Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

All shares of outstanding common stock of Nevada Power Company are held by its parent company, NV Energy, Inc., which is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, formerly known as MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company. As of April 30,July 31, 2014, 1,000 shares of common stock, $1.00 stated value, were outstanding.

When used in Forward-Looking Statements, Part I - Items 2 through 4, and Part II - Items 1 through 6, the following terms have the definitions indicated.

Further details of the potential risks and uncertainties affecting the Company are described in the Company's filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, including Part II, Item 1A and other discussions contained in this Form 10‑Q. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. The foregoing factors should not be construed as exclusive.

To the Board of Directors and Shareholder of

Nevada Power Company

Las Vegas, Nevada

We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Nevada Power Company and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of March 31,June 30, 2014, and the related consolidated statements of operations for the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2014 and 2013, and of changes in shareholder's equity and cash flows for the three-monthsix-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2014 and 2013. These interim financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our reviews in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to such consolidated interim financial statements for them to be in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of Nevada Power Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2013, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholder's equity, and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our report dated March 31, 2014, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2013 is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the consolidated balance sheet from which it has been derived.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Las Vegas, Nevada

Nevada Power Company, together with its subsidiaries (collectively, the "Company"), is a wholly owned subsidiary of NV Energy, Inc. ("NV Energy"), a holding company that also owns Sierra Pacific Power Company ("Sierra Pacific") and certain other subsidiaries. The Company is a United States utility company serving electric retail customers, including residential, commercial and industrial customers, primarily in the Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson and adjoining areas. NV Energy is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company ("Berkshire Hathaway Energy"BHE"), formerly known as MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company. Berkshire Hathaway Energy. BHE is a holding company based in Des Moines, Iowa that owns subsidiaries principally engaged in energy businesses. Berkshire Hathaway EnergyBHE is a consolidated subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.

The unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP") for interim financial information and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and regulations for Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the disclosures required by GAAP for annual financial statements. Management believes the unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements contain all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) considered necessary for the fair presentation of the unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements as of March 31,June 30, 2014 and for the three-monththree- and six-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2014 and 2013. Certain amounts in the prior periodperiods Consolidated Statement of Operations have been reclassified to conform to the current periodperiod's presentation. Such reclassifications did not impact previously reported net income. The results of operations for the three-month periodthree- and six-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2014 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year.

The preparation of the unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the period. Actual results may differ from the estimates used in preparing the unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements. Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 describes the most significant accounting policies used in the preparation of the unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements. There have been no significant changes in the Company's assumptions regarding significant accounting estimates and policies during the three-monthsix-month period ended March 31,June 30, 2014.

In February 2013,May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2014-09, which creates FASB Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") Topic 606, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers" and supersedes ASC Topic 605, "Revenue Recognition." The guidance replaces industry-specific guidance and establishes a single five-step model to identify and recognize revenue. The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize revenue upon transfer of control of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Additionally, the guidance requires the entity to disclose further quantitative and qualitative information regarding the nature and amount of revenues arising from contracts with customers, as well as other information about the significant judgments and estimates used in recognizing revenues from contracts with customers. This guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. Early application is not permitted. This guidance may be adopted retrospectively or under a modified retrospective method where the cumulative effect is recognized at the date of initial application. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this guidance on its Consolidated Financial Statements and disclosures included within Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-04, which amends FASB Accounting Standards CodificationASC Topic 405, "Liabilities." The amendments in this guidance require an entity to measure obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation is fixed at the reporting date as the amount the reporting entity agreed to pay plus any additional amounts the reporting entity expects to pay on behalf of its co-obligor. Additionally, the guidance requires the entity to disclose the nature and amount of the obligation, as well as other information about those obligations. This guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2013. The Company adopted this guidance on January 1, 2014. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company's disclosures included within Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The PUCN's final order approving the merger between Berkshire Hathaway EnergyBHE and NV Energy stipulated that the Company will not seek recovery of any lost revenue for calendar year 2014 in an amount that exceeds 50% of the lost revenue that the Company could otherwise request. As a result, the Company has deferred revenue recognition for energy efficiency implementation rates collected and has recorded a liability of $3 million on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2014. In February 2014, the Company filed an application with the PUCN to reset the energy efficiency implementation rate. The Company proposedIn June 2014, the PUCN accepted a stipulation to suspend collection ofadjust the energy efficiency implementation rate, on Octoberas of July 1, 2014, and defer implementationto collect 50% of a newthe estimated lost revenue that the Company would otherwise be allowed to recover for the 2014 calendar year. The energy efficiency implementation rate untilwill be effective from July through December 2014 and will reset on January 1, 2015 and remain in effect through September 2015. To the extent the Company's earned rate of return exceeds the rate of return used to set base general rates, the Company is required to refund to customers energy efficiency implementation rate revenue collected. As a result, the Company has deferred recognition of energy efficiency implementation rate revenue collected and has recorded a liability of $7 million on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2014.

