Emission Reduction
Partnership for
Electric Power
Systems

2008 Annual Report

December 2009

/MAAAmi SF6 Emission Reduction
Partnership for Electric Power Systems

\\wn


-------
1999

Inception of the "Partnership" with 49 Charter Partners.

2000

1st International Conference on SF6 and the Environment
held in San Diego, CA.

2001-2003

Technical literature developed and made available on program Web site
including, "Byproducts of SF6 Use in the Electric Power Industry" and
"Catalog of Guidelines and Standards for the Handling
and Management of SF6."

2nd International Conference on SF6 and the Environment held in San

Diego, CA in 2002.

2004

3rd International Conference on SF6 and the Environment
held in Scottsdale, AX (substation tour).

Partners start receiving customized benchmark reports on their progress in
the program. Service Provider directory made available.

2005

Webcast tutorials on estimating and reporting SF6 emissions offered. Field
study on leak rates from circuit breakers manufactured between January
1998 and December 2002 is completed.

2006

4th International Conference on SF6 and the Environment held in San
Antonio, TX (substation tour). Partnership participation increases to 77
companies representing 42% of U.S. grid.

2007

The SF6 emission rate dropped to 5.5 percent; Partners have reduced SF6
emissions by more than half of baseline emissions.

2008

Partnership SF6 emission rate drops again. Estimated at 4.7 percent, it is
the lowest overall leak rate recorded by the Partnership. Cumulative SF6
emission reductions since 1999 baseline year are nearly 2,000,000 lbs.


-------
The SFg Emission Reduction
Partnership for Electric Power
Systems Celebrates 10 Years



In 1999, members of the U.S. electric power industry and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) collaborated to establish the SFg Emission Reduction Partnership for Electric Power Systems
(the Partnership) as a mechanism for the EPA and industry to share information and encourage better
management practices, all in effort to reduce emissions of SFg gas. This year marks the Partnership's 10
year anniversary. Partner utilities have made great progress in identifying and reducing emissions over this
past decade. The Partnership continues to succeed in its purpose—to foster voluntary actions toward the
overall nationwide effort to address global climate change. This report presents the significant reductions
of sulfur hexafluoride (SFg) emissions made by Partners to-date.

The Partnership is one of the many voluntary public-private partnerships managed by EPA that aim to
reduce or slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gases range in their potency; and
sulfur hexafluoride (SFg), which is the gas of concern under this Partnership, has a global warming
potential (GWP) 23,900 times1 that of carbon dioxide (CO2), classifying it as the highest GWP gas. This
means that SFg is 23,900 times more effective at trapping infrared radiation than an equivalent amount
of carbon dioxide (CO2) over a 100-year period. Although SFg is emitted in smaller quantities than many
other greenhouse gases, its extremely long atmospheric lifetime of 3,200 years causes it to accumulate m
the earth's atmosphere for centuries.

Because of its unique dielectric properties, electric utilities rely heavily on SFg in electric power system for
voltage electrical insulation, current interruption and arc quenching in the transmission and distribution of
electricity. SFg should remain contained within equipment; yet in reality, SFg is inadvertently emitted into
the atmosphere as leaks develop during various stages of the equipment's lifecycle. SFg can also be
released at the time of equipment manufacture installation, servicing, or de-commissioning. Because there
is no clear alternative to SFg, Partners reduce their greenhouse gas emissions through implementing emission
reduction strategies such as detecting, repairing and/or replacing problem equipment, as well as educating
gas handlers on proper handling techniques of SFg gas during equipment installation, servicing, and disposal.

Inside the 2008 SFg Emissions Reduction Partnership Annual Report

>-	Partnership Accomplishments 2008	2

>-	SF6 Emissions Rate Trends	2

>•	Partner Spotlights	5

>•	Partnership Updates	7

>-	Phoenix Workshop February 2009 NEW!	7

>-	Chicago Partner Meeting June 2009 NEW!	8

>-	Mandatory Reporting Rule NEW!	8

>	A Decade of Success and Tomorrow's Challenges	9

>-	Updated List of Partners	11

1 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report.

2008 Annual Report - December 2009

www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6 1


-------
Partnership
Accompl ishments

As part of their commitment to the
Partnership, each year Partners voluntarily
report their SFg emissions and nameplate
capacity estimates to EPA. EPA collects and
aggregates this information to determine the
overall accomplishments of the Partnership.
The results of the 2008 reporting year for the
Partnership, including the cumulative emissions
reduction for the program in comparison to
the 1999 baseline year, are presented in the
following section.

