UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
|
|
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009
OR
|
|
|
|
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the transition period from
to
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission
|
|
Registrant; State of Incorporation;
|
|
IRS Employer
|
|
File Number
|
|
Address; and Telephone Number
|
|
Identification Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-13739
|
|
UNISOURCE ENERGY CORPORATION
|
|
86-0786732
|
|
|
|
(An Arizona Corporation)
|
|
|
|
|
|
One South Church Avenue, Suite 100
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ 85701
|
|
|
|
|
|
(520) 571-4000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-5924
|
|
TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
|
|
86-0062700
|
|
|
|
(An Arizona Corporation)
|
|
|
|
|
|
One South Church Avenue, Suite 100
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ 85701
|
|
|
|
|
|
(520) 571-4000
|
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to
Section 12(b)
of the Exchange Act:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name of Each Exchange
|
|
Registrant
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
on Which Registered
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy
|
|
Common Stock, no par value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Corporation
|
|
|
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to
Section 12(g)
of the Exchange Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of
the Securities Act of 1933.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation
|
|
Yes
þ
|
|
No
o
|
|
Tucson Electric Power Company
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
|
Tucson Electric Power Company
|
|
Yes
þ
|
|
No
o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation
|
|
Yes
þ
|
|
No
o
|
|
Tucson Electric Power Company (1)
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
(1) As indicated above, Tucson Electric Power Company is not required to file reports under the
Exchange Act. However, Tucson Electric Power Company has filed all Exchange Act reports for the
preceding 12 months.
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 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
o
|
|
Tucson Electric Power Company
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
o
|
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is
not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of each registrants knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K
or any amendment to this Form 10-K.
o
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 definition of accelerated filer,
large accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation
|
|
Large Accelerated Filer
þ
|
|
Accelerated Filer
o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer
o
|
|
Smaller Reporting Company
o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tucson Electric Power Company
|
|
Large Accelerated Filer
o
|
|
Accelerated Filer
o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer
þ
|
|
Smaller Reporting Company
o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
|
Tucson Electric Power Company
|
|
Yes
o
|
|
No
þ
|
The aggregate market value of UniSource Energy Corporation voting Common Stock held by
non-affiliates of the registrant was $933,280,480 based on the last reported sale price thereof on
the consolidated tape on June 30, 2009.
At February 23, 2010, 35,941,414 shares of UniSource Energy Corporation Common Stock, no par value
(the only class of Common Stock), were outstanding.
At February 23, 2010, 32,139,434 shares of Tucson Electric Power Companys common stock, no par
value, were outstanding, all of which were held by UniSource Energy Corporation.
Tucson Electric Power Company meets the conditions set forth in General Instructions (I)(1)(a) and
(b) on
Form 10-K
and is therefore filing this report with the reduced disclosure format.
Documents incorporated by reference: Specified portions of UniSource Energy Corporations Proxy
Statement relating to the 2010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into
Part III.
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
v
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART I
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART II
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
ii
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
iii
DEFINITIONS
The abbreviations and acronyms used in the 2009 Form 10-K are defined below:
|
|
|
|
|
1992 Mortgage
|
|
TEPs Indenture of Mortgage and Deed of Trust, dated as of December 1, 1992,
to the Bank of New York Mellon, successor trustee, as supplemented.
|
|
1999 Settlement Agreement
|
|
TEPs Settlement Agreement approved by the ACC in November 1999 that
provided for electric retail competition and transition asset recovery.
|
|
2008 TEP Rate Order
|
|
A rate order issued by the ACC resulting in a new retail rate structure for TEP,
effective December 1, 2008.
|
|
ACC
|
|
Arizona Corporation Commission.
|
|
ALJ
|
|
Administrative Law Judge.
|
|
AMT
|
|
Alternative Minimum Tax.
|
|
APS
|
|
Arizona Public Service Company.
|
|
BART
|
|
Best Available Retrofit Technology.
|
|
BMGS
|
|
Black Mountain Generating Station.
|
|
Btu
|
|
British thermal unit(s).
|
|
CCB
|
|
Coal combustion byproducts.
|
|
Capacity
|
|
The ability to produce power; the most power a unit can produce or the
maximum that can be taken under a contract; measured in MWs.
|
|
Citizens
|
|
Citizens Communications Company.
|
|
Collateral Trust Bonds
|
|
Bonds issued under the Indenture of Trust, dated as of August 1, 1998, of TEP
to The Bank of New York, successor
trustee.
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
UniSource Energys common stock, without par value.
|
|
Company or UniSource Energy
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation.
|
|
Cooling Degree Days
|
|
An index used to measure the impact of weather on energy usage
calculated by subtracting 75 from the average of the high and low
daily temperatures.
|
|
DSM
|
|
Demand side management.
|
|
Emission Allowance(s)
|
|
An allowance issued by the Environmental Protection Agency which
permits emission of one ton of sulfur dioxide or one ton of nitrogen
oxide. These allowances can be bought and sold.
|
|
Energy
|
|
The amount of power produced over a given period of time; measured
in MWh.
|
|
EPA
|
|
The Environmental Protection Agency.
|
|
EL Paso
|
|
El Paso Electric Company.
|
|
EPNG
|
|
El Paso Natural Gas Company.
|
|
ESP
|
|
Energy Service Provider.
|
|
Express Line
|
|
A dedicated 345-kV transmission line from Springerville Unit 2 to TEPs retail
service area.
|
|
FERC
|
|
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
|
|
Fixed CTC
|
|
Competition Transition Charge of approximately $0.009 per kWh that was
included in TEPs retail rate for the purpose of recovering TEPs TRA.
Approximately $58 million will be credited to customers through the
PPFAC.
|
|
Four Corners
|
|
Four Corners Generating Station.
|
|
GHG
|
|
Greenhouse gases.
|
|
Haddington
|
|
Haddington Energy Partners II, LP, a limited partnership that funds
energy-related investments.
|
|
Heating Degree Days
|
|
An index used to measure the impact of weather on energy usage
calculated by subtracting the average of the high and low daily
temperatures from 65.
|
|
IDBs
|
|
Industrial development revenue or pollution control revenue bonds.
|
|
IRS
|
|
Internal Revenue Service.
|
|
kWh
|
|
Kilowatt-hour(s).
|
|
kV
|
|
Kilovolt(s).
|
|
LIBOR
|
|
London Interbank Offered Rate.
|
v
|
|
|
|
|
Luna
|
|
Luna Energy Facility.
|
|
Mark-to-Market Adjustments
|
|
Forward energy sales and purchase contracts that are considered to be
derivatives are adjusted monthly by recording unrealized gains and losses
to reflect the market prices at the end of each month.
|
|
Millennium
|
|
Millennium Energy Holdings, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of
UniSource Energy.
|
|
MMBtu
|
|
Million British Thermal Units.
|
|
Mortgage Bonds
|
|
Bonds issued under the 1992 Mortgage.
|
|
MW
|
|
Megawatt(s).
|
|
MWh
|
|
Megawatt-hour(s).
|
|
Navajo
|
|
Navajo Generating Station.
|
|
NERC
|
|
North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
|
|
NO
x
|
|
Nitrogen oxide.
|
|
PGA
|
|
Purchased Gas Adjuster, a retail rate mechanism designed to recover
the cost of gas purchased for retail gas customers.
|
|
Pima Authority
|
|
The Industrial Development Authority of the County of Pima.
|
|
PNM
|
|
Public Service Company of New Mexico.
|
|
PNMR
|
|
PNM Resources.
|
|
PPA
|
|
Purchased Power Agreement.
|
|
PPFAC
|
|
Purchased Power and Fuel Adjustment Clause.
|
|
PWMT
|
|
Pinnacle West Marketing and Trading.
|
|
REST
|
|
Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff rules approved by the ACC in October
2006.
|
|
Repurchased Bonds
|
|
$221 million of fixed-rate tax-exempt bonds that TEP purchased from
bondholders on May 11, 2005.
|
|
Rules
|
|
Retail Electric Competition Rules.
|
|
Sabinas
|
|
Carboelectrica Sabinas, S. de R.L. de C.V., a Mexican limited liability
company. Prior to June 2009, Millennium owned 50% of Sabinas.
|
|
San Carlos
|
|
San Carlos Resources Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of TEP.
|
|
San Juan
|
|
San Juan Generating Station.
|
|
SO
2
|
|
Sulfur dioxide.
|
|
Springerville
|
|
Springerville Generating Station.
|
|
Springerville Coal Handling Facilities Leases
|
|
Leveraged lease arrangements relating to the coal handling facilities
serving Springerville.
|
|
Springerville Common Facilities
|
|
Facilities at Springerville used in common with Springerville Unit 1 and
Springerville Unit 2.
|
|
Springerville Common Facilities Leases
|
|
Leveraged lease arrangements relating to an undivided one-half
interest in certain Springerville Common Facilities.
|
|
Springerville Unit 1
|
|
Unit 1 of the Springerville Generating Station.
|
|
Springerville Unit 1 Leases
|
|
Leveraged lease arrangement relating to Springerville Unit 1 and an
undivided one-half interest in certain Springerville Common Facilities.
|
|
Springerville Unit 2
|
|
Unit 2 of the Springerville Generating Station.
|
|
Springerville Unit 3
|
|
Unit 3 of the Springerville Generating Station.
|
|
Springerville Unit 4
|
|
Unit 4 of the Springerville Generating Station.
|
|
SRP
|
|
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District.
|
|
Sundt
|
|
H. Wilson Sundt Generating Station (formerly known as the Irvington
Generating Station).
|
|
Sundt Lease
|
|
The leveraged lease arrangement relating to Sundt Unit 4.
|
|
Sundt Unit 4
|
|
Unit 4 of the H. Wilson Sundt Generating Station.
|
|
SWG
|
|
Southwest Gas Corporation.
|
|
TEP
|
|
Tucson Electric Power Company, the principal subsidiary of UniSource
Energy.
|
|
TEP Credit Agreement
|
|
Amended and Restated Credit Agreement between TEP and a syndicate of
Banks, dated as of August 11, 2006.
|
|
TEP Letter of Credit Facility
|
|
Letter of credit facility between TEP and a syndicate of Banks, dated as of April
30, 2008.
|
|
TEP Revolving Credit Facility
|
|
Revolving credit facility under the TEP Credit Agreement.
|
vi
|
|
|
|
|
Therm
|
|
A unit of heating value equivalent to 100,000 British thermal units (Btu).
|
|
TRA
|
|
Transition Recovery Asset, a $450 million regulatory asset established in TEPs 1999
Settlement Agreement that was fully recovered in May 2008.
|
|
Tri-State
|
|
Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association.
|
|
UED
|
|
UniSource Energy Development Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary
of UniSource Energy, which engages in developing generation
resources and other project development services and related
activities.
|
|
UES
|
|
UniSource Energy Services, Inc., an intermediate holding company
established to own the operating companies (UNS Gas and UNS
Electric) which acquired the Citizens Arizona gas and electric
utility assets in 2003.
|
|
UniSource Energy Credit Agreement
|
|
Amended and Restated Credit Agreement between UniSource Energy and
a syndicate of banks, dated as of August 11, 2006.
|
|
UniSource Energy
|
|
UniSource Energy Corporation.
|
|
UNS Electric
|
|
UNS Electric, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of UES, which acquired
the Citizens Arizona electric utility assets in 2003.
|
|
UNS Gas
|
|
UNS Gas, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of UES, which acquired the
Citizens Arizona gas utility assets in 2003.
|
|
UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver
|
|
Revolving credit facility under the Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement among UNS Gas and UNS Electric as borrowers, and UES as
guarantor, and a syndicate of banks, dated as of August 11, 2006.
|
|
Valencia
|
|
Valencia power plant owned by UNS Electric.
|
|
WAPA
|
|
Western Area Power Administration.
|
vii
PART I
This combined Form 10-K is being filed separately by UniSource Energy Corporation and Tucson
Electric Power Company (collectively, the Registrants). Information contained herein relating to
any individual registrant is filed by such registrant on its own behalf. TEP does not make any
representation as to information relating to any other subsidiary of UniSource Energy.