In May 2014, the Company filed a general rate case with the PUCN. In July 2014, the Company made its certification filing, which requests incremental annual revenue relief in the amount of $38 million, or an average price increase of 2%. An order is expected by the end of 2014 and, if approved, the new rates would be effective January 1, 2015.

In May 2013, the Company, along with Sierra Pacific, filed an application with the FERC to establish single system transmission and ancillary service rates. The combined filing requested incremental rate relief of $17 million annually to be effective January 1, 2014. On August 5, 2013, the FERC granted the companies' request for a rate effective date of January 1, 2014 subject to refund, and set the case for hearing or settlement discussions. On January 1, 2014, the Company implemented the filed rates in this case subject to refund as set forth in FERC's order. As of March 31,June 30, 2014, the Company accrued $3$7 million for amounts subject to rate refund, which is included in customer deposits and other on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. At this time management is unable to determine the final revenue impact of the case.

The Company is a participant in benefit plans sponsored by NV Energy. The NV Energy Retirement Plan includes a qualified pension plan ("Qualified Pension Plan") and a supplemental executive retirement plan and a restoration plan (collectively, "Non-Qualified Pension Plans") that provide pension benefits for eligible employees. The NV Energy Comprehensive Welfare Benefit and Cafeteria Plan provides certain postretirement health care and life insurance benefits for eligible retirees ("Other Postretirement Plans") on behalf of the Company. Amounts attributable to the Company were allocated from NV Energy based upon the current, or in the case of retirees, previous, employment location. Offsetting regulatory assets and liabilities have been recorded related to the amounts not yet recognized as a component of net periodic benefit costs that will be included in regulated rates. Net periodic benefit costs not included in regulated rates are included in accumulated other comprehensive income.

Amounts receivable from (payable to) NV Energy are included on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and consist of the following (in millions):

The Company is exposed to the impact of market fluctuations in commodity prices and interest rates. The Company is principally exposed to electricity, natural gas, coal, and other commodity price risk as it has an obligation to serve retail customer load in its service territory. The Company's load and generating facilities represent substantial underlying commodity positions. Exposures to commodity prices consist mainly of variations in the price of fuel required to generate electricity and wholesale electricity that is purchased and sold. Commodity prices are subject to wide price swings as supply and demand are impacted by, among many other unpredictable items, weather, market liquidity, generating facility availability, customer usage, storage, and transmission and transportation constraints. The actual cost of fuel and purchased power are recoverable through the deferred energy mechanism. Interest rate risk exists on variable-rate debt and future debt issuances. The Company does not engage in proprietary trading activities.

The Company has established a risk management process that is designed to identify, assess, monitor, report, manage and mitigate each of the various types of risk involved in its business. To mitigate a portion of its commodity price risk, the Company uses commodity derivative contracts, which may include forwards, options, swaps and other agreements, to effectively secure future supply or sell future production, generally at fixed prices. The Company manages its interest rate risk by limiting its exposure to variable interest rates primarily through the issuance of fixed-rate long-term debt and by monitoring market changes in interest rates. Additionally, the Company may from time to time enter into interest rate derivative contracts, such as interest rate swaps or locks, to mitigate the Company's exposure to interest rate risk. The Company does not hedge all of its commodity price and interest rate risks, thereby exposing the unhedged portion to changes in market prices.