Partner-Reported Emissions
Summary

The Partnership's annual average SFg emission
rate, the ratio of SFg emissions relative to total
SFg nameplate capacity (i.e., the total quantity of
SFg contained in electrical equipment), is a
benchmark metric by which achievements of the
Partnership are tracked. Since 1999 the annual
average SFg emission rate has decreased in every

Figure V. SFe Emission Rate Trends

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Total SF5 Emissions (lbs)
- SF6 Emission Rate (%)

Total Name-Plate Capacity (lbs)

reporting year, as illustrated in Figure 1. Between
the 2007 and 2008 reporting years the SFg
emission rate decreased from 5.3 percent to 4.7
percent. Overall the annual average SFg emission
rate for the Partnership is down 68 percent from
the 1999 baseline emission rate of 14.6 percent.

Table 1 summarizes the Partnership's aggregate
SFg emissions, nameplate capacity and emission
rate for the 1999 to 2008 reporting years.2
From 2007 to 2008, total SFg emissions
have decreased to 286,445 pounds, while the
Partnership nameplate capacity increased to
6,116,188 pounds. Both of these changes led
to an overall decrease in the annual average
Partnership SFg emission rate. A summary of
the Partnership's SFg emissions and reductions
are presented in Table 2. The SFg emission
reductions, presented in terms of pounds of
SFg and million metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MMTCOie), were calculated using a
baseline year of 1999.

To date, Partners have decreased absolute
emissions of SFg by 59 percent. In 2008, SFg
Partners reduced emissions of SFg gas by 34,154
pounds, or the CO2 equivalent of 0.37 million
metric tons (MMTCO2E). From 1999 through
2008, Partnership emissions reductions totaled
close to a cumulative of 2 million pounds of SFg

2 The SFe emission rate is a valuable indicator of Partnership
trends because it allows for a normalized comparison of data.
Partners vary significantly in total SFg nameplate capacity
making comparisons of and conclusions about absolute
emissions difficult. However, partners of all sizes can make
comparisons using emission rates as a benchmark.

2 www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6	2008 Annual Report - December 2009


-------
or 21.27 MMTCO2E (i.e., based on the sum of
"Reduction from Baseline" as provided in Row
3, Table 2).

Figure 2 displays the distribution of Partners
according to their emission rate. As illustrated,
over 75 percent Partners are below an emission
rate of 5 percent, and half of all Partners have
achieved an emission rate of 2.5 percent or less.
Emission rates of Partners vary due to a number
of factors such as total nameplate capacity
within their system, transmission miles, age and
geographic location of equipment, and the
number of years participating in the Partnership.

TABLE 1 Partnership SF6 Emissions, Nameplate Capacity, and Emission Rate



1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Total SFs
Emissions (lbs)

698,923

645,242

626,076

554,383

542,548

504,066

465,133

383,608

320,599

286,445

Total Nameplate
Capacity (lbs)

4,785,355

4,820,335

4,862,004

5,237,981

5,544,657

5,619,007

5,864,673

6,005,624

6,069,311

6,116,188

SF6 Emission Rate

(%)a

14.6%

13.4%

12.9%

10.6%

9.8%

9.0%

7.9%

6.4%

5.3%

4.7%

Note: Historical estimates have been updated based on the estimation methodology used by EPA and data made available by Partners.

a Emission rate is defined as total emissions divided by total nameplate capacity (i.e., the total quantity of SF6 contained in electrical
equipment).



TABLE 2 Partnership SF6 Emissions and Reductions



1999a

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Total Partner-
Reported sf6
Emissions (lbs)

698,923

645,242

626,076

554,383

542,548

504,066

465,133

383,608

320,599

286,445

Total Partner-
Reported sf6
Emissions
(MMTC02e)

7.58

6.99

6.79

6.01

5.88

5.46

5.04

4.16

3.47

3.10

Reduction from
Baseline (lbs)

-

53,682

72,848

144,540

156,376

194,857

233,790

315,316

378,325

412,478

Reduction
from Baseline
(MMTC02e)

-

0.58

0.79

1.57

1.69

2.11

2.53

3.42

4.10

4.47

Percent Reduction
from Baseline

-

7.7%

10.4%

20.7%

22.4%

27.9%

33.5%

45.1%

54.1%

59.0%

Note: Historical estimates have been updated based on the estimation methodology used by EPA and data made available by Partners.
a Baseline year

Estimation Methods

Results in Table 1 are based on
Partners in the program in 2008 as
the representative population size for
estimates for the entire time-series
(1999-2008). To estimate emissions
and nameplate capacity not reported
by Partners; a set of assumptions was
developed. For example, if a Partner
provided a report for 2006 and 2008
but not for 2007, a 2007 estimate was
determined through linear interpolation.