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements as defined by the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You should read forward-looking statements together with
the cautionary statements and important factors included in this Form 10-K. (See
Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Safe Harbor
for Forward-Looking Statements
). Forward-looking statements include statements concerning plans,
objectives, goals, strategies, future events or performance and underlying assumptions.
Forward-looking statements are not statements of historical facts. Forward-looking statements may
be identified by the use of words such as anticipates, estimates, expects, intends,
plans, predicts, projects, and similar expressions. We express our expectations, beliefs and
projections in good faith and believe them to have a reasonable basis. However, we make no
assurances that managements expectations, beliefs or projections will be achieved or accomplished.
In addition, UniSource Energy and TEP disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking
statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this report.
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
OVERVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED BUSINESS
UniSource Energy is a holding company that has no significant operations of its own. Operations
are conducted by UniSource Energys subsidiaries, each of which is a separate legal entity with its
own assets and liabilities. UniSource Energy owns the outstanding common stock of TEP, UniSource
Energy Services, Inc. (UES), UniSource Energy Development Company (UED) and Millennium Energy
Holdings, Inc. (Millennium). We conduct our business in three primary business segments TEP,
UNS Gas and UNS Electric.
TEP, an electric utility, provides electric service to the community of Tucson, Arizona. UES,
through its two operating subsidiaries, UNS Gas, Inc. (UNS Gas) and UNS Electric, Inc. (UNS
Electric), provides gas and electric service to 30 communities in Northern and Southern Arizona.
UED developed and owns the Black Mountain Generating Station (BMGS), a natural gas-fired combustion
turbine in Northern Arizona that, through a power sales agreement, provides energy to UNS Electric.
Millennium has existing investments in unregulated businesses that represent 1% of UniSource
Energys total assets as of December 31, 2009; no new investments are planned in Millennium.
UniSource Energy was incorporated in the State of Arizona in 1995 and obtained regulatory approval
to form a holding company in 1997. In 1998, TEP and UniSource Energy exchanged shares of stock
resulting in TEP becoming a subsidiary of UniSource Energy.
K-1
BUSINESS SEGMENT CONTRIBUTIONS
The table below shows the contributions to our consolidated after-tax earnings by our three
business segments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
$
|
89
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
53
|
|
|
UNS Gas
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
UNS Electric
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
Other
(1)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Net Income
|
|
$
|
104
|
|
|
$
|
14
|
|
|
$
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Includes: UniSource Energy parent company expenses; income and losses from
Millennium investments and UED and interest expense (net of tax) on the UniSource Energy
Convertible Senior Notes and on the UniSource Energy Credit Agreement.
|
References in this report to we and our are to UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries,
collectively.
Rates and Regulation of Business Segments
The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) regulates portions of TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electrics
utility accounting practices and electricity rates. The ACC has authority over rates charged to
retail customers, the issuance of securities, and transactions with affiliated parties. Our
regulated utilities rates for retail electric and natural gas service are determined on a cost of
service basis. Rates are designed to provide, after recovery of allowable operating expenses, an
opportunity for us to earn a reasonable return on rate base. Rate base is generally determined by
reference to the original cost and reconstruction (net of depreciation) of utility plant in service
to the extent deemed used and useful, and to various adjustments for deferred taxes and other items
plus a working capital component. Over time, additions to utility plant in service increase rate
base and depreciation and retirement of utility plant reduce the rate base.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates the terms and prices of transmission
services and wholesale electricity sales, wholesale transport and purchases of natural gas and
portions of our accounting practices. TEP and UNS Electric have FERC tariffs to sell power at
market based rates.
TEP
TEP was incorporated in the State of Arizona in 1963. TEP is the principal operating subsidiary of
UniSource Energy. In 2009, TEPs electric utility operations contributed 79% of UniSource Energys
operating revenues and comprised 81% of its assets.
SERVICE AREA AND CUSTOMERS
TEP is a vertically integrated utility that provides regulated electric service to approximately
402,000 retail customers in Southeastern Arizona. TEPs service territory consists of a 1,155
square mile area and includes a population of approximately 1 million in the greater Tucson
metropolitan area in Pima County, as well as parts of Cochise County. TEP holds franchises to
provide electric distribution service to customers in the Cities of Tucson and South Tucson. These
franchises expire in 2026 and 2017, respectively. TEP also sells electricity to other utilities
and power marketing entities in the Western U.S.
Retail Customers
TEP provides electric utility service to a diverse group of residential, commercial, industrial,
and public sector customers. Major industries served include copper mining, cement manufacturing,
defense, health care, education, military bases and other governmental entities. TEPs retail
sales are influenced by several factors, including seasonal weather patterns and overall economic
climate.
K-2
The table below shows the percentage distribution of TEPs energy sales by major customer
class over the last three years. The retail energy consumption by customer class through 2012 is
expected to be similar to the historical distribution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
42
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
|
|
42
|
%
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
21
|
%
|
|
|
21
|
%
|
|
|
21
|
%
|
|
Non-mining Industrial
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
Public Authority
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
Two of TEPs largest retail customers are in the copper mining industry. TEPs kWh sales to mining
customers depend on a variety of factors including changes in supply and demand in the world copper
market and the economics of self-generation.
Local, regional, and national economic factors can impact the level of customer growth and the
financial condition and operations of TEPs large commercial and industrial customers and as a
result directly impact energy consumption. Economic conditions can also impact sales to
residential and small commercial customers if employment and consumer spending levels change.
As a result of weak economic conditions during 2008 and 2009, retail customer growth and energy
usage by retail customers at TEP were below the average levels experienced in prior years. In 2008
and 2009, TEPs average number of retail customers increased by less than 1% per year. This
compares with average annual increases of 2% from 2003 to 2007.
TEPs total retail kWh sales decreased by 1.4% in 2008 compared with 2007. This was the first
year-over-year decrease in TEPs retail kWh sales since 2002. In 2009, TEPs kWh sales once again
declined by 1.4% over the prior years levels. This compares with average annual increases in
retail kWh sales of 4% from 2003 to 2007. We cannot predict if the customer growth rate or sales
volumes will return to historic levels. However, we expect TEPs customer base to grow at a rate
of less than 1% in 2010 and approximately 1% in 2011.
Energy Service Providers
In 2001, all of TEPs retail customers became eligible to choose an alternative energy service
provider (ESP); however, none of TEPs retail customers are currently being serviced by an
alternative ESP. See
Rates and Regulation,
below for more information regarding the status of
retail competition in Arizona.
Wholesale Business
TEPs electric utility operations include the wholesale marketing of electricity to other utilities
and power marketers. Wholesale sales transactions are made on both a firm and interruptible basis.
A firm contract requires TEP to supply power on demand (except under limited emergency
circumstances), while an interruptible contract allows TEP to stop supplying power under defined
conditions. See
Purchases and Interconnections
, below.
Generally, TEP commits to future sales based on expected excess generating capability, forward
prices and generation costs, using a diversified portfolio approach to provide a balance between
long-term, mid-term and spot energy sales. When TEP expects to have excess generating capacity and
energy (usually in the first, second and fourth calendar quarters), its wholesale sales consist
primarily of two types of sales:
Long-term sales
Long-term wholesale sales contracts are for periods of more than one year. TEP typically uses its
own generation to serve the requirements of its long-term wholesale customers. TEP currently has
long-term contracts with three entities to sell firm capacity and energy:
|
|
|
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP), 100 MW, expires in
May 2016. Under the current terms of the contract, TEP receives an annual demand charge of
approximately $22 million, while the cost of the energy sold is based on TEPs average
generation cost. Beginning in June 2011, SRP will purchase 876 MWhs annually, TEP will not
receive a demand charge and the price of energy will be based on a slight discount to the Dow
Jones Palo Verde Electricity Price Indexes (Palo Verde Index).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navajo Tribal Utility Authority (NTUA) expires in December 2015. TEP serves the portion of
NTUAs load that is not served from NTUAs allocation of federal hydroelectric power. Over
the last three years, sales to NTUA
averaged 225 MWh. Beginning in 2010, the price of 50% of the kWh sales from June to September
will be based on the Palo Verde Index.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tohono Oodham Utility Authority, 2 MW, expires in 2014.
|
K-3
Short-term sales
Under forward contracts, TEP commits to sell a specified amount of capacity or energy at a
specified price over a given period of time, typically for one-month, three-month or one-year
periods. Under short-term sales, TEP sells energy in the daily or hourly markets at fluctuating
spot market prices and makes other non-firm energy sales. Beginning January 1, 2009, all revenues
from short-term wholesale sales offset fuel and purchased power costs that are passed through to
TEP retail customers. TEP uses short-term wholesale sales as part of its hedging strategy to
reduce customer exposure to fluctuating power prices. See
Rates and Regulation,
below.
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, Tucson Electric Power Company, Factors Affecting Results of Operations,
for additional
discussion of TEPs wholesale marketing activities.
GENERATING AND OTHER RESOURCES
At December 31, 2009, TEP owned or leased 2,229 MW of net generating capability, as set forth in
the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Fuel
|
|
|
Capability
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
TEPs Share
|
|
|
Generating Source
|
|
No.
|
|
|
Location
|
|
|
In Service
|
|
|
Type
|
|
|
MW
|
|
|
Agent
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
MW
|
|
|
Springerville Station
(1)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
Springerville, AZ
|
|
|
1985
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
387
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
387
|
|
|
Springerville Station
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Springerville, AZ
|
|
|
1990
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
390
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
390
|
|
|
San Juan Station
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
Farmington, NM
|
|
|
1976
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
340
|
|
|
PNM
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
San Juan Station
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Farmington, NM
|
|
|
1973
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
340
|
|
|
PNM
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
Navajo Station
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
Page, AZ
|
|
|
1974
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
SRP
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Navajo Station
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Page, AZ
|
|
|
1975
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
SRP
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Navajo Station
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
Page, AZ
|
|
|
1976
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
SRP
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Four Corners Station
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
Farmington, NM
|
|
|
1969
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
784
|
|
|
APS
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Four Corners Station
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
Farmington, NM
|
|
|
1970
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
784
|
|
|
APS
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Luna Energy Facility
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
Deming, NM
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Gas
|
|
|
570
|
|
|
PNM
|
|
|
33.3
|
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
Sundt Station
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
1958
|
|
|
Gas/Oil
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
Sundt Station
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
1960
|
|
|
Gas/Oil
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
Sundt Station
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
1962
|
|
|
Gas/Oil
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
Sundt Station
(1)
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
1967
|
|
|
Coal/Gas
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
DeMoss Petrie
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
1972
|
|
|
Gas/Oil
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
North Loop
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
Gas
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
Springerville Solar Station
|
|
|
|
|
|
Springerville/Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
2002-2005
|
|
|
Solar
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total TEP Capacity
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,229
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Leased assets, as of December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Excludes 781MW of additional resources, which consist of certain capacity
purchases and interruptible retail load. At December 31, 2009, total owned capacity was 1,686 MW
and leased capacity was 543 MW.
|
Springerville Generating Station
Springerville Unit 1 is leased by TEP. The Springerville Generating Station also includes the
Springerville Coal Handling Facilities and the Springerville Common Facilities.
The terms of the Springerville Unit 1 Leases, which include a 50% interest in the Springerville
Common Facilities, expire in 2015, but have optional fair market value renewal and purchase
provisions. In 1985, TEP sold and leased back a 50% interest in the Springerville Common
Facilities. The Springerville Common Facilities Leases, which expire in 2017 and 2021, have a
fixed price purchase provision. The fixed prices to acquire the leased interests in the
Springerville Common Facilities are $38 million in 2017 and $68 million in 2021. In 1984, TEP sold
and leased back the Springerville Coal Handling Facilities. The terms of the Springerville Coal
Handling Facilities Leases expire in 2015, but have a fixed price purchase provision of $120
million.