There have been no significant changes in the Company's accounting policies related to derivatives. Refer to Note 78 for additional information on derivative contracts.

The following table, which excludes contracts that have been designated as normal under the normal purchases or normal sales exception afforded by GAAP, summarizes the fair value of the Company's derivative contracts, on a gross basis, and reconciles those amounts to the amounts presented on a net basis on the Consolidated Balance Sheets (in millions):

The following table summarizes the net notional amounts of outstanding derivative contracts with indexed and fixed price terms that comprise the mark-to-market values as of (in millions):

The Company extends unsecured credit to other utilities, energy marketing companies, financial institutions and other market participants in conjunction with its wholesale energy supply and marketing activities. Credit risk relates to the risk of loss that might occur as a result of nonperformance by counterparties on their contractual obligations to make or take delivery of electricity, natural gas or other commodities and to make financial settlements of these obligations. Credit risk may be concentrated to the extent that one or more groups of counterparties have similar economic, industry or other characteristics that would cause their ability to meet contractual obligations to be similarly affected by changes in market or other conditions. In addition, credit risk includes not only the risk that a counterparty may default due to circumstances relating directly to it, but also the risk that a counterparty may default due to circumstances involving other market participants that have a direct or indirect relationship with the counterparty.

The Company analyzes the financial condition of each significant wholesale counterparty before entering into any transactions, establishes limits on the amount of unsecured credit to be extended to each counterparty and evaluates the appropriateness of unsecured credit limits on an ongoing basis. To mitigate exposure to the financial risks of wholesale counterparties, the Company enters into netting and collateral arrangements that may include margining and cross-product netting agreements and obtains third-party guarantees, letters of credit and cash deposits. Counterparties may be assessed fees for delayed payments. If required, the Company exercises rights under these arrangements, including calling on the counterparty's credit support arrangement.

In accordance with industry practice, certain wholesale derivative contracts contain credit support provisions that in part base certain collateral requirements on credit ratings for unsecured debt as reported by one or more of the three recognized credit rating agencies. These derivative contracts may either specifically provide rights to demand cash or other security in the event of a credit rating downgrade ("credit-risk-related contingent features") or provide the right for counterparties to demand "adequate assurance," in the event of a material adverse change in creditworthiness. These rights can vary by contract and by counterparty. As of March 31,June 30, 2014, credit ratings from the three recognized credit rating agencies were investment grade.

The aggregate fair value of the Company's derivative contracts in liability positions with specific credit-risk-related contingent features was $4 million.million, which represents the amount of collateral to be posted if all credit risk related contingent features for derivative contracts in liability positions had been triggered. The Company's collateral requirements could fluctuate considerably due to market price volatility, changes in credit ratings, changes in legislation or regulation or other factors.

The carrying value of the Company's cash, certain cash equivalents, receivables, investments held in Rabbi trusts, payables, accrued liabilities and short-term borrowings approximates fair value because of the short-term maturity of these instruments. The Company has various financial assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on the Consolidated Financial Statements using inputs from the three levels of the fair value hierarchy. A financial asset or liability classification within the hierarchy is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The three levels are as follows:

The Company's commodity derivative contracts are valued using a market approach that uses quoted forward commodity prices for similar assets and liabilities, which incorporates a mid-market pricing convention (the mid-point price between bid and ask prices) as a practical expedient for valuing its assets and liabilities measured and reported at fair value. Interest rate swaps are valued using a financial model which utilizes observable inputs for similar instruments based primarily on market price curves. The determination of the fair value for derivative instruments not only includes counterparty risk, but also the impact of the Company's nonperformance risk on its liabilities, which as of March 31,June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, had an immaterial impact to the fair value of its derivative instruments. As such, the Company considers its commodity derivative contracts to be valued using Level 3 inputs.