2008 Annual Report - December 2009

www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6 3


-------
Cumulative SFg emissions reductions of 1,962,212 pounds relative
to the 1999 baseline are equivalent to CO2 emissions reductions from:

>	4.1 million passenger cars not driven for one year

>	49.5 million barrels of oil not used

>	5.5 million households reducing electricity use by 50 percent for one year

Because SF6 has an atmospheric lifetime of 3,200 years, the benefits of reducing
emissions accrue for many generations.

Source: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html

Figure 2:2008 Distribution of Partners by Emission Rates

100%
80% -
60% -
40% -
20%
0%







0%

5%

10 15% 20%
SFe Emission Rate

25% 30%

4 www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6

2008 Annual Report - December 2009


-------
Companies in the EPA SFg Partnership
lead their industry in efforts to reduce
SFg emissions. Partners are actively seeking
opportunities to improve the management and
tracking of their cylinder inventories, maximizing
recycling, and continually training personnel on
responsible handling of SFg in the field. Another
key action is prioritizing equipment repair and
replacing equipment with major leaks as they see
the financial benefit in such an investment (i.e.,
improved system reliability and of the avoided
cost to replace gas lost to the atmosphere), in
addition to environmental benefits. Partners are
also gathering at Partnership events to exchange
information and learn from one another.

This past year, EPA recognized two Partners,
Arizona Public Service Company and
Consolidated Edison Company of New York
Inc., that stood out as exemplary in achieving
effective strategies for reductions of SFg and for
sharing information on the environmental and
economic benefits.

Arizona Public Service Company

Arizona Public Service Company (APS) joined
the SFg Partnership in 2004, and has since
achieved cumulative reductions of 126,542
pounds of SFg compared to their baseline year
of 2001.3 They have achieved these reductions
through adopting improved handling and

maintenance practices and increasing SFg
recycling. In recent years, APS has achieved
substantial emissions reductions through
an emissions reduction strategy focused on
properly utilizing an SFg recycling gas cart to
reclaim, purify, and reuse their SFg gas during
equipment service or repair. These recycling
efforts have significantly reduced the amount
of SFg gas purchases required and have reduced
SFg leakage associated with maintenance
activities. APS has played an extremely valuable
role in sharing knowledge about SFg emission
reduction strategies by hosting site visits for a
previous Partnership conference as well as for
the 2009 Phoenix SFg Reduction Workshop.
APS's aggressive efforts to reduce emissions
and their commitment to sharing information
have contributed to the overall success of the
SFg Partnership. Thanks to their efforts, APS
received a Partnership award at the 2009 SFg
Emission Reduction Strategies Workshop.

3 This quantity represents the sum of annual emission
reductions relative to emissions in 2001.

Presentation of an award to Arizona Public Service for
its commitment to reducing SFe emissions at the 2009
Partnership's Workshop in Phoenix, AZ. Left to right:
Robert Mills (APS), Brian Clark (APS), Paul Atwell (APS),
Scott Alford (APS), Sally Rand (EPA).

2008 Annual Report - December 2009	wwvv.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6 5


-------
Consolidated Edison Company of
New York, Inc.

Consolidated Edison Company of New York
Inc. (Con Edison) became a Charter Partner of
the EPA SFg Reduction Partnership when they
joined the Partnership in its inception year, 1999.
Con Edison, one of the larger Partners with a
reported nameplate capacity in 2008 of 213,526
pounds, has achieved cumulative emissions
reductions of 890,548 pounds of SFg compared
to the baseline year of 1999.4 Con Edison
embarked on an aggressive equipment repair
and replacement program that resulted in the
replacement of over 20 circuit breakers with high
leak rates during the 2006 and 2007 reporting
years. Additionally, Con Edison has been a
leader in using innovative technologies to reduce
SFg emissions, including a laser imaging camera
developed in conjunction with the Electric
Power Research Institute (EPRI) to identify
leaky equipment and a new sealing method to
seal leaks on flanges under pressure. The lessons
that Con Edison has learned from implementing
new technologies were used to provide guidance
for EPRI's SF6 Gas Handling Tutorial and to
provide technical assistance to EPRI's SFg Task
Force. Con Edison has also improved SFg gas
handling practices by developing an on-the-job
training course for handling SFg gas, which is
distributed to all field employees who handle SFg
gas. With a consistent focus and dedication to
reducing emissions and improving management
strategies, Con Edison has achieved large SFg
emission reductions and has made significant
contributions in terms of sharing knowledge of
practical mitigation options.