K-4
Since entering into the Springerville leases, TEP has purchased a 14% equity ownership interest in
the Springerville Unit 1 Leases and a 13% equity ownership interest in the Springerville Coal
Handling Facilities Leases.
Sundt Generating Station
The Sundt Generating Station and the internal combustion turbines located in Tucson are designated
as must-run generation facilities. Must-run generation units are required to run in certain
circumstances to maintain distribution system reliability and to meet local load requirements.
Sundt Unit 4 is leased by TEP and the term of the lease expires in 2011. In January 2010, TEP
entered into an agreement to purchase 100% of the equity interest in Sundt Unit 4 from the equity
owner for approximately $52 million. The purchase price is subject to increase by 0.75% of the
purchase price per month in the event that the purchase occurs after March 31, 2010. TEP expects
the purchase to occur prior to March 31, 2010. Following the completion of the transaction, TEP
expects to redeem the outstanding Sundt Unit 4 lease obligation of $5 million, terminate the lease and
cause the title of Sundt Unit 4 to be transferred to TEP.
See
Note 6 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Debt, Credit Facilities, and Capital
Lease Obligations,
and
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations, Tucson Electric Power Company, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Contractual
Obligations
, for more information regarding the Springerville and Sundt leases.
Renewable Energy Resources
Owned Resources
The Springerville Solar Generating Station includes 34,980 photovoltaic (PV) modules located near
TEPs coal-fired Springerville Generating Station in eastern Arizona. TEP began building the
system in 2000 and continued to expand it for several years until its capacity reached 4.6
megawatts in 2004. A proposal to expand its capacity to 6.4 MW in 2010 is pending before the ACC.
TEP also has proposed a 1.6 MW PV installation in Tucson, Arizona. If approved by the ACC, the
project is expected to be completed in the second half of 2010.
Purchased Power Agreements
In September 2009, TEP filed two 20 year purchased power agreements with the ACC in order to meet
the requirements of the ACCs Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST). The first agreement
would provide TEP with 25 MW of energy from a single axis tracking PV installation. The second
agreement would provide TEP with 5 MW of energy from a parabolic trough concentrating solar
facility. Each agreement contains an option that would allow TEP to purchase all or part of the
project at a future period. TEP cannot predict when or if the ACC will approve the agreements.
See
Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff,
below for more information.
Purchases and Interconnections
TEP purchases power from other utilities and power marketers. TEP may enter into contracts: (a) to
purchase energy under long-term contracts to serve retail load and long-term wholesale contracts,
(b) to purchase capacity or energy during periods of planned outages or for peak summer load
conditions, and (c) to purchase energy for resale to certain wholesale customers under load and
resource management agreements.
TEP typically uses generation from its gas-fired units supplemented by purchased power to meet the
summer peak demands of its retail customers. Some of these purchased power contracts are price
indexed to natural gas prices. Due to its increasing seasonal gas and purchased power usage, TEP
hedges a portion of its total natural gas exposure from plant fuel and gas-indexed purchased power
with fixed price contracts for a maximum of three years. TEP also purchases energy in the daily
and hourly markets to meet higher than anticipated demands, to cover unplanned generation outages,
or when it is more economical than generating its own energy.
K-5
TEP is a member of various regional reserve sharing, reliability and power sharing organizations.
These relationships allow TEP to call upon other utilities during emergencies, such as plant
outages and system disturbances, and reduce the amount of reserves TEP is required to carry.
As a result of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, owners and operators of bulk power transmission
systems, including TEP, are subject to mandatory reliability standards that are developed and
enforced by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) subject to the oversight of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). TEP is reviewing its operating policies and
procedures to ensure continued compliance with these standards.
Springerville Units 3 and 4
Springerville Units 3 and 4 are each 400 MW coal-fired generating facilities located at the same
site as Springerville Units 1 and 2 that are operated, but not owned by TEP. Tri-State is leasing
100% of Unit 3 from a financial owner. Unit 4 began commercial operation in December 2009 and is
owned by SRP. For operating Units 3 and 4, TEP receives rental payments and other fees, including
the allocation of a portion of the fixed costs of the existing common facilities to Units 3 and 4.
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations. Tucson Electric Power Company, Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Springerville
Units 3 and 4
.
Peak Demand and Resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peak Demand
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-MW-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail Customers
|
|
|
2,354
|
|
|
|
2,376
|
|
|
|
2,386
|
|
|
|
2,365
|
|
|
|
2,225
|
|
|
Firm Sales to Other Utilities
|
|
|
385
|
|
|
|
394
|
|
|
|
369
|
|
|
|
331
|
|
|
|
342
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coincident Peak Demand (A)
|
|
|
2,739
|
|
|
|
2,770
|
|
|
|
2,755
|
|
|
|
2,696
|
|
|
|
2,567
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Generating Resources
|
|
|
2,229
|
|
|
|
2,204
|
|
|
|
2,204
|
|
|
|
2,194
|
|
|
|
2,004
|
|
|
Other Resources
(1)
|
|
|
781
|
|
|
|
966
|
|
|
|
785
|
|
|
|
719
|
|
|
|
788
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total TEP Resources (B)
|
|
|
3,010
|
|
|
|
3,170
|
|
|
|
2,989
|
|
|
|
2,913
|
|
|
|
2,792
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Margin (B) (A)
|
|
|
271
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
234
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
Reserve Margin (% of Coincident Peak Demand)
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Other Resources include firm power purchases and interruptible retail and wholesale
loads. Additional firm power purchases were made in 2009 to displace more expensive owned gas
generation.
|
Peak demand occurs during the summer months due to the cooling requirements of TEPs retail
customers. Retail peak demand varies from year-to-year due to weather, economic conditions and
other factors. TEPs retail demand peaked in 2007 and subsequently declined in 2008 and 2009 due
primarily to weak economic conditions.
The chart above shows the relationship over a five-year period between TEPs peak demand and its
energy resources. TEPs total margin is the difference between total energy resources and
coincident peak demand, and the reserve margin is the ratio of margin to coincident peak demand.
TEPs reserve margin in 2009 was in compliance with reliability criteria set forth by the Western
Electricity Coordinating Council, a regional council of NERC.
Forecasted retail peak demand for 2010 is approximately 2,284 MW, compared with actual peak demand
of 2,354 MW in 2009. In 2009, cooling degree days were 13% above the ten year average. TEPs 2010
estimated retail peak demand is based on normal weather patterns and total retail kWh sales similar
to 2009 levels. TEP believes it will have sufficient resources to meet expected demand in 2010
with its existing generation capacity and power purchase agreements.
Future Generating Resources
TEP will continue to add peaking resources to serve the Tucson area as needed based upon our
forecasts of retail and firm wholesale load, as well as statewide transmission infrastructure. TEP
projects that additional import capacity and/or additional local generation resources of 75 to 150
MW may be required in 2015.
K-6
FUEL SUPPLY
Fuel Summary
Fuel cost and usage information is provided below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Cost per MMBtu
|
|
|
Percentage of Total Btu
|
|
|
|
|
Consumed
|
|
|
Consumed
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
$
|
2.11
|
|
|
$
|
2.08
|
|
|
$
|
1.81
|
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
|
|
93
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
Gas
|
|
$
|
4.51
|
|
|
$
|
8.02
|
|
|
$
|
8.30
|
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
All Fuels
|
|
$
|
2.34
|
|
|
$
|
2.52
|
|
|
$
|
2.30
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
Coal
TEPs principal fuel for electric generation is low-sulfur, bituminous or sub-bituminous coal from
mines in Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado. More than 90% of TEPs coal supply is purchased under
long-term contracts, which results in more predictable prices. The average cost per ton of coal,
including transportation, for 2009, 2008, and 2007 was $39.81, $39.67, and $34.71, respectively
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
|
|
|
Sulfur
|
|
|
|
|
Station
|
|
Coal Supplier
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
Content
|
|
|
Coal Obtained From (A)
|
|
Springerville
|
|
Peabody Coalsales Company
|
|
|
2020
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
|
Lee Ranch Coal Company
|
|
Four Corners
|
|
BHP Billiton
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
|
Navajo Indian Tribe
|
|
San Juan
|
|
San Juan Coal Company
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
|
Federal and State Agencies
|
|
Navajo
|
|
Peabody Coalsales Company
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
%
|
|
Navajo and Hopi Indian Tribes
|
|
Sundt
|
|
Rio Tinto Energy America
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colowyo Mine / McKinley Mine
|
|
|
|
/ Chevron Mining Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(A)
|
|
Substantially all of the suppliers mining leases extend at least as long as coal is being
mined in economic quantities.
|
TEP Operated Generating Facilities
TEP is the operator, and the sole owner (or lessee), of the Springerville Units 1 and 2 and Sundt
Unit 4 Generating Stations. The coal supplies for the Springerville Units 1 and 2 are transported
approximately 200 miles by railroad from Northwestern New Mexico. TEP expects coal reserves to be
sufficient to supply the estimated requirements for Springerville Units 1 and 2 for their presently
estimated remaining lives.
The coal supplies for Sundt are transported approximately 1,300 miles by railroad from Colorado and
approximately 500 miles from New Mexico. In the past, Sundt Unit 4 has been fueled by coal;
however, the generating station can also be operated with natural gas or landfill gas. Both fuels
are combined with methane, a renewable energy resource, piped from a nearby landfill. From January
through October 2009, TEP used natural gas to fuel Sundt Unit 4. TEP hedged the price of natural
gas such that it became more economic to use natural gas instead of coal to fuel the plant. TEP
had agreements for the purchase and transportation of coal to Sundt through 2009 and has adequate
coal inventory through 2010. TEP will continue to analyze natural gas prices to determine the fuel
it will use to run Sundt Unit 4.
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, UniSource Energy Consolidated, Contractual Obligations
and
Note 4 of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements Commitments and Contingencies, TEP Commitments, Firm Purchase
and Transportation Commitments.
K-7
Generating Facilities Operated by Others
TEP also participates in jointly-owned generating facilities at Four Corners, Navajo and San Juan.
Four Corners and San Juan, operated by PNM, are mine mouth generating stations located adjacent to
the coal reserves. Navajo, operated by SRP, obtains its coal supply from a nearby coal mine and a
dedicated rail delivery system. The coal supplies are under long-term contracts administered by
the operating agents. TEP expects coal reserves available to these three jointly-owned generating
facilities to be sufficient for the remaining presently estimated lives of the stations.
Natural Gas Supply
TEP typically uses generation from its facilities fueled by natural gas and purchased power, in
addition to energy from its coal-fired facilities, to meet the summer peak demands of its retail
customers and local reliability needs. Some of these purchased power contracts are price indexed
to natural gas prices. Short-term and spot power purchase prices are also closely correlated to
natural gas prices. Due to its increasing seasonal gas and purchased power usage, TEP hedges a
portion of its total natural gas exposure from plant fuel, gas-indexed purchased power and spot
market purchases with fixed price contracts for a maximum of three years.
TEP purchases gas from Southwest Gas Corporation (SWG) under a retail tariff for North Loop, a 95
MW internal combustion turbine located in Tucson, Arizona, and receives distribution service under
a transportation agreement for DeMoss Petrie, a 122 MW internal combustion turbine located in
Tucson, Arizona. TEP completed a bypass of SWG and connected the Sundt plant directly to El Paso
Natural Gas Company (ENPG) in the first quarter of 2008. TEP purchases capacity from EPNG for
transportation from the San Juan and Permian Basins to its Sundt plant under a contract that
expires in April 2013, with right-of-first refusal for continuation thereafter. TEP buys gas from
third party suppliers for Sundt and DeMoss Petrie.
TEP purchases gas transportation for Luna from EPNG from the Permian Basin to the plant site under
an agreement that expires in January 2012, with right-of-first refusal for continuation thereafter.
TEP purchases gas for its share of Luna from various suppliers in the Permian Basin region.