The following table reconciles the beginning and ending balances of the Company's commodity liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant Level 3 inputs for the three-month period ended March 31 (in millions):

The Company's long-term debt is carried at cost on the Consolidated Financial Statements. The fair value of the Company's long-term debt is a Level 2 fair value measurement and has been estimated based upon quoted market prices, where available, or at the present value of future cash flows discounted at rates consistent with comparable maturities with similar credit risks. The carrying value of the Company's variable-rate long-term debt approximates fair value because of the frequent repricing of these instruments at market rates. The following table presents the carrying value and estimated fair value of the Company's long-term debt (in millions):

The Company is subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding air and water quality, renewable portfolio standards, emissions performance standards, climate change, coal combustion byproduct disposal, hazardous and solid waste disposal, protected species and other environmental matters that have the potential to impact the Company's current and future operations. The Company believes it is in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

In February 2014, the PUCN issued a final order approving draft regulations, subject to review by a Nevada Legislative commission and which must be filed with the Secretary of State, and the regulations became effective March 2014. In May 2014, the Company filed its Emission Reduction Capacity Replacement Plan proposing, among other items, the retirement of Reid Gardner Generating Station units 1, 2 and 3 in 2014 and unit 4 in 2017; the elimination of the Company's ownership interest in Navajo Generating Station in 2019; and a plan to replace the generation capacity being retired, as required by Senate Bill No. 123. The Emissions Reduction and Capacity Replacement Plan includes the issuance of requests for proposals for 300 MW of renewable energy to be issued between 2014 and 2016; the acquisition of a 274-MW natural gas co-generating facility in 2014; the acquisition of a 222-MW natural gas peaking facility in 2014; the construction of a 15-MW solar photovoltaic facility expected to be placed in-service in 2015; and the construction of a 200-MW solar photovoltaic facility expected to be placed in-service in 2016. In the second quarter of 2014, the Company executed various contractual agreements to fulfill the proposed Emissions Reduction and Capacity Replacement Plan, which are subject to PUCN approval. The PUCN has scheduled a hearing on the application beginning in September 2014 and an order is expected in the fourth quarter of 2014.

In October 2011, the Company received a request for information from the Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act requesting current and historical operations and capital project information for the Company's Reid Gardner Generating Station located near Moapa, Nevada. The Environmental Protection Agency'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 Environmental Protection Agency relating to the plant. The Company completed its responses to the Environmental Protection Agency during the first quarter of 2012 and will continue to monitor developments relating to this Section 114 request. At this time, the Company cannot predict the impact, if any, associated with this information request.

The Company is party to a variety of legal actions arising out of the normal course of business. Plaintiffs occasionally seek punitive or exemplary damages. The Company does not believe that such normal and routine litigation will have a material impact on its consolidated financial results. The Company is also involved in other kinds of legal actions, some of which assert or may assert claims or seek to impose fines, penalties and other costs in substantial amounts and are described below.

In 2006, November 2005 Land Investors, LLC ("NLI") purchased from the United States through the Bureau of Land Management 2,675 acres of land located in North Las Vegas, Nevada. A small portion of the land is traversed by a 500 kilovolt transmission line owned by the Company and sited pursuant to a pre-existing right-of-way grant from the Bureau of Land Management. Subsequent to NLI's purchase, a dispute arose as to whether the Company owed rent and, if it did, the amount owed to NLI under the right-of-way grant. NLI eventually "terminated" the right-of-way grant and brought claims against the Company for breach of contract, inverse condemnation and trespass. The Company counterclaimed for express condemnation of a perpetual easement over the right-of-way corridor. The matter proceeded to trial in the Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County, Nevada ("Eighth District Court"). In September 2013, the Eighth District Court awarded NLI $1 million for unpaid rent and $5 million for inverse condemnation, plus interest and attorneys' fees, bringing the total judgment to $12 million. The Eighth District Court also found the Company was entitled to judgment in its favor on its counterclaim for condemnation of the right-of-way corridor. The Company has posted the required bond of $6 million and has subsequently appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court. Management cannot assess or predict the outcome of the case at this time.