Thanks to their efforts, Con Edison received a
Partnership award at the 2009 SFg Emission
Reduction Strategies Workshop.

















TP'*













] ftf

9 dp









•/









m

—Br TB



r< 1

K '

| *



4$

t

Sally Rand, EPA (right) presenting an award to
Theodorou Theophanis, Con Edison (left) and
Anastasia O'Malley, Con Edison (center) for their com-
pany's significant SFe emission reductions at the 2009
Partnership's Workshop in Phoenix, AZ.

4	This quantity represents the sum of annual emission

reductions relative to emissions in 1999.

6 www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6

2008 Annual Report - December 2009


-------
Thank you to our Workshop
sponsors

>- SFg Partner: APS

>	National Electrical Manufacturers
Association (NEMA)

>	WIKA

>	FLIR Systems Inc.

The end of 2008 and the beginning
of 2009 was a very active time for the
Partnership. The Partnership coordinated and
executed three outreach events, including the
SFg Emission Reduction Strategies Workshop in
Phoenix, the Partner Webcast on the Proposed
Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
and the Partner Meeting in Chicago focused
on U.S. climate change policy and implications
for SFg emissions. Since the beginning of 2008
the Partnership has welcomed two Partners,
expanding our members count to 80 Partners.

Workshop on SFg Emission
Reduction Strategies, Phoenix,
Arizona

The SFg Emission Reduction Partnership for
Electric Power Systems hosted a Workshop
on February 4-5, 2009 in Phoenix, Arizona.
The Workshop, which was held in conjunction
with the EUEC Conference, brought together
over 120 participants to discuss SFg emission
reduction strategies and included representatives
from Partner utilities, service providers, gas
producers and distributors, and equipment
manufacturers. The sessions conducted at the
Workshop included:

•	Domestic and International Climate Change
Policy Update

•	Training and Techniques for Field Personnel

•	Best Management Practices and SFg Inventories

•	Leak Detection, Repair, Replacement

•	SFg Emissions Reductions through Recovery,
Recycling, and Reuse

2008 Annual Report - December 2009

www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6


-------
EPA is very appreciative for the participation of
all speakers at the Workshop who contributed to
its success. The event reinvigorated information
sharing and led to a renewed interest in Partner
forums. In addition to presentations and
discussions, EPA presented all Charter Partners
with certificates, recognizing their leading steps
in efforts to reduce SFg emissions. To wrap up
the event, APS graciously hosted a site tour at
their Lone Peak substation. More information
about the Workshop and its proceedings are
available on the Partnership website.

EPA Regulatory Initiatives

EPA has begun to issue regulatory actions under
the Clean Air Act and in some cases other
statutory authorities to address issues related
to climate change. For a list of these actions
along with links to pages with more information
see: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/
initiatives/index.html.

Partner Meeting: U.S. Climate
Change Policy and Implications
for Emissions of SFg

On June 2-3, 2009, the Partnership conducted a
Partners-only meeting held in Chicago, Illinois to
discuss the status of climate policy and to review
and discuss the enormous amount of activity
within Congress and the Federal Government
occurring on climate protection. The purpose
of this meeting was to facilitate the exchange
of information relevant to improving SFg
emission estimates and reducing SFg emissions
in the context of the recent developments in
climate policy. Roundtable discussions were
held allowing an open forum for Partners in
attendance to discuss improving SFg emission

and nameplate capacity estimates, best
management practices, and mitigation strategies
for SFg emission reductions and the future of the
SFg Partnership.

Thank You to our June 2009
Partner Meeting Host, SF6
Partner ComEd!

Representatives from thirteen Partner companies
attended the meeting representing approximately
50 percent of the Partnership's total SFg
nameplate capacity. The meeting proved to
reinvigorate the collaborative spirit of the
Partnership with productive Partner discussions
on SFg best management practices and SFg
emission reductions.