WATER SUPPLY
The Four Corners region of New Mexico, where the San Juan and Four Corners Generating Stations (San
Juan and Four Corners) are located, experiences drought conditions periodically that could affect
the water supply for these plants. The operating agents for San Juan and Four Corners have
negotiated supplemental water contracts with BHP Billiton and the Jicarilla Apache Nation to assist
the generating plants in meeting their water requirements in the event of a shortage.
Drought conditions within the Southwestern United States, combined with increased water usage in
Arizona, Nevada and Southern California, have periodically caused water levels to recede at Lake
Powell, which supplies operating water for the Navajo Generating Station (Navajo). TEP has a 7.5%
ownership interest in Navajo Units 1, 2 and 3 (168 MW capacity). A project was completed in
December 2009, which lowered the water intake structures to ensure adequate water supply at Navajo
in the event drought conditions adversely affect the water level at Lake Powell.
TRANSMISSION ACCESS
TEP has transmission access and power transaction arrangements with over 120 electric systems or
suppliers. TEP is taking steps to increase the capacity and reliability of its transmission and
distribution system. TEP also has various ongoing projects that are designed to increase access to
the regional wholesale energy market and improve the reliability and efficiency of its existing
transmission and distribution systems.
In 2008, TEP completed construction of a new 500 kV transmission line from the Palo Verde regional
market hub to the Pinal West substation along with a new 345 kV TEP substation at Pinal West
connecting to TEPs 345kV transmission line between Phoenix and Tucson. These projects provide TEP
with additional access to energy resources.
K-8
TEP is participating in the continuation of the 500 kV transmission line from the Pinal West
substation to the Pinal Central substation. TEP is also in the process of obtaining permits to
construct a 40 mile 500-kV transmission line from the Pinal Central substation to the Tortolita
substation northwest of Tucson to further enhance its ability to access the regions energy
resources. TEP expects the transmission lines to be in-service in 2014. As a result of these high
voltage transmission additions, TEP anticipates that its ability to import energy into its service
territory should increase by at least 250 MW.
Tucson to Nogales Transmission Line
TEP and UNS Electric are parties to a project development agreement initiated in 2000 for the joint
construction of a 62-mile transmission line from Tucson to Nogales, Arizona. The project was
initiated in response to an order by the ACC to improve reliability to UNS Electrics retail
customers in Nogales, Arizona. Since receiving ACC approval of the location and construction of
the proposed 345-kV transmission line along a specified route, TEP has been working to obtain all
other required permits from state and federal agencies. The Department of Energy completed a Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project accepting any of the routes identified in the
FEIS. The U.S. Forest Service, however, prefers a route that was not approved by the ACC.
Based on the alternative proposals and passage of time since the ACC approved the location of the
line, in 2006 the Line Siting Committee of the ACC was directed to gather facts related to options
for improving service reliability in Nogales, Arizona. TEP continues to evaluate alternatives for
improving service reliability in Nogales, Arizona. In 2007 and 2008, TEP met with major property
owners and impacted governmental agencies along the proposed transmission line routes to discuss
alternatives. If all regulatory approvals are received and the project moves forward, the future
costs to construct the transmission line from Tucson to Nogales, Arizona are expected to be
approximately $120 million. As of December 31, 2009, TEP had capitalized $11 million related to the
project, including $2 million of land and land rights. If TEP does not receive the required
approvals or abandons the project, TEP believes that cost recovery is probable for prudent and
reasonably incurred costs related to the project as a consequence of the ACCs requirement for a
second transmission line serving the Nogales, Arizona area.
TEP met with the Federal Electricity Commission of Mexico (CFE) and other transmission developers
in 2009 to develop a schedule for performing transmission studies to interconnect the proposed
Tucson to Nogales transmission line to a new CFE proposed 400-kV transmission line in Mexico. The
studies are scheduled to be completed in 2010.
RATES AND REGULATION
2008 TEP Rate Order
On November 25, 2008, the ACC issued an order that resolved a rate case filed by TEP in July 2007.
The ACC order included an average base retail rate increase of approximately 6% effective December
1, 2008 and a Purchased Power and Fuel Adjustment Clause (PPFAC) that began January 1, 2009.
Prior to the 2008 TEP Rate Order, TEPs rates had remained unchanged since 2000.
The 2008 TEP Rate Order requires TEP to credit $58 million of previously collected Fixed CTC
true-up revenues to customers through the PPFAC. TEP expects the PPFAC charge to be zero until the
Fixed CTC true-up revenues are fully credited over an estimated period of 36 to 48 months, which
began on April 1, 2009.
For a more detailed description of the terms of the 2008 TEP Rate Order, see
Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Tucson
Electric Power Company
,
Factors Affecting Results of Operations
,
2008 TEP Rate Order
, below.
Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff
The ACCs REST requires TEP and other affected utilities to generate or purchase at least 15% of
their total annual retail energy requirements from renewable energy technologies by 2025, with
smaller amounts required in earlier years. The REST rules provide for recovery of above market
costs a utility incurs in providing the renewable energy. TEP met the 2009 REST rules target of
generating or purchasing renewable energy for at least 2.0% of TEPs total retail energy
requirements; TEP expects to meet the REST rules 2010 target of 2.5%.
K-9
For more information see
Renewable Energy Resources,
above, and
Item 7. Managements Discussion and
Analysis, Tucson Electric Power, Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Renewable Energy Standard
and Tariff.
Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
In December 2009, the ACC established a process to adopt new Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
(EE Standards) designed to require TEP, UNS Electric and other affected utilities to implement
demand-side management (DSM) programs, to the extent that they are cost effective. If the ACC
approves EE Standards, they must be certified by the Arizona Attorney General before taking effect.
TEPs DSM programs and customer surcharge to recover the costs incurred to implement these proposed
programs are subject to ACC approval. See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition
and
Results of Operations
,
TEP, Factors Affecting Results of Operations,
Electric Energy Efficiency Standards,
for more information.
Retail Electric Competition Rules
In 1999, the ACC approved the Retail Electric Competition Rules (Rules) that provided a framework
for the introduction of retail electric competition in Arizona. Certain portions of the ACC rules
that enabled ESPs to compete in the retail market were invalidated by an Arizona Court of Appeals
decision in 2005. In 2008, the ACC opened an administrative proceeding to address the Rules.
Unless and until the ACC clarifies the competition rules and ESPs offer to provide energy in TEPs
service area, it is not possible for TEPs retail customers to use alternative ESPs. We cannot
predict what changes, if any, the ACC will make to the Rules. See
Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Tucson Electric Power
Company, Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Competition,
for more information.
Line Extension Policy
In 2008, the ACC approved a policy requiring TEP to charge customers for the total cost of line
extensions, eliminating TEPs prior practice of providing a portion of line extensions free of
charge to its customers. The policy became effective June 1, 2009. Prior to this ruling by the
ACC, a portion of the cost of line extensions was capitalized by TEP and eligible for inclusion in
rate base.
K-10
TEPS UTILITY OPERATING STATISTICS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Generation and Purchased Power kWh (000)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remote Generation (Coal)
|
|
|
9,576,873
|
|
|
|
10,438,864
|
|
|
|
11,001,318
|
|
|
|
10,854,710
|
|
|
|
10,059,315
|
|
|
Local Tucson Generation (Oil, Gas & Coal)
|
|
|
711,420
|
|
|
|
1,039,362
|
|
|
|
1,088,778
|
|
|
|
966,476
|
|
|
|
1,165,001
|
|
|
Purchased Power
|
|
|
3,085,805
|
|
|
|
2,947,749
|
|
|
|
2,046,864
|
|
|
|
1,680,495
|
|
|
|
1,638,737
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Generation and Purchased Power
|
|
|
13,374,098
|
|
|
|
14,425,975
|
|
|
|
14,136,960
|
|
|
|
13,501,681
|
|
|
|
12,863,053
|
|
|
Less Losses and Company Use
|
|
|
948,463
|
|
|
|
954,643
|
|
|
|
944,024
|
|
|
|
885,120
|
|
|
|
806,168
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Energy Sold
|
|
|
12,425,635
|
|
|
|
13,471,332
|
|
|
|
13,192,936
|
|
|
|
12,616,561
|
|
|
|
12,056,885
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales kWh (000)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
3,905,696
|
|
|
|
3,852,707
|
|
|
|
4,004,797
|
|
|
|
3,778,269
|
|
|
|
3,633,226
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
1,988,356
|
|
|
|
2,034,453
|
|
|
|
2,057,982
|
|
|
|
1,959,141
|
|
|
|
1,855,432
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
2,160,946
|
|
|
|
2,263,706
|
|
|
|
2,341,025
|
|
|
|
2,278,244
|
|
|
|
2,302,327
|
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
1,064,830
|
|
|
|
1,095,962
|
|
|
|
983,173
|
|
|
|
924,898
|
|
|
|
842,881
|
|
|
Public Authorities
|
|
|
250,915
|
|
|
|
255,817
|
|
|
|
247,430
|
|
|
|
260,767
|
|
|
|
241,119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Retail Sales
|
|
|
9,370,743
|
|
|
|
9,502,645
|
|
|
|
9,634,407
|
|
|
|
9,201,419
|
|
|
|
8,874,985
|
|
|
Electric Wholesale Sales
|
|
|
3,054,892
|
|
|
|
3,968,688
|
|
|
|
3,558,529
|
|
|
|
3,415,142
|
|
|
|
3,181,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Sales
|
|
|
12,425,635
|
|
|
|
13,471,332
|
|
|
|
13,192,936
|
|
|
|
12,616,561
|
|
|
|
12,056,885
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Revenues (000)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
$
|
377,761
|
|
|
$
|
351,079
|
|
|
$
|
362,967
|
|
|
$
|
343,459
|
|
|
$
|
330,614
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
219,694
|
|
|
|
211,639
|
|
|
|
213,364
|
|
|
|
203,284
|
|
|
|
192,966
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
163,720
|
|
|
|
164,849
|
|
|
|
168,279
|
|
|
|
165,068
|
|
|
|
165,988
|
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
61,033
|
|
|
|
55,619
|
|
|
|
48,707
|
|
|
|
43,724
|
|
|
|
39,749
|
|
|
Public Authorities
|
|
|
19,865
|
|
|
|
19,146
|
|
|
|
18,332
|
|
|
|
18,935
|
|
|
|
17,559
|
|
|
REST and DSM
|
|
|
25,443
|
|
|
|
2,781
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EFPS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
|
4,822
|
|
|
|
2,684
|
|
|
|
2,624
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Retail Sales
|
|
|
867,516
|
|
|
|
805,528
|
|
|
|
816,471
|
|
|
|
777,154
|
|
|
|
749,500
|
|
|
CTC To Be Refunded
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(58,092
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wholesale Revenue-Long Term
|
|
|
48,249
|
|
|
|
57,493
|
|
|
|
55,788
|
|
|
|
51,442
|
|
|
|
54,901
|
|
|
Wholesale Revenue-Short Term
|
|
|
83,456
|
|
|
|
185,189
|
|
|
|
125,369
|
|
|
|
112,309
|
|
|
|
117,557
|
|
|
California Power Exchange Provision for
Wholesale Refunds
|
|
|
(4,172
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transmission
|
|
|
18,974
|
|
|
|
17,173
|
|
|
|
14,842
|
|
|
|
13,391
|
|
|
|
7,250
|
|
|
Other Revenues
|
|
|
82,688
|
|
|
|
71,962
|
|
|
|
58,033
|
|
|
|
34,698
|
|
|
|
8,262
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Operating Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,096,711
|
|
|
$
|
1,079,253
|
|
|
$
|
1,070,503
|
|
|
$
|
988,994
|
|
|
$
|
937,470
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customers (End of Period)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
365,157
|
|
|
|
363,861
|
|
|
|
361,945
|
|
|
|
357,646
|
|
|
|
350,628
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
35,759
|
|
|
|
35,432
|
|
|
|
34,759
|
|
|
|
34,104
|
|
|
|
33,534
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
629
|
|
|
|
633
|
|
|
|
641
|
|
|
|
664
|
|
|
|
673
|
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Public Authorities
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Retail Customers
|
|
|
401,608
|
|
|
|
399,989
|
|
|
|
397,408
|
|
|
|
392,477
|
|
|
|
384,898
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Retail Revenue per kWh Sold (cents)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
Industrial and Mining
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
Average Retail Revenue per kWh Sold
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Revenue per Residential Customer
|
|
$
|
1,034
|
|
|
$
|
965
|
|
|
$
|
1,003
|
|
|
$
|
971
|
|
|
$
|
954
|
|
|
Average kWh Sales per Residential Customer
|
|
|
10,708
|
|
|
|
10,621
|
|
|
|
11,129
|
|
|
|
10,681
|
|
|
|
10,484
|
|
K-11
ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
Air and water quality, resource extraction, waste disposal and land use are regulated by federal,
state and local authorities. TEP believes that its facilities are in substantial compliance with
existing regulations.