In August 2013, the Sierra Club and Moapa Band of Paiute Indians filed a complaint in federal district court in Nevada against the Company and California Department of Water Resources, alleging that activities at the Reid Gardner Generating Station are causing imminent and substantial harm to the environment and that placement of coal combustion residuals at the on-site landfill constitute "open dumping" in violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The complaint also alleges that the Reid Gardner Generating Station is engaged in the unlawful discharge of pollutants in violation of the Clean Water Act. The notice was issued pursuant to the citizen suit provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Clean Water Act. CDWR was named as a co-defendant in the litigation due to its prior co-ownership in Reid Gardner Generating Station unit 4. The complaint seeks various injunctive remedies, assessment of civil penalties, and reimbursement of plaintiffs' attorney and legal fees and costs. The Company answered the complaint and intends to vigorously defend the suit. Given the stage of the proceeding, management cannot predict the impact to the Company, or estimate the range of loss.

The Company's revenues and operating income are subject to fluctuations during the year due to impacts that seasonal weather, rate changes, and customer usage patterns have on demand for electric energy and resources. The Company is a summer peaking utility experiencing its highest retail energy sales in response to the demand for air conditioning. The variations in energy usage due to varying weather, customer growth and other energy usage patterns, including energy efficiency and conservation measures, necessitates a continual balancing of loads and resources and purchases and sales of energy under short- and long-term energy supply contracts. As a result, the prudent management and optimization of available resources has a direct effect on the operating and financial performance of the Company. Additionally, the timely recovery of purchased power, fuel costs and other costs and the ability to earn a fair return on investments through rates are essential to the operating and financial performance of the Company.

The following is management's discussion and analysis of certain significant factors that have affected the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company during the periods included herein. Explanations include management's best estimate of the impact of weather, customer growth and other factors. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the Company's historical unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 1 of this Form 10-Q. The Company's actual results in the future could differ significantly from the historical results.

As of March 31,June 30, 2014, the Company's total net liquidity was $599$568 million consisting of $99$168 million in cash and cash equivalents and $500$400 million of revolving credit facility availability.

Net cash flows from operating activities for the three-monthsix-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2014 and 2013 were $33$148 million and $37$130 million, respectively. The change was primarily due to reduced refunds to customers for previously over-collected deferred energy costs, increased transmission sales and timing of short-term incentive payments, partially offset by a one-time bill credit paid to retail customers in 2014 associated with the merger between Berkshire Hathaway EnergyBHE and NV Energy, intercompany transactions related to ON Line,increased spending on renewable energy programs and increased rent payments related to the ON Line transmission use agreement, partially offset by reduced refunds to customers for previously over-collected deferred energy costs and an increase in energy rates.agreement.

Net cash flows from investing activities for the three-monthsix-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2014 and 2013 were $(49)$(97) million and $(53)$(107) million, respectively. The change was primarily due to an increase in contributions in aid of construction and customer advances.advances, partially offset by an increase in capital expenditures.

Net cash flows for the three-monthsix-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2014 and 2013 were $(11)$(9) million and $(53)$(82) million, respectively. The change was primarily due to a decrease in dividends, partially offset by $5 million of debt tendered in 2014 as a result of the merger between Berkshire Hathaway EnergyBHE and NV Energy and higher payments for capital and financial lease obligations.payments.

The Company's ability to issue debt is primarily impacted by its financing authority from the PUCN. As of March 31,June 30, 2014, the Company has financing authority from the PUCN consisting of authority to: (1) issue additional long-term debt securities of up to $725 million; (2) refinance up to $423 million of long-term debt securities; and (3) maintain a revolving credit facility of up to $1.3 billion. The Company's revolving credit facility contains a financial maintenance covenant which the Company was in compliance with as of March 31,June 30, 2014. In addition, certain financing agreements contain covenants which are currently suspended as the Company's senior secured debt is rated investment grade. However, if the Company's senior secured debt ratings fall below investment grade by either Moody's Investor Service or Standard & Poor's, the Company would be subject to limitations under these covenants.

The Company has available a variety of sources of liquidity and capital resources, both internal and external, including net cash flows from operating activities, public and private debt offerings, the use of its secured revolving credit facility, capital contributions and other sources. These sources are expected to provide funds required for current operations, capital expenditures, debt retirements and other capital requirements. The availability and terms under which the Company has access to external financing depends on a variety of factors, including the Company's credit ratings, investors' judgment of risk and conditions in the overall capital markets, including the condition of the utility industry.