The host of the event, SFg Partner ComEd,
shared their headquarters at Chase Tower, which
offered a fabulous view of the city. In addition,
ComEd also provided meeting participants a site
tour of their new West Loop CIS Substation.
The site tour enabled participants to explore
the design and specifications of one of ComEd's
largest ever expansion projects. Tour participants
also had the opportunity to speak with the
engineers of the project to learn—among other
things—how state-of-the-art CIS technology can
minimize SFg emissions while increasing system
reliability. The meeting would not have been
possible without the hard work and hospitality
of the ComEd staff.

8 www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6

2008 Annual Report - December 2009


-------
New Partners

In 2009, the Partnership welcomed two new
Partners, the State of California Department of
Water Resources based in Sacramento, CA, as
well as Salt River Project from Phoenix, AZ. The

When EPA and the electric power
industry launched the Partnership in
1999, the challenge to reduce SRg emissions in
technically and economically feasible ways was
at hand. Partners met this challenge making
significant reductions primarily by identifying
and replacing or repairing old, leaking breakers.
Over the years, Partners advanced their
strategies to reduce SFg emissions, examining
their system for all possible sources of potential
emissions; purchasing new laser leak detection
cameras; working with their vendors to receive
SFg inventory related reports; tightening their
gas cylinder inventories; purchasing more
recycling carts; and improving on their overall
management and training procedures. Ten years
of learning and voluntary action has yielded
impressive results. In the reporting year 2008,
SFg Partners collectively reduced the average
SFg emission rate to 4.7 percent compared to
5.3 percent in 2007 and 14.6 percent in 1999.
SFg emissions in the 2008 reporting year are 68
percent lower than in the 1999 baseline year.

Partnership has nearly doubled from the initial
count of 48 members in 1999 to 80 Partners as
of August 2009. Charter members are specially
recognized in the complete Partner list, which
can be referenced at the end of this report.

A Decade of Success and
Tomorrow's Challenges

Know your System—

Take the Partner Challenge to
Improve SFg Nameplate Capacity
Estimates

Over the next year. Partners are
encouraged and challenged to
reevaluate and develop thorough and
accurate estimates of SFs nameplate
capacity. Total nameplate capacity is
recognized as difficult for Partners to
determine given the various ages and
types of SFe-containing equipment and
its varied distribution across numerous
substations; but having a reliable
estimate is imperative to understanding
system-wide SF6 usage and accurately
determining an SFs emission rate.

2008 Annual Report - December 2009

www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6 9


-------
Cumulatively, over the course of the Partnership,
SFg Partners have prevented the escape of
approximately 2 million pounds of SFg or 21.27
MMTCOie. Preventing the loss of this much gas
into the atmosphere translates into an equivalent
of $15.7 million to $23.5 million of avoided SFg
purchases to replace such losses.5

EPA applauds all Partners for the program's
success and celebrates reaching a 10-year
milestone. The lessons learned in the last ten
years are invaluable. They position Partners to
target more challenging SFg emission sources
and to manage more accurately and thoroughly
all SFg gas activities across their systems toward
the goal of more robust SFg emission estimates.
It is the demonstrated leadership of SFg Partners
over the last ten years that has resulted in a
thriving program today and will lead it to future
successes in SFg emission reductions.

For Additional Information,
Please Contact:

Sally Rand
Program Manager

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Climate Change Division (6207J)

Washington, DC 20460
Tel: (202) 343-9739
E-mail: rand.sally@epa.gov

For additional Partnership information see:

http://www.epa.gov/highgwp/electricpower-sf6/

index.html

5 Based on an SF6 gas cost range of $8 to $12 per pound.
Estimated cost savings does not consider other potential cost
savings that might be realized indirectly, such as savings from
reduced labor and maintenance expenditure or potential
annual SF6 cylinder rental fees.

10 www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6

2008 Annual Report - December 2009


-------
List of Partners (as of December 2009)

* Charter Partner

Subsidiaries are bulleted under parent companies

Allegheny Power

Greens burg, PA

American Electric Power (AEP)*
Columbus, OH

Arizona Public Service Company
(APS)

Phoenix, AZ

Athens Electric Department*

Athens, AL

Austin Energy

Austin, TX

Bangor Hydro-Electric
Company*

Bangor, ME

Big Rivers Electric Corporation*

Henderson, KY

Bonneville Power
Administration *

Portland, OR

Center Point Energy*

Houston, TX

Central Maine Power Company*

Augusta, ME

Central Vermont Public Service
Corporation*

Rutland, VT

City of Palo Alto

Palo Alto, CA

Columbia River People's Utility
District*

St. Helens, OR

Consolidated Edison Company of
New York. Inc.