Clean Air Act Requirements
TEP generating facilities are subject to EPA limits on the amount of sulfur dioxide
(SO
2
), nitrogen oxide (NOx) and other emissions into the atmosphere. TEP capitalized
$24 million in 2009, $73 million in 2008 and $7 million in 2007 in construction costs to comply
with environmental requirements, including TEPs share of new pollution control equipment installed
at San Juan described below. TEP expects to capitalize environmental compliance costs of $8
million in 2010 and $5 million in 2011. In addition, TEP recorded operating expenses of $13
million in 2009, $14 million in 2008 and $10 million in 2007 related to environmental compliance.
TEP expects environmental expenses to be $11 million in 2010. TEP may incur additional costs to
comply with future changes in federal and state environmental laws, regulations and permit
requirements at existing electric generating facilities. Compliance with these changes may reduce
operating efficiency.
As a result of a 2005 settlement agreement between PNM, environmental activist groups, and the New
Mexico Environment Department (PNM Consent Decree), the co-owners of San Juan installed new
pollution control equipment at the generating station to reduce mercury, particulate matter, NOx,
and SO
2
emissions. TEP owns 50% of San Juan Units 1 and 2. The PNM Consent Decree
includes stipulated penalties for non-compliance with specified emissions limits at San Juan. In
2008 and 2007, TEPs share of stipulated penalties at San Juan
was $1 million and $2 million,
respectively. TEPs share of stipulated penalties at San Juan during 2009 was less than $1
million. TEP cannot deduct these penalties for income tax purposes. With the installation of new
pollution control equipment designed to remedy emission violations, we do not expect to incur
similar penalties in the future.
In April 2009, APS received a request from the EPA under section 114 of the Clean Air Act seeking
information about Four Corners. Four Corners, which is operated by APS, is comprised of five
coal-fired generating units. TEP has a 7% ownership interest in two units, totaling 110 MW. APS
has responded to the EPAs request. TEP cannot predict the timing or outcome of this matter.
In 1993, the EPA allocated TEPs generating units SO
2
Emission Allowances based on past
operational history. Beginning in 2000, TEPs generating units were required to hold Emission
Allowances equal to the level of emissions in the compliance year or pay penalties and offset
excess emissions in future years. To date, TEP has held sufficient Emission Allowances to comply
with the SO
2
regulations.
Hazardous Air Pollutant Requirements
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to develop an emission limit for hazardous air pollutants that
represents the maximum achievable control technology. In October 2009, EPA entered into a consent
order to develop a final rule by November 2011.
Depending on the stringency of the EPA rule, emission controls for mercury may be required at some
or all coal fired units by 2014 or later. Whether controls are required at a particular unit, the
level of control required, and the cost to achieve that level of control will not be known until
the rule has been promulgated.
As stipulated in the PNM Consent Decree described above, the co-owners of San Juan installed new
pollution control equipment at the generating station to reduce mercury emissions. The
installation of mercury emissions controls for San Juan Units 1 and 2 were completed in 2009.
These controls are expected to be adequate to achieve compliance with the federal standard.
Arizona adopted mercury emission rules in 2007 requiring a 90% reduction in emission from coal
fired units. Due to potential inconsistency between the Arizona rule and the pending EPA rule, in
January, 2009, TEP and ADEQ reached an agreement that (1) defers the 90% reduction requirement to
2016, (2) improves regulatory certainty regarding mercury compliance obligations under existing
Arizona rules, and (3) achieves mercury reductions substantially similar to those that would be
required by the existing Arizona rules. This agreement relates to the Springerville and Sundt
generating stations.
In order to comply with the Arizona rule, TEP expects mercury emission control equipment may be
required at Springerville by 2016. The associated capital cost for this equipment is estimated to
be $6 million at Springerville
Units 1 and 2. If the emission control equipment is installed, TEP expects the annual operating
expenses to be approximately $3 million, once all installations are completed.
K-12
Climate Change
In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al v. EPA, that carbon
dioxide (CO
2
) and other greenhouse gases (GHG) are air pollutants under the Clean Air
Act. In December 2009, EPA issued a final Endangerment Finding, stating that greenhouse gases
endanger public health and welfare. This finding allows EPA to promulgate regulations limiting
emissions of greenhouse gases. EPA is in the process of developing regulation limiting greenhouse
gases, which once finalized, may impact future generation or modifications of existing plants.
Several pieces of legislation have been introduced at the federal level. In June 2009, the House
of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security legislation which included a cap
and trade program for GHG. The Senate is considering similar cap and trade legislation with the
September 2009 introduction of the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power bill. While debate
continues at the national level over the direction of domestic climate policy, several states have
developed state-specific policies or regional initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In
2007, the governors of several western states, including the then-governor of Arizona, signed the
Western Regional Climate Action Initiative (the Western Climate Initiative) that directed their
respective states to develop a regional target for reducing greenhouse gases. The states in the
Western Climate Initiative announced a target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 15% below
2005 levels by 2020. In 2008, the Western Climate Initiative participants submitted their design
recommendation for the Western Climate Initiative cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas
emissions, with an implementation date set for 2012. In February 2010, the Governor of Arizona
issued an executive order which, among other things, stated that Arizona will not implement the GHG
cap-and-trade proposal advanced by the Western Climate Initiative. The executive order expires
December 31, 2012.
Based on the competing proposals to regulate greenhouse gas emissions by federal, state, and local
regulatory and legislative bodies and uncertainty in the regulatory and legislative processes, the
scope of such requirements and initiatives and their effect on our operations cannot be determined
at this time.
Regional Haze
The EPAs regional haze rules require emission controls known as Best Available Retrofit Technology
(BART) for certain industrial facilities emitting air pollutants that reduce visibility. The
operators of the San Juan, Four Corners, and Navajo generating stations submitted BART analyses in
2007 and early 2008. PNM, operator of San Juan, believes the controls being installed at San Juan
as a result of the PNM Consent Decree constitute BART and did not recommend installation of any
additional pollution control equipment. APS and SRP, the operators of the Four Corners and Navajo
generating stations, respectively recommended installing certain additional pollution control
equipment in their respective BART analyses. TEPs share of the cost for the APS recommended
pollution control upgrades at Four Corners is estimated to be $6 million. SRP has initiated the
pollution control upgrades at Navajo on a voluntary basis. TEPs $3 million share of these costs
is included in the cost estimates section on Clean Air Act Requirements above.
In August 2009, EPA issued an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking requesting comment on the cost
effectiveness and expected visibility improvements of different levels of air pollution controls at
Four Corners and Navajo including Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR). If SCR is determined by the
EPA to be BART, the capital cost impact to TEP is estimated to be $42 million for Four Corners, and
$50 million for Navajo. The exact level and cost of pollution control required will not be known
until final determinations are made by the regulatory agencies. Under the current proposal,
controls would need to be in place no earlier than five years following the final determination.
The Four Corners and Navajo Plant participants obligations to comply with the EPAs BART
determinations, coupled with the financial impact of future climate change legislation, other
environmental regulations and other business considerations, could jeopardize the economic
viability of these plants or the ability of individual participants to meet their obligations and
continue their participation in these plants.
K-13
Coal Combustion Byproducts
The EPA is expected to issue proposed regulations governing the handling and disposal of coal
combustion byproducts (CCBs), such as fly ash. The EPA is evaluating options that include
regulation of CCBs under solid waste standards, hazardous waste standards, or a combination of
both. A proposed rule is expected during the first quarter of 2010. The financial impact to TEP,
if any, cannot be determined at this time.
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard
In January 2010, EPA issued a proposed rule to reduce the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for
Ozone. Based on the proposed standard, certain counties in which TEP conducts operations could be
in violation of the standard. The financial impact to TEP, if any, cannot be determined at this
time.
UNS GAS
SERVICE TERRITORY AND CUSTOMERS
UNS Gas is a gas distribution company serving approximately 146,000 retail customers in Mohave,
Yavapai, Coconino, and Navajo counties in Northern Arizona, as well as Santa Cruz County in
Southeast Arizona. These counties comprise approximately 50% of the territory in the state of
Arizona, with a population of approximately 700,000. From 2003 to 2007, customer growth in UNS
Gas service territory averaged 3% per year, compared with zero growth in 2008 and less than 1% growth in 2009 in the number of retail
customers. As a result of weak economic conditions and mild weather, the
average energy use by retail customers during 2008 and 2009 was below the average levels
experienced by UNS Gas in prior periods.
UNS Gas customer base is primarily residential. Revenues derived from residential customers were
approximately 61% of total revenues in 2009, while sales to other retail customer classes accounted
for approximately 28% of total revenues. Approximately 11% of total revenues in 2009 were derived
from gas transportation services and a Negotiated Sales Program (NSP). UNS Gas supplies natural
gas transportation service to the 600 MW Griffith Power Plant located near Kingman, Arizona, under
a 20-year contract which expires in 2021. UNS Gas also supplies natural gas to some of its large
transportation customers through an NSP approved by the ACC. One half of the margin earned on
these NSP sales is retained by UNS Gas, while the other half benefits retail customers through a
credit to the purchased gas adjustor (PGA) mechanism which reduces the gas commodity price.
In 2008, UNS Gas and UNS Electric entered into a 20-year gas transportation agreement and a 20-year
natural gas sales agreement, whereby UNS Gas will purchase natural gas for UNS Electric and
transport it to BMGS.
GAS SUPPLY AND TRANSMISSION
UNS Gas directly manages its gas supply and transportation contracts. The market price for gas
varies based upon the period during which the commodity is purchased. UNS Gas hedges its gas
supply prices by entering into fixed price forward contracts and financial swaps at various times
during the year to provide more stable prices to its customers. These purchases and hedges are
made up to three years in advance with the goal of hedging at least 45% of the expected monthly gas
consumption with fixed prices prior to entering into the month.
UNS Gas buys most of the gas it distributes from the San Juan Basin in the Four Corners region.
The gas is delivered on the El Paso Natural Gas Company (EPNG) and Transwestern Pipeline Company
(Transwestern) interstate pipeline systems under firm transportation agreements with combined
capacity sufficient to meet UNS Gas customers demands.
With EPNG, the average daily capacity right of UNS Gas is approximately 655,000 therms per day,
with an average of 1,095,000 therms per day in the winter season (November through March) to serve
its Northern and Southern Arizona service territories. UNS Gas has capacity rights of 250,000
therms per day on the San Juan Lateral and Mainline of the Transwestern pipeline. The Transwestern
pipeline principally delivers gas to the portion of UNS Gas distribution system serving customers
in Flagstaff and Kingman, Arizona, and also delivers gas to UNS Gas facilities serving the
Griffith Power Plant in Mohave County.
K-14
UNS Gas signed a separate transportation agreement with Transwestern for transportation capacity
rights on the Phoenix Lateral Extension Line. The 15-year agreement began in March 2009, when
construction of that pipeline was completed. UNS Gas average daily capacity right will be 126,100
therms per day, with an average of 221,900 therms per day in the winter season (November through
March).