The Company has significant future capital requirements. Capital expenditure needs are reviewed regularly by management and may change significantly as a result of these reviews, which may consider, among other factors, changes in environmental and other rules and regulations; impacts to customers' rates; outcomes of regulatory proceedings; changes in income tax laws; general business conditions; load projections; system reliability standards; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment and materials; commodity prices; and the cost and availability of capital. Prudently incurred expenditures for compliance-related items, such as pollution-control technologies, replacement generation and associated operating costs are generally incorporated into the Company's regulated retail rates. Expenditures for certain assets may ultimately include acquisitions of existing assets.

Forecasted capital expenditures, which exclude amounts for non-cash equity AFUDC and other non-cash items, are approximately $380$383 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 and are as follows (in millions):

As of March 31,June 30, 2014, there have been no material changes outside the normal course of business in contractual obligations from the information provided in Item 7 of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.

The Company is subject to comprehensive regulation. The discussion below contains material developments to those matters disclosed in Item 7 of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, and new regulatory matters occurring in 2014.

In May 2014, the Company filed the Emissions Reduction Capacity Replacement Plan in compliance with Senate Bill No. 123 ("SB 123") enacted by the 2013 Nevada Legislature. The filing proposed, among other items, the retirement of Reid Gardner Generating Station units 1, 2 and 3 in 2014 and unit 4 in 2017; the elimination of the Company's ownership interest in Navajo Generating Station in 2019; and a plan to replace the generation capacity being retired, as required by SB 123. The Emissions Reduction and Capacity Replacement Plan includes the issuance of requests for proposals for 300 MW of renewable energy to be issued between 2014 and 2016; the acquisition of a 274-MW natural gas co-generating facility in 2014; the acquisition of a 222-MW natural gas peaking facility in 2014; the construction of a 15-MW solar photovoltaic facility expected to be placed in-service in 2015; and the construction of a 200-MW solar photovoltaic facility expected to be placed in-service in 2016. In the second quarter of 2014, the Company executed various contractual agreements to fulfill the proposed Emissions Reduction and Capacity Replacement Plan, which are subject to PUCN approval. The impacts of the Emissions Reduction Capacity Replacement Plan to the Company's 2014 forecasted capital expenditures are included in the Future Uses of Cash previously discussed. The PUCN has scheduled a hearing on the application beginning in September 2014 and an order is expected in the fourth quarter of 2014.

In May 2014, the Company filed a general rate case with the PUCN requesting anPUCN. In July 2014, the Company made its certification filing, which requests incremental annual increaserevenue relief in the amount of $21$38 million or an average price increase of 1%2%. An order is expected by the end of 2014 and, if approved, the new rates would be effective January 1, 2015.

NV Energy has announced plans to join the energy imbalance market ("EIM") in October 2015. The EIM is expected to reduce costs to serve customers through more efficient dispatch of a larger and more diverse pool of resources, more effectively integrate renewables and enhance reliability through improved situational awareness and responsiveness. In today's environment, utilities in the west outside the California Independent System Operator ("California ISO") rely upon a combination of automated and manual dispatch within the hour to balance generation and load to maintain reliable supply and have limited capability to transact within the hour outside their own borders. In contrast, the EIM will optimize and automate five-minute dispatch of generation to serve load across the state and the California ISO footprint. The EIM is voluntary and available to all balancing authorities in the Western United States. Benefits to customers are expected to increase as more entities join and the footprint grows bringing incremental generation and load diversity. In April 2014, the Company filed an application to amend its portfolio optimization procedures contained in the PUCN-approved energy supply plan for the remaining action period of 2015. The PUCN's final order approving the merger between Berkshire Hathaway EnergyBHE and NV Energy stipulated that the Company would obtain PUCN authorization prior to participating in an energy imbalance market.EIM. The amendment reflects the Company's participation in the energy imbalance marketEIM that is being established by the California Independent System Operator. An order on the filing is expected in August 2014. ISO.