New York, NY

CPS Energy (formerly San
Antonio City Public Service
Board)*

San Antonio, TX

Duquesne Light Company*

Pittsburg, PA

E.ON U.S. LCC

Louisville, KY

Edison International

Rosemead, CA

El Paso Electric Company*

El Paso, TX

Eugene Water and Electric
Board*

Eugene, OR

Exelon Energy Delivery (EED)

ComEd Energy Delivery*

Chicago, IL

PECO Energy Delivery
Philadelphia, PA

FirstEnergy Corporation*

Akron, OH

Florida Power and Light
Company (FPL)*

Juno Beach, FL

FPL Energy New England
Division

Seabrook, NH

Fort Pierce Utilities Authority*

Fort Pierce, FL

Grand Island Utilities
Department*

Grand Island, NE

Great River Energy

Elk River, MN

Hastings Utilities*

Hastings, NE

ITC Transmission

Novi, MI

Kings River Conservation
District*

Fresno, CA

Lower Colorado River Authority
(LCRA)

Austin, TX

Maine Public Service Company*

Presque Isle, ME

Manitowoc Public Utilities*

Manitowoc, Wl

Memphis Light, Gas &c Water
Division

Memphis, TN

Menasha Utilities*

Menasha, Wl

MidAmerican Energy

Des Moines, IA

Montana-Dakota Utilities

Bismarck, ND

Muscatine Power 8c Water*

Muscatine, IA

NSTAR Electric and Gas

Westwood, MA

Boston Edison Company

Boston, MA

Cambridge Electric Light
Company

Boston, .VIA

Commonwealth Electric
Company

Boston, MA

2008 Annual Report - December 2009

www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6 11


-------
Nashville Electric Service (NES)

Nashville, TN

National Grid

Granite State Electric

Northborough, MA

Massachusetts Electric

Northborough, MA

Nantucket Electric

Nantucket, MA

Narragansett Electric

Providence, RI

New England Power
Company

Westborough, MA

New England Electric
Transmission Corporation

Westborough, MA

New England Hydro-
Transmissions Company Inc.

Westborough, MA

Niagara Mohawk Power
Corporation

Syracuse, NY

Nebraska Public Power District

Doniphan, NE

New York Power Authority

New York, NY

New York State Electric and Gas

Ithaca, NY

Northeast Utilities Services
Company*

Connecticut Light and Power
Company

Berlin, CT

Public Service Company of
New Hampshire

Manchester, CT

Western Massachusetts
Electric Company

West Springfield, MA

Northern Indiana Public Service
Company (NIPSCO)

Merriville, IN

Oglethorpe Power

Tucker, GA

Oklahoma Gas and Electric
Corporation* (OG&E)

Oklahoma City, OK

Oncor (formerly TXU)*

Dallas, TX

Otter Tail Power Company

Fergus Falls, MN

PNM Resources

Albuquerque, NM

Pacificorp

Portland, OR

Pacific Power

Portland, OR

Rocky Mountain Power

Salt Lake City, UT

Pacific Gas and Electric
Corporation (PG&E)*

San Francisco, CA

Public Utility District No. 1 of
Douglas County

East Wenatchee, WA

Public Utility District No. 1 of
Pend Oreille County*

Newport, WA

Rochester Gas and Electric
Corporation

Rochester, NY

Salt River Project**

Phoenix, AZ

Seattle City Light

Seattle, WA

Silicon Valley Power*

Santa Clara, CA

South Carolina Electric & Gas
Company

Columbia, SC

Southern Company*

Atlanta, GA

State of California - Department
of Water Resources

Sacramento, CA

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

Knoxville, TN

Texas Municipal Power Agency*
Bryan, TX

VT Transco LLC

Rutland, VT

Wallingford Electric Division*

Wallingford, CT

We Energies*

Milwaukee, WI

** Salt River Project is a Charter Partner that left the Partnership, but recently rejoined in 2009.

12 www.epa.gov/electricpower-sf6

2008 Annual Report - December 2009


-------

-------
xvEPA

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

Climate Change Division (6207J)

www.epa.gov

December 2009


-------