging opportunities with options in 2011 not as compelling

− 2012 Natural Gas prices dropped ~$0.75/MMBtu− Volatilities ranged from ~25‐28%− Lower premiums made options less attractive as a hedging tool

20%

30%

40%

$3

$4

$5

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Aug Sep

ILITY

ICE

C l '12 HH $/MMBt V l C l12

Adjusting commercial strategy to changing market dynamics− Spark spreads expanding in eastern regions potentially creates a valuable hedge opportunity

− Maintain current hedge portfolio in anticipation of market improvement

− Future hedging activity will continue usage of standard hedging 

Range: ~25-28%

26

Cal '12 HH ‐ $/MMBtu Vol ‐ Cal12products such as tolls, financial swaps and options

Commercial strategy positioning portfolio for market improvement

Assets In Different MarketsAssets In Different Markets

• How maximize the value of your assets across multiple markets– Know your markets (the details matter!)Understand the politics of your market (city county state federal)– Understand the politics of your market (city, county, state, federal)

– Utilize adjacent markets if superior to the one you’re in

• Key metrics– Gross Margin?– Operating Margin?– Spark Spreads?p p– MWh produced?– Capacity Factor?– In‐Market Availability?In Market Availability?

• Pitfalls to avoid– Not knowing the rules

l l– Analysis paralysis– “One size fits all” mentality

27

Know when to fold ‘Know when to fold ‘emem

• Trading strategies

– When to exit?

Certain date on the calendar?Certain date on the calendar?

Certain % move (up or down)

When you run out of credit?

When you will exceed your assigned VAR?y y g

When your boss tells you to?

Paradox [păr´å`dǒks]

28

Paradox [păr å dǒks]n

A seemingly contradictory statement that may nonetheless be true

Commercial HighlightsCommercial Highlights

Generation Hedged Position

100% 100%100% 100%80%

100%

Coal Supply and Transport Hedged – Coal Segment(as of 10/31/11)BOY 2011 2012 2013

Jul‐11 Oct–11 Jul–11 Oct–11 Jul–11 Oct ‐ 11

20%

40%

60%

80%

Coal SupplyTransport

Coal 85% 95% 20% 20% 5% 3%

Gas 90% 89% 55% 48% 20% 14%

DNE 90% 0% 40% 0% 0% 0%

0%2011 2012

Adjusted EBITDA Sensitivities (in $MM)

FY 2012 Portfolio Unhedged Year

Note: Values are based upon expected on and off‐peak generation as of 7/15/11 and 10/10/11

Gas Supply Hedged – Gas Segment  (as of 10/10/11)

Gas Coal Gas Coal

Plus .5 HR(1) $15 $25 $45 $30

Minus .5 HR(1) $(20) $(25) $(40) $(25)

FY 2012 Portfolio   Unhedged Year

Market Implied 

Heat R

ate 

Movem

ent 

(Btu/KWh)

93%

56%60%

80%

100%

Plus $1 Gas(2) $(75) $135 $10 $150

Minus $1 Gas(2) $(60) $(145) $(10) $(145)Change in

 Cost 

of Natural Gas 

($/M

MBtu)

(1) Sensitivities based on “on-peak” power price changes and full-year estimates; Assumes constant natural gas price of ~$4.42/MMBtu and heat rate changes are for a full year; Increased run-time will result in increased maintenance costs, which are not included in sensitivities (2) Sensitivities based on full year estimates and assume natural gas price change occurs for the entire year and entire

56%

15%0%

20%

40%

2011 2012 2013

29

on full-year estimates and assume natural gas price change occurs for the entire year and entire portfolio; On-peak power prices are adjusted by holding the spark spread constant to a 7,000 Btu/KWh heat rate; Off-peak prices are adjusted holding the market implied heat rate constant

Dynegy positioned to capture value in a rising pricing environment

Know when to fold ‘Know when to fold ‘emem

• Plant retirements

– When to retire?