The filing requests the PUCN to determine that the amended energy supply plan balances the objectives of minimizing the cost of supply and retail price volatility;volatility, maximizes the reliability of supply over the remaining term of the plan;plan, optimizes the value of the overall supply portfolio of the Company for the benefit of bundled retail customers;customers and does not contain any features or mechanisms that the PUCN finds would impair the restoration or the creditworthiness of the Company. A hearing on the application was held in July 2014, and an order is expected in August 2014. In April 2014 the California ISO filed the Implementation Agreement entered into by the Company and the California ISO. The Implementation Agreement provides the mechanism by which the Company will compensate the California ISO for its share of the costs to upgrade systems, software licenses and other configuration activities. The Implementation Agreement was approved by the FERC in June 2014.

The Company is subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations regarding air and water quality, renewable portfolio standards, emissions performance standards, climate change, coal combustion byproduct disposal, hazardous and solid waste disposal, protected species and other environmental matters that have the potential to impact the Company's current and future operations. In addition to imposing continuing compliance obligations, these laws and regulations provide regulators with the authority to levy substantial penalties for noncompliance including fines, injunctive relief and other sanctions. These laws and regulations are administered by the EPA and various state, local and international agencies. The Company believes it is in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, although many are subject to interpretation that may ultimately be resolved by the courts. Refer to "Liquidity and Capital Resources" for discussion of the Company's forecasted environmental-related capital expenditures. The discussion below contains material developments to those matters disclosed in Item 7 of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.

The Clean Air Act is a federal law administered by the EPA that provides a framework for protecting and improving the nation's air quality and controlling sources of air emissions. The implementation of new standards is generally outlined in State Implementation Plans ("SIPs"), which are a collection of regulations, programs and policies to be followed. SIPs vary by state and are subject to public hearings and EPA approval. Some states may adopt additional or more stringent requirements than those implemented by the EPA.

The Clean Air Mercury Rule ("CAMR"), issued by the EPA in March 2005, was the United States' first attempt to regulate mercury emissions from coal-fueled generating facilities through the use of a market-based cap-and-trade system. The CAMR, which mandated emissions reductions of approximately 70% by 2018, was overturned by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ("D.C. Circuit") in February 2008. In March 2011, the EPA proposed a new rule that would require coal-fueled generating facilities to reduce mercury emissions and other hazardous air pollutants through the establishment of "Maximum Achievable Control Technology" standards rather than a cap-and-trade system. The final rule, Mercury and Air Toxics Standards ("MATS"), was published in the Federal Register in February 2012, with an effective date of April 16, 2012, and requires that new and existing coal-fueled generating facilities achieve emission standards for mercury, acid gases and other non-mercury hazardous air pollutants. Existing sources are required to comply with the new standards by April 16, 2015. Individual sources may be granted up to one additional year, at the discretion of the Title V permitting authority, to complete installation of controls or for transmission system reliability reasons. The Company believes that its emissions reduction projects completed to date or currently permitted or planned for installation, including scrubbers, baghouses and electrostatic precipitators, are consistent with the EPA's MATS and will support the Company's ability to comply with the final rule's standards for acid gases and non-mercury metallic hazardous air pollutants. The Company will be required to take additional actions to reduce mercury emissions through the installation of controls or use of sorbent injection at certain of its coal-fueled generating facilities and otherwise comply with the final rule's standards, which may include retiring certain units.

Incremental costs to install and maintain emissions control equipment at the Company's coal-fueled generating facilities and any requirement to shut down what have traditionally been low cost coal-fueled generating facilities will likely increase the cost of providing service to customers. In addition, numerous lawsuits were filed against the MATS in the D.C. Circuit. In April 2014, the D.C. Circuit upheld the MATS requirements.

The federal Water Pollution Control Act ("Clean Water Act") establishes the framework for maintaining and improving water quality in the United States through a program that regulates, among other things, discharges to and withdrawals from waterways. The Clean Water Act requires that cooling water intake structures reflect the "best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact" to aquatic organisms. In July 2004, the EPA established significant new technology-based performance standards for existing electricity generating facilities that take in more than 50 million gallons of water per day. These rules were aimed at minimizing the adverse environmental impacts of cooling water intake structures by reducing the number of aquatic organisms lost as a result of water withdrawals. In response to a legal challenge to the rule, in January 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ("Second Circuit") remanded almost all aspects of the rule to the EPA, without addressing whether companies with cooling water intake structures were required to comply with these requirements. On appeal from the Second Circuit, in April 2009, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the EPA permissibly relied on a cost-benefit analysis in setting the national performance standards regarding "best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact" at cooling water intake structures and in providing for cost-benefit variances from those standards as part of the §316(b) Clean Water Act Phase II regulations. The United States Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Second Circuit to conduct further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