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, UNS Gas, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Contractual Obligations, UNS Gas Supply
Contracts
, for more information.
RATES AND REGULATION
The ACC regulates UNS Gas with respect to retail gas rates, the issuance of securities, and
transactions with affiliated parties. UNS Gas retail gas rates include a monthly customer charge,
a base rate charge for delivery services and the cost of gas (expressed in cents per therm), and a
PGA.
Purchased Gas Adjustor
The PGA mechanism is intended to address the volatility of natural gas prices and allow UNS Gas to
recover its actual commodity costs, including transportation, through a price adjustor. The
difference between UNS Gas actual monthly gas and transportation costs and the rolling 12-month
average cost of gas and transportation is deferred and recovered or returned to customers through
the PGA mechanism. See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations, UNS Gas, Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Rates and Regulation,
Energy Cost Adjustment Mechanism
, for more information.
2008 General Rate Case
In November 2008, UNS Gas filed a general rate case with the ACC on a cost of service basis. Below
is a table that summarizes UNS Gas request:
|
|
|
|
|
Test year 12 months ended June 30, 2008
|
|
Requested by UNS Gas
|
|
Original cost rate base
|
|
$182 million
|
|
Revenue deficiency
|
|
$9.5 million
|
|
Total rate increase (over test year revenues)
|
|
6%
|
|
Cost of long-term debt
|
|
6.5%
|
|
Cost of equity
|
|
11.0%
|
|
Actual capital structure
|
|
50% equity / 50% debt
|
|
Weighted average cost of capital
|
|
8.75%
|
|
Rate of return on fair value rate base
|
|
6.80%
|
On June 8, 2009, the ACC staff and other intervenors filed testimony in this proceeding. The ACC
staff recommended a rate increase of $3.4 million based on an original cost rate base of $178
million and a 10% ROE. Hearings before an administrative law judge concluded in August 2009. UNS
Gas expects the ACC to issue a final order in the first half of 2010. UNS Gas cannot predict the
outcome of this general rate case proceeding. See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, UNS Gas, Rates
,
2008 General Rate Case Filing,
for more information.
ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
UNS Gas is subject to environmental regulation of air and water quality, resource extraction, waste
disposal and land use by federal, state and local authorities. UNS Gas believes that its
facilities are in substantial compliance with all existing regulations. See
Item. 1 Business,
TEP, Environmental Matters
, for more information.
UNS ELECTRIC
SERVICE TERRITORY AND CUSTOMERS
UNS Electric is an electric transmission and distribution company serving approximately 90,000
retail customers in Mohave and Santa Cruz counties. These counties have a combined population of
approximately 240,000. As a result of weak economic conditions, retail customer growth and average
energy use by retail customers is below the average levels experienced by UNS Electric in prior
periods. From 2003 to 2007, customer growth in UNS
Electrics service territory averaged 3% per year, compared with no change in the average number of retail
customers during 2008 and less than 1% growth 2009. UNS Electrics customer base is primarily residential, with some
small commercial and both light and heavy industrial customers. Peak demand for 2009 was 559 MW.
K-15
POWER SUPPLY AND TRANSMISSION
Power Supply
In 2008, UNS Electric and UED entered into a Power Purchase and Sales Agreement (PPA) under which
UED sells all the output of the 90 MW gas-fired Black Mountain Generating Station (BMGS) to UNS
Electric over a five-year term. The PPA is a tolling arrangement in which UNS Electric operates
BMGS and assumes all risk of operation and maintenance costs, including fuel. Under the terms of
the PPA, UNS Electric pays UED a capacity charge. The costs associated with the PPA are
recoverable through UNS Electrics PPFAC.
UNS Gas and UED have a 20-year gas transportation agreement and a 20-year natural gas sales
agreement, whereby UNS Gas will purchase and transport natural gas for UED to BMGS.
UNS Electric owns and operates the Valencia Power Plant (Valencia), located in Nogales, Arizona.
Valencia consists of four gas and diesel-fueled combustion turbine units and provides approximately
68 MW of peaking resources. The facility is directly interconnected with the distribution system
serving the city of Nogales and the surrounding areas.
In addition to the PPA with UED and the output from Valencia, UNS Electric relies on a portfolio of
long, intermediate and short-term purchases to meet customer load requirements.
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, UNS Electric, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Contractual Obligations and Other
Non-Reportable Business Segments, UED
, below for more information.
Transmission
UNS Electric imports the power it purchases from UED into its Mohave County and Santa Cruz County
service territories over Western Area Power Administrations (WAPA) transmission lines. UNS
Electric has a network transmission service agreement for its primary transmission capacity with
WAPA for the Parker-Davis system that expires in May 2017. UNS Electric also has a long-term
electric point to point transmission capacity agreement with WAPA for the Southwest Intertie system
that expires in 2011.
UNS Electric currently plans to upgrade its existing 115 kV transmission line to 138 kV by the end
of 2012 to improve the reliability of service in Santa Cruz County.
This upgrade is included in UNS Electrics current capital expenditures forecast. See
Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, UNS
Electric, Liquidity and Capital Resources
for more information.
RATES AND REGULATION
UNS Electric is regulated by the ACC with respect to retail electric rates, quality of service, the
issuance of securities, and transactions with affiliated parties, and by the FERC with respect to
wholesale power contracts and interstate transmission service. In 2007, UNS Electric was granted a
FERC tariff to sell power at market based rates. UNS Electrics retail electric rates include a
PPFAC, which allows for UNS Electric to recover the actual costs of its fuel and power purchases.
K-16
2009 General Rate Case Filing
In April 2009, UNS Electric filed a rate case application with the ACC, which is summarized below.
|
|
|
|
|
Test year December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
Original cost rate base
|
|
$176 million
|
|
Revenue deficiency
|
|
$13.5 million
|
|
Total rate increase (over test year revenues)
|
|
7.4%
|
|
Cost of debt
|
|
7.05%
|
|
Cost of equity
|
|
11.40%
|
|
Actual capital structure
|
|
46% equity / 54% debt
|
|
Weighted average cost of capital
|
|
9.04%
|
|
Fair Value Rate Base
|
|
$265 million
|
|
Rate of Return on Fair Value Rate Base
|
|
6.88%
|
The filing also included a proposal to acquire, and put into its rate base, BMGS, the gas-fired
facility in UNS Electrics service territory that is owned by UED. The proposed acquisition and
inclusion of BMGS in rate base would not impact the amount of the total rate increase requested by
UNS Electric.
On November 6, 2009, the ACC staff and other intervenors filed testimony in this proceeding. The
ACC staff recommended a rate increase of $7.5 million based on an original cost rate base of $168
million and a 10% return on equity. A hearing before an ACC administrative law judge concluded in
February 2010. See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations, UNS Electric, Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Rates
, for more
information.
Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
In December 2009, the ACC established a process to adopt new Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
(EE Standards) designed to require TEP, UNS Electric and other affected utilities to implement
demand-side management (DSM) programs, to the extent that they are cost effective. If the ACC
approves EE Standards, they must be certified by the Arizona Attorney General before taking affect.
TEPs DSM programs and customer surcharge to recover the costs incurred to implement these
proposed programs are subject to ACC approval.
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, UNS Electric, Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Electric Energy Efficiency
Standards
, for more information.
Line Extension Policy
As part of the May 2008 ACC order, UNS Electric is required to charge customers for the total cost
of line extensions beginning in March 2010. Prior to this ruling by the ACC, a portion of the cost
of line extensions was capitalized by UNS Electric and eligible for inclusion in rate base.
ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
UNS Electric is subject to environmental regulation of air and water quality, resource extraction,
waste disposal and land use by federal, state and local authorities. UNS Electric believes that
its facilities are in substantial compliance with all existing regulations and will be in
compliance with expected environmental regulations. See
Item. 1 Business, TEP, Environmental
Matters
, for more information.
Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff
The REST rules require UNS Electric to generate or purchase at least 15% of its total annual retail
energy requirements from renewable energy technologies by 2025, with smaller amounts required in
earlier years. UNS Electric began implementing its ACC approved REST plan on June 1, 2008. UNS
Electric met the REST rules 2009 target of generating or purchasing renewable energy for at least
2% of UNS Electrics total retail energy requirements; UNS Electric expects to meet the 2010
requirement of 2.5%. See Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations, UNS Electric, Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Renewable Energy
Standard and Tariff
, for more information.
K-17
Renewable Energy Resources
In February 2010, UNS Electric requested the ACC approve a power purchase agreement that would
provide UNS Electric with 11 MW of energy from wind turbine installation near Kingman, Arizona over
a 20 year period. The above market cost of power under the agreement would be funded through UNS
Electrics REST surcharge. UNS Electric cannot predict when or if the ACC will approve the
agreement. See
Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff,
above for more information.
OTHER
UED
UED completed construction of the 90 MW BMGS in May 2008. See
UNS Electric, Power Supply and
Transmission
, above for more information regarding BMGS.
Millennium Investments
Through affiliates, Millennium holds investments in unregulated energy and emerging technology
companies. At December 31, 2009, Millennium had an investment balance of $10 million, a $7 million
cash balance and a $15 million note, which in total represented less than 1% of UniSource Energys total
consolidated assets. UniSource Energy has ceased making loans or equity contributions to Millennium
and has less than $1 million of remaining funding commitments. See
Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Other Non-Reportable
Business Segments, Millennium Investments,
for more information.
Sabinas
In June 2009, Millennium finalized a sale of its 50% interest in Sabinas. Millennium received an
upfront $5 million cash payment in January 2009. Other key terms of the transaction included a
three year, 6% interest-bearing, collateralized $15 million note. In June 2009, Millennium
recorded a $6 million pre-tax gain on the sale.
EMPLOYEES (As of December 31, 2009)
TEP had 1,358 employees, of which approximately 54% are represented by the International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local No. 1116. A collective bargaining agreement between
the IBEW and TEP expires in January 2013.
UNS Gas had 197 employees, of which 117 employees were represented by IBEW Local No. 1116 and 6
employees were represented by IBEW Local No. 387. The agreements with the IBEW Local No. 1116 and
No. 387 expire in June 2012 and February 2011, respectively.
UNS Electric had 167 employees, of which 29 employees were represented by the IBEW Local No. 387
and 107 employees were represented by the IBEW Local No. 769. The existing agreement with the IBEW
Local No. 387 and No. 769 expire in February 2011 and August 2010, respectively.
Southwest Energy Solutions, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Millennium, had 254 employees, of which
approximately 95% are represented by unions. Of the employees represented by unions, 226 are
represented by IBEW Local No. 1116 and 15 by IBEW Local No. 570; these agreements expire on
February 2, 2012, and May 31, 2012, respectively.