Plant is losing $ for the foreseeable future 

Even a miracle won’t change the outcome (e.g. 2x increase in revenue)

Not feasible (or not economical) to run on an alternative fuel (nat gas)

No “green” subsidy available (co‐firing  landfill gas, bio‐fuel, etc)

Not required for reliability by the ISO / RTO (no RMR payments)

Conundrum  [kuh‐nuhn‐druhm]n.a A question or problem having only a conjectural answer

30

a: A question or problem having only a conjectural answer b: An intricate and difficult problem 

AES AES GreenidgeGreenidge 3 & 43 & 4

• AES Greenidge• Location: Dresden NY• Location: Dresden, NY• Operator: AES Corp• Employees: 40

f (• Configuration:  Unit 3 (50 MW, retired December 2009), Unit 4 (113 MW, to be mothballed 3/18/2011)Reasons for retirement: 3/18/2011)

• Operation: 1950‐1953• Fuel: coal, wood• Environmental modifications total

Reasons for retirement:• Economics; unit is operating at a net loss (Source: NYPSC Filing)• Plant Manager Doug Roll cited a • Environmental modifications total 

$49mm and include a bag house, dry scrubber, SCR, Biomass co‐firing

combination of increased costs for coal and rail transportation, high state taxes, fees, decreased demand for electricity and a decline in the price of natural gas. (October 5, 2010) (Source: Finger Lakes Times Online)

AES Westover 7 & 8AES Westover 7 & 8

• AES Westover• Location: Union NY• Location: Union, NY• Operator: AES Corp• Employees: 37

f (• Configuration:  Unit 7 (44 MW, retired December 2009), Unit 8 (80 MW, to be mothballed 3/18/2011)3/18/2011)

• Operation: 1943‐1951• Fuel: coal• Environmental modifications total

Reason for retirement:

• Environmental modifications total $60mm and include a bag house, dry scrubber, SCR

Economics; unit is operating at a net loss

Source: NYPSC Filing

Exelon Exelon –– CrombyCromby Units 1 & 2Units 1 & 2

• Location: Phoenixville, PAO t E l• Operator: Exelon

• Employees: 82• Configuration:  Units 1 (160 MW, to be mothballed 5/31/11)         Unit 2 (208 MW, to be mothballed 12/31/11)

• Operation: 1954‐1955• Fuel: coal, fuel oil, natural gasReason for retirement:

•“Decreased power demand, over supply of natural gas and increasingsupply of natural gas and increasing operating costs, has led Exelon Power to retire these units,” said Doyle Beneby, senior vice president of Exelon Powerof Exelon Power.

Source: Exelon Press Release

Exelon Exelon –– EddystoneEddystone Units 1 & 2Units 1 & 2

• Location: Eddystone, PAO t E l• Operator: Exelon

• Employees: 172 (total site)• Configuration:  Units 1 (294 MW, to be mothballed 5/31/11)         Unit 2 (294 MW, to be mothballed 6/1/12) 

• Six natural gas or fuel oil units (820MW total) will remain in service 

• Operation: 1960• Fuel: coal, natural gas, fuel oil

Reason for retirement:“Decreased power demand, over supply of natural gas and increasing ue coa , atu a gas, ue osupply of natural gas and increasing operating costs, has led Exelon Power to retire these units,” said Doyle Beneby, senior vice president of Exelon Powerof Exelon Power.

Source: Exelon Press Release

AEP Philip AEP Philip SpornSporn –– Unit 5Unit 5

• Location: New Haven, WVO t AEP• Operator: AEP

• Configuration:  Unit 5 – 496MW• Operation: 1960• Fuel: coal• Supercritical

Reason for retirement:•Based on present and projected economic conditions, Sporn unit 5 is no longer economic to operate and Ohio Power plans to shut down the plant earlier than

i l ti i t d ti t i i l id th fili t thpreviously anticipated contingent upon commission approval, said the filing at the PUCO. Sporn unit 5 is forecast to produce negative operating income for the next two years. Based on recent market forecasts, the PJM revenues from the unit are not expected to recover the anticipated expenses necessary to operate the unit. Results f 2013 t d t b i il Ohi P t d i th filifor 2013 are expected to be similar, Ohio Power noted in the filing.Source: PennEnergy

Q & AQ & A