In June 2013, the EPA published proposed effluent limitation guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating sector. These guidelines, which had not been revised since 1982, were revised in response to the EPA's concerns that the addition of controls for air emissions have changed the effluent discharged from coal- and natural gas-fueled generating facilities. While the EPA expected the final rule to be published in May 2014, the final rule is now scheduled for release by September 30, 2015. It is likely that the new guidelines will impose more stringent limits on wastewater discharges from coal-fueled generating facilities and ash and scrubber ponds. However, until the revised guidelines are finalized, the Company cannot predict the impact on its generating facilities.

Debt of the Company is rated by credit rating agencies. Assigned credit ratings are based on each rating agency's assessment of the Company's ability to, in general, meet the obligations of its issued debt. The credit ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities, and there is no assurance that a particular credit rating will continue for any given period of time.

The Company has no credit rating downgrade triggers that would accelerate the maturity dates of outstanding debt, and a change in ratings is not an event of default under the applicable debt instruments. The Company's secured revolving credit facility does not require the maintenance of a minimum credit rating level in order to draw upon its availability. However, commitment fees and interest rates under the credit facility are tied to credit ratings and increase or decrease when the ratings change. A ratings downgrade could also increase the future cost of commercial paper, short- and long-term debt issuances or new credit facilities.

In accordance with industry practice, certain wholesale agreements, including derivative contracts, contain credit support provisions that in part base certain collateral requirements on credit ratings for unsecured debt as reported by one or more of the three recognized credit rating agencies. These agreements may either specifically provide rights to demand cash or other security in the event of a credit rating downgrade ("credit-risk-related contingent features") or provide the right for counterparties to demand "adequate assurance," in the event of a material adverse change in creditworthiness. These rights can vary by contract and by counterparty. As of March 31,June 30, 2014, credit ratings from the three recognized credit rating agencies were investment grade. If all credit-risk-related contingent features or adequate assurance provisions for these agreements had been triggered as of March 31,June 30, 2014, the Company would have been required to post $56$69 million of additional collateral. The Company's collateral requirements could fluctuate considerably due to market price volatility, changes in credit ratings, changes in legislation or regulation, or other factors. Refer to Note 7 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for a discussion of the Company's collateral requirements specific to the Company's derivative contracts.

For a discussion of new accounting pronouncements affecting the Company, refer to Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 1 of this Form 10-Q.

Certain accounting measurements require management to make estimates and judgments concerning transactions that will be settled several years in the future. Amounts recognized on the Consolidated Financial Statements based on such estimates involve numerous assumptions subject to varying and potentially significant degrees of judgment and uncertainty and will likely change in the future as additional information becomes available. Estimates are used for, but not limited to, the accounting for the effects of certain types of regulation, derivatives, impairment of long-lived assets, income taxes and revenue recognition - unbilled revenue. For additional discussion of the Company's critical accounting estimates, see Item 7 of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013. There have been no significant changes in the Company's assumptions regarding critical accounting estimates since December 31, 2013.

For quantitative and qualitative disclosures about market risk affecting the Company, see Item 7A of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013. The Company's exposure to market risk and its management of such risk has not changed materially since December 31, 2013. Refer to Note 67 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for disclosure of the Company's derivative positions as of March 31,June 30, 2014.

At the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, the Company carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of the Company's management, including the President (principal executive officer) and the Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer), of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) promulgated under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). Based upon that evaluation, the Company's management, including the President (principal executive officer) and the Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer), concluded that the Company's disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the United States Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and forms, and is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Company's President (principal executive officer) and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer), or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. There has been no change in the Company's internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended March 31,June 30, 2014 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting.

None.

There has been no material change to the Company's risk factors from those disclosed in Item 1A of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

None.

The exhibits listed on the accompanying Exhibit Index are filed as part of this Quarterly Report.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.