K-18
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANTS
Executive Officers UniSource Energy
Executive Officers of UniSource Energy, who are elected annually by UniSource Energys Board of
Directors, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Officer
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position(s) Held
|
|
Since
|
|
Paul J. Bonavia
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Michael J. DeConcini
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Transmission and Distribution
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
Raymond S. Heyman
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and General Counsel
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Kevin P. Larson
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
Philip Dion III
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
Vice President, Legal and Environmental Services
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Kentton C. Grant
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Vice President, Finance and Rates
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Arie Hoekstra
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Vice President, Generation
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
David G. Hutchens
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
Vice President, Energy Efficiency and Resource Planning
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Karen G. Kissinger
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Vice President, Controller and Chief Compliance Officer
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
Steven W. Lynn
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
Vice President, Communications and Government Relations
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Thomas A. McKenna
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
Vice President, Engineering
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Catherine E. Ries
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Vice President, Human Resources
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Herlinda H. Kennedy
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
Corporate Secretary
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul J. Bonavia
|
|
Mr. Bonavia became Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer of UniSource Energy and TEP in
January 2009. Prior to joining UniSource Energy and
TEP, Mr. Bonavia served as President of the Utilities
Group of Xcel Energy. Mr. Bonavia previously served
as President of Xcel Energys Commercial Enterprises
business unit and President of the companys Energy
Markets unit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. DeConcini
|
|
Mr. DeConcini joined TEP in 1988 and was elected
Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of
the Energy Resources business unit of TEP, effective
January 1, 2003. In August 2006, he was named Senior
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer,
Transmission and Distribution. In May 2009, he was
named Senior Vice President and Chief Operating
Officer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raymond S. Heyman
|
|
Mr. Heyman was elected to the position of Senior Vice
President and General Counsel of TEP and UniSource
Energy in September 2005. Prior to joining UniSource
Energy and TEP, Mr. Heyman was a member of the
Phoenix, Arizona law firm Roshka, Heyman & DeWulf,
PLC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin P. Larson
|
|
Mr. Larson joined TEP in 1985 and thereafter held
various positions in its finance department and at
TEPs investment subsidiaries. He was elected
Treasurer of TEP in August 1994 and Vice President in
March 1997. In October 2000, he was elected Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of both
UniSource Energy and TEP and serves as Treasurer of
both organizations. He was named Senior Vice
President in September 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Dion III
|
|
Mr. Dion was named Vice President of Legal and
Environmental Services at UniSource Energy and TEP in
February 2008. Prior to joining TEP, Mr. Dion was
chief of staff and chief legal advisor to
Commissioner Marc Spitzer of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. Mr. Dion previously worked in
various roles at the ACC, including as an
administrative law judge and as an advisor to Mr.
Spitzer, prior to his appointment to FERC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kentton C. Grant
|
|
Mr. Grant joined TEP in 1995. In January 2007, Mr.
Grant was elected Vice President of Finance and Rates
at UniSource Energy and TEP.
|
K-19
|
|
|
|
|
Arie Hoekstra
|
|
Mr. Hoekstra joined TEP in 1979. In January 2007,
Mr. Hoekstra was elected Vice President of Generation
at UniSource Energy and TEP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
David G. Hutchens
|
|
Mr. Hutchens joined TEP in 1995. In May 2009, Mr.
Hutchens was named Vice President of Energy
Efficiency and Resource Planning. In January 2007,
Mr. Hutchens was elected Vice President of Wholesale
Marketing at UniSource Energy and TEP, and Vice
President of UNS Gas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Karen G. Kissinger
|
|
Ms. Kissinger joined TEP as Vice President and
Controller in January 1991. She was named Vice
President, Controller and Principal Accounting
Officer of UniSource Energy in January 1998. She has
served as Chief Compliance Officer of UniSource
Energy and TEP since 2003.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven W. Lynn
|
|
Mr. Lynn joined TEP in 2000. In January 2003, he was
elected Vice President of Communications and
Government Relations at UniSource Energy and TEP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas A. McKenna
|
|
Mr. McKenna joined Nations Energy Corporation (a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Millennium) in 1998. In
May 2009, Mr. McKenna was named Vice President of UNS
Gas. This is in addition to his position as Vice
President of Engineering at UniSource Energy and TEP,
and Vice President of UNS Electric, to which he was
elected in January 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catherine E. Ries
|
|
Ms. Ries joined UniSource Energy and TEP in June 2007
as Vice President of Human Resources. Prior to
joining UniSource Energy and TEP, Ms. Ries worked for
Clopay Building Products, a division of Griffon
Corporation, from 2000 to 2007 and held the position
of Vice President of Human Resources prior to joining
UniSource Energy and TEP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herlinda H. Kennedy
|
|
Ms. Kennedy joined TEP in 1980. Ms. Kennedy was
named assistant Corporate Secretary of TEP and
UniSource Energy in 1999 and was elected Corporate
Secretary of UniSource Energy and TEP in September
2006.
|
Executive Officers TEP
The executive officers of TEP are the same as UniSource Energy. See
Executive Officers
UniSource Energy,
above
,
for a listing and description of TEPs executive officers.
SEC REPORTS AVAILABLE ON UNISOURCE ENERGYS WEBSITE
UniSource Energy and TEP make available their annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably
practicable after they electronically file them with, or furnish them to, the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC). These reports are available free of charge through UniSource Energys
website address: http://www.uns.com. A link from UniSource Energys website to these SEC reports
is accessible as follows: At the UniSource Energy main page, select Investors from the menu shown
at the top of the page; next select SEC filings from the menu shown on the Investor Relations page.
UniSource Energys code of ethics, and any amendments made to the code of ethics, is also
available on UniSource Energys website.
Information contained at UniSource Energys website is not part of any report filed with the SEC by
UniSource Energy or TEP.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
The business and financial results of UniSource Energy and TEP are subject to a number of risks and
uncertainties, including those set forth below and in other documents we file with the SEC. These
risks and uncertainties fall primarily into five major categories: revenues, regulatory, financial,
environmental and operational.
REVENUES
National and local economic conditions can have a significant impact on the results of operations,
net income and cash flows at TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric.
Economic conditions have contributed significantly to a reduction in TEPs retail customer growth
and lower energy usage by the companys residential, commercial and industrial customers. From
2003 to 2007, customer growth in TEPs service territory averaged approximately 2% per year. In
2008 and 2009, as economic conditions
worsened, TEPs average retail customer base grew by less than 1%. In 2009, total retail kWh sales
were 1.4% below 2008 levels. TEP estimates that a 1% decrease in annual retail sales could reduce
pre-tax net income and pre-tax cash flows by approximately $6 million.
K-20
Similar impacts were felt at UNS Gas and UNS Electric. The retail customer bases at both companies
did not grow during 2008 or 2009 compared with average annual growth rates of 3 to 4% from 2003 to
2007. We estimate that a 1% decrease in annual retail sales at UNS Gas and UNS Electric could
reduce pre-tax net income and pre-tax cash flows by less than $1 million.
TEPs base rates are frozen through December 31, 2012, which could limit our ability to cope with
the impact of risks and uncertainties and negatively affect TEPs results of operations, net income
and cash flows.
Under the terms of the 2008 TEP rate order, TEP is prohibited from submitting a base rate
application before June 30, 2012 and new rates cannot go into effect prior to December 31, 2012.
If the cost of serving TEPs customers rises more quickly than the revenues collected from
customers, TEPs results of operations, net income and cash flows could be negatively impacted.
New technological developments and increasing use of more energy efficient products may have a
significant impact on retail sales, which could negatively impact UniSource Energys results of
operations, net income and cash flows.
Heightened awareness of energy costs and general public support for energy efficiency has increased
demand for products intended to reduce consumers use of electricity. TEP and UNS Electric also
are promoting Demand Side Management programs designed to help customers reduce their energy use,
and these efforts may increase significantly under new energy efficiency rules given preliminary
approval in 2009 by the ACC. Unless the ACC makes specific provision for the recovery of
usage-based revenues lost to these energy efficiency programs, the reduced retail sales that would
result from the success of these efforts would negatively impact the results of operations, net
income and cash flows of TEP and UNS Electric.
The revenues, results of operations and cash flows of TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are seasonal,
and are subject to weather conditions and customer usage patterns, beyond the companies control.
TEP typically earns the majority of its operating revenue and net income in the third quarter
because retail customers increase their air conditioning usage during Tucsons hot summer weather.
Conversely, TEPs first quarter net income is typically limited by relatively mild winter weather
in its retail service territory. UNS Electrics earnings follow a similar pattern, while UNS Gas
sales peak in the winter during home heating season. Cool summers or warm winters may affect
customer usage at all three companies, adversely affecting operating revenues, cash flows and net
income by reducing sales.
REGULATORY
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are subject to regulation by the ACC, which sets the companies
retail rates and oversees many aspects of their business in ways that could negatively affect the
companies results of operations, net income and cash flows.
The ACC is a constitutionally created body composed of five elected commissioners. Commissioners
are elected state-wide for staggered four-year terms and are limited to serving a total of two
terms. As a result, the composition of the commission, and therefore its policies, are subject to
change every two years.
The ACC is charged with setting retail electric and gas rates that provide utility companies with
an opportunity to recover their costs of service and earn a reasonable rate of return. The
decisions these elected officials make on such matters impact the net income and cash flows of TEP,
UNS Gas and UNS Electric.
Changes in federal energy regulation may negatively affect TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electrics results
of operations, net income and cash flows.
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are subject to comprehensive and changing governmental regulation at
the federal level that continues to change the structure of the electric and gas utility industries
and the ways in which
these industries are regulated. UniSource Energys electric utility subsidiaries are subject to
regulation by the FERC. The FERC has jurisdiction over rates for electric transmission in
interstate commerce and rates for wholesale sales of electric power, including terms and prices of
transmission services and sales of electricity at wholesale prices.
K-21
FINANCIAL
Financial market disruptions and volatility may increase our financing costs, limit our access to
the credit markets and increase our pension funding obligations, which may adversely affect our
liquidity and our ability to carry out our financial strategy.
We rely on access to the bank markets and capital markets as a significant source of liquidity and
for capital requirements not satisfied by the cash flow from our operations. Market disruptions
such as those recently experienced in the United States and abroad may increase our cost of
borrowing or adversely affect our ability to access sources of liquidity needed to finance our
operations and satisfy our obligations as they become due. These disruptions may include turmoil in
the financial services industry, including substantial uncertainty surrounding particular lending
institutions and counterparties we do business with, unprecedented volatility in the markets where
our outstanding securities trade, and general economic downturns in our utility service
territories. If we are unable to access credit at competitive rates, or if our borrowing costs
dramatically increase, our ability to finance our operations, meet our short-term obligations and
execute our financial strategy could be adversely affected.
Changing market conditions could negatively affect the market value of assets held in our pension
and other postretirement pension plans and may increase the amount and accelerate the timing of
required future funding contributions.
Financial market disruptions and volatility may increase our financing costs and adversely affect
our ability to refinance debt obligations and credit agreements totaling $671 million that expire
or come due in 2011 at UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric.
UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are each party to a revolving credit agreement with
a group of lenders. We rely on these agreements for working capital requirements not provided by
cash flow from our operations. We cannot be assured that there will be sufficient lender interest
and capacity to refinance these facilities prior to their expiration dates. The following credit
agreements and debt obligations mature in August 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
Description
|
|
Amount
|
|
UniSource Energy Credit Agreement
|
|
$70 million revolving credit facility
|
|
TEP Credit Agreement
|
|
$491 million, consisting of a $341
million letter of credit facility and a
$150 million revolving credit facility
|
|
UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver
|
|
$60 million revolving credit facility
|
|
UNS Gas Senior Unsecured Notes
|
|
$50 million
|
UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric could have difficulty obtaining funding under their
respective revolving credit facilities when required if lenders in the bank group file for
bankruptcy or refuse to fund when requested. If sufficient liquidity is not available to meet
short-term working capital needs, if we are unable pay off or refinance our debt obligations or if
borrowing costs dramatically increase, UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electrics results of
operations, net income and cash flows could be negatively impacted.
Regulatory rules and other restrictions limit the ability of TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric to make
distributions to UniSource Energy.
As a holding company, UniSource Energy is dependent on the earnings and distributions of funds from
its subsidiaries to service its debt and pay dividends to shareholders.
K-22
Restrictions include:
|
|
|
|
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are restricted from lending or transferring funds or
issuing securities without ACC approval;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Federal Power Act restricts electric utilities ability to pay dividends out of
funds that are properly included in their capital account. TEP has an accumulated deficit
rather than positive retained earnings. Although the terms of the Federal Power Act are
unclear, we believe there is a reasonable basis for TEP to pay dividends from current year
earnings. However, the FERC could attempt to stop TEP from paying further dividends or
could seek to impose additional restrictions on the payment of dividends; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric must be in compliance with their respective debt
agreements to make dividend payments to UniSource Energy.
|
Economic conditions could adversely impact our ability to comply with financial covenants in the
UniSource Energy and TEP Credit Agreements.
The UniSource Energy and TEP credit and reimbursement agreements include a minimum cash flow to
interest coverage ratio and a maximum leverage ratio. The leverage ratios are calculated as the
ratio of total indebtedness to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. The
ability to comply with these covenants could be adversely impacted by lower customer growth rates
or sales during an economic downturn. In the event that we seek to renegotiate these provisions to
provide additional flexibility, we may need to pay fees or increased interest rates on borrowings
as a condition to any amendments or waivers.
UniSource Energys net income and cash flows can be adversely affected by rising interest rates.
As of February 23, 2010, TEP had $329 million of tax-exempt variable rate debt obligations. The interest rates on these
debt obligations are set weekly with a maximum interest rate of 20%. The average weekly interest
rate ranged from 0.25% to 0.79% in 2009. A 1% increase in the average interest rates on this debt,
over a twelve month period, would result in an increase in interest expense by approximately $3
million.
UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric also are subject to risk resulting from changes in
the interest rate on their borrowings under revolving credit facilities. Revolving credit
borrowings may be made on a spread over LIBOR or an Alternate Base Rate. Each of these agreements
is a committed facility and expires in August 2011.
If capital market conditions result in rising interest rates, the resulting increase in the cost of
variable rate borrowings would negatively impact UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric
results of operations, net income and cash flows.
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric may be required to post margin under their power and fuel supply
agreements which could negatively impact their liquidity.
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric secure power and fuel supply resources to serve their respective
retail customers. The agreements under which TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric contract for such
resources include requirements to post credit enhancement in the form of cash or letters of credit
under certain circumstances, including changes in market prices which affect contract values, or a
change in creditworthiness of the respective companies.
In order to post such credit enhancement, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric would have to use available
cash, draw under their revolving credit agreements, or issue letters of credit under their
revolving credit agreements.
The maximum amount TEP may use under its revolving credit facility is $150 million. As of February
23, 2010, TEP had $99 million available to borrow under its revolving credit facility. The
maximum amount UNS Gas or UNS Electric may use under their revolving credit facility is $45
million, so long as the combined amount does not exceed $60 million. As of February 23, 2010, UNS
Gas and UNS Electric had $45 million and $33 million, respectively, to borrow under their revolving
credit facility. From time to time, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric use their respective revolving
credit facilities to post collateral. If additional collateral is required, it may negatively
impact TEP, UNS Gas and/or UNS Electrics ability to fund their capital requirements. As of
December 31, 2009, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric had posted $1 million, $2 million, and $11
million, respectively, with counterparties.
K-23
UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries have substantial debt which could adversely affect their
business and results of operations.
UniSource Energy has no operations of its own and derives all of its revenues and cash flow from
its subsidiaries. At December 31, 2009, the ratio of total debt (including capital lease
obligations net of investments in lease debt) to total capitalization for UniSource Energy and its
subsidiaries was 70%. This substantial debt level:
|
|
|
|
requires UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries to dedicate a substantial portion of
their cash flow to pay principal and interest on their debt, which could reduce the funds
available for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and other general
corporate purposes; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
could limit UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries ability to borrow additional amounts
for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, dividends, debt service
requirements, execution of its business strategy or other purposes.
|
The cost of renewing leases or purchasing TEPs leased assets, or the cost of procuring alternate
sources of generation or purchased power, could adversely affect TEPs results of operations, net
income and cash flows.
TEP, under separate sale and leaseback arrangements, leases the following generation facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased Asset
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Renewal/Purchase Option
|
|
Springerville Unit 1
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
Fair market value purchase option
|
|
Springerville Coal Handling Facilities
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
Fixed price purchase option of $120 million
|
|
Springerville Common Facilities
|
|
|
2017 & 2021
|
|
|
Fixed price purchase option of $106 million
|
|
Sundt Unit 4
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Agreement to purchase equity entered into
January 2010
|
TEP may renew the leases or purchase the assets when the leases expire at various times between
2011 and 2021. The renewal and purchase options for Springerville Unit 1 are generally for fair
market value as determined at that time, whereas fixed purchase price options exist for the coal
handling and common facilities leases. Upon expiration of the coal handling and common facilities
leases (whether at the end of the initial term or any renewal term), TEP has the obligation under
agreements with the Springerville Units 3 and 4 owners to purchase such facilities, and each of the
owners of Springerville Units 3 and 4 has the obligation to purchase or continue renting from TEP
at 14% and 17% interest, respectively, in these facilities.
ENVIRONMENTAL
UniSource Energys utility subsidiaries are subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations
that may increase their cost of operations or expose them to environmentally-related litigation and
liabilities.
UniSource Energys utility subsidiaries are subject to numerous federal, state and local
environmental laws and regulations affecting present and future operations, including rules
regarding air emissions, water quality, wastewater discharges, solid waste and hazardous waste.
Many of these regulations arise from TEPs reliance on coal as its primary fuel for energy
generation.
These laws and regulations can contribute to higher capital, operating and other costs,
particularly with regard to enforcement efforts focused on existing power plants and compliance
plans with regard to new and existing power plants. These laws and regulations generally require us
to obtain and comply with a wide variety of environmental licenses, permits, authorizations and
other approvals. Both public officials and private individuals may seek to enforce applicable
environmental laws and regulations. Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations might
result in the imposition of fines and penalties by regulatory authorities. We cannot provide
assurance that existing environmental laws and regulations will not be revised or that new
environmental laws and regulations will not be adopted or become applicable to us. Increased
compliance costs or additional operating restrictions from revised or additional regulation could
have an adverse effect on our results of operations, particularly if those costs are not fully
recoverable from our ratepayers.
TEP also is contractually obligated to pay a portion of the environmental reclamation costs
incurred at generating stations in which it has a minority interest and may be obliged to pay
similar costs at the mines that supply these generating stations. While TEP has recorded the
portion of its costs that can be determined at this time, the total costs for final reclamation at
these sites are unknown and could be substantial.
K-24
New federal regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions could increase TEPs cost of operations
and result in a change in the composition of TEPs coal-dominated generating fleet.
Based on the finding by the EPA in December 2009 stating that greenhouse gases endanger public
health and welfare, the agency is in the process of developing regulations limiting greenhouse gas
emissions. In addition, there are proposals and ongoing studies at the state, federal and
international levels to address global climate change that could also result in the regulation of
carbon dioxide (CO
2
) and other greenhouse gases. Any future regulatory actions taken to
address global climate change represent a business risk to our operations. In 2009, 69% of TEPs
total energy resources came from its coal-fueled generating facilities. Reductions in
CO
2
emissions to the levels specified by some proposals could be materially adverse to
our financial position or results of operations if associated costs of control or limitation cannot
be recovered from customers. Any future legislation or regulation addressing climate change could
produce a number of other results including additional costs to fund energy efficiency activities,
costly modifications to, or reexamination of the economic viability of, our existing coal plants or
changes in the overall fuel mix of our generating fleet. The impact of legislation or regulation to
address global climate change would depend on the specific legislation or regulation enacted and
cannot be determined at this time.
UniSource Energy could be subject to physical risks associated with climate change.
Climate change may cause physical risks, including an increase in sea level, intensified storms,
water scarcity and changes in weather conditions, such as changes in precipitation, average
temperatures and extreme weather conditions. A significant portion of the nations oil and gas
infrastructure is located in areas susceptible to storm damage that could be aggravated by wetland
and barrier island erosion, which could give rise to fuel supply interruptions and price spikes.
These and other physical changes could result in changes in customer demand, increased costs
associated with repairing and maintaining generation facilities and transmission and distribution
systems resulting in increased maintenance and capital costs (and potential increased financing
needs), limits on the companys ability to meet peak customer demand, increased regulatory
oversight, and lower customer satisfaction. Also, to the extent that climate change adversely
impacts the economic health of a region, it may adversely impact customer demand and revenues.
Such physical risks could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations
and liquidity.
OPERATIONAL
The operation of electric generating stations involves risks that could result in unplanned outages
or reduced generating capability that could adversely affect TEPs results of operations, net
income and cash flows.
The operation of electric generating stations involves certain risks, including equipment breakdown
or failure, interruption of fuel supply and lower than expected levels of efficiency or operational
performance. Unplanned outages, including extensions of planned outages due to equipment failure
or other complications occur from time to time and are an inherent risk of our business. If TEPs
generating stations operate below expectations, TEP could be adversely affected.
The operation of electric transmission and distribution systems involves a risk of significant
unplanned outages that could adversely affect TEP and UNS Electrics businesses, results of
operations, net income and cash flows.
The operation of electric transmission and distribution systems involves certain risks, including
equipment failure and damage caused by storms, fires or other hazards. Unplanned outages occur
from time to time and are an inherent risk of our business. If TEP or UNS Electrics transmission
and distribution systems experience a significant failure, TEP or UNS Electric could be adversely
affected
K-25
TEP could be subject to penalties as a result of mandatory reliability standards.
As a result of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, owners and operators of bulk power transmission
systems, including TEP, are subject to mandatory reliability standards that are developed and
enforced by NERC, subject to the oversight of FERC. If we fail to comply with the mandatory
reliability standards we could be subject to sanctions, including substantial monetary penalties.
UNS Electric may not be able to secure sufficient energy resources to serve its retail customers.
UNS Electric owns 68 MW of peaking generation resources and is purchasing the output of the 90 MW
BMGS from UED through a PPA that extends through May 2013. UNS Electric also relies on short and
intermediate term purchased power contracts to meet its retail energy demand. In 2009, UNS
Electrics peak retail demand was 559 MW. UNS Electric procures its projected retail peak demand
requirements prior to the start of the summer season. In addition to its owned resources and PPA
with UED, UNS Electric has acquired other contract capacity to satisfy 90% and 60% of its projected
summer peak demand for 2010 and 2011, respectively. However, UNS Electric cannot predict whether
it will be able to obtain sufficient resources to meet its retail energy demand for 2010 and
beyond. UNS Electrics cash flows and net income could be negatively impacted if UNS Electric is
unable to secure adequate energy resources to sell to its retail customers.
TEP or UNS Electric may not be able to secure adequate right-of-way to construct transmission lines
and may be required to find alternate ways to provide adequate sources of energy and maintain
reliability in TEP and UNS Electrics service areas.
TEP and UNS Electric rely on federal, state and local governmental agencies to secure right-of-way
and siting permits to construct transmission lines. If adequate right-of-way and siting permits to
build new transmission lines cannot be secured:
|
|
|
|
TEP and UNS Electric may need to rely on more costly alternatives to provide energy to
their customers;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEP and UNS Electric may not be able to maintain reliability in their service areas; or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEP and UNS Electrics ability to provide electric service to new customers may be
negatively impacted.
|
TEP may be required to build an estimated $120 million transmission line from Tucson to Nogales or
UNS Electric or TEP may be required to find alternate ways to improve reliability in UNS Electrics
Santa Cruz service area.
In 2001, TEP entered into an agreement to build an approximately 60-mile transmission line from
Tucson to Nogales, Arizona, in response to an order from the ACC to improve reliability to UNS
Electrics retail customers in Nogales. Required regulatory approvals have delayed the
construction of the transmission line, and in 2005, the ACC initiated proceedings to review the
status of service in Nogales and need for the 345-kV line. After a hearing on the issue in
February 2006, the ACC directed the ALJ to amend the recommendation to direct the Arizona Power
Plant and Transmission Line Siting Committee to gather facts related to options for improving
service reliability in Santa Cruz County. If all regulatory approvals are received and the project
moves forward, the future costs to construct the transmission line from Tucson to Nogales are
expected to be $120 million. If TEP is required to build the transmission line, it may negatively
impact TEPs ability to internally fund substantially all of its capital requirements.
If TEP does not receive required approvals or if the project is abandoned, TEP may be required to
expense a portion of the $11 million it has incurred through December 31, 2009, in land
acquisition, engineering and environmental expenses. In such an event, TEP or UNS Electric may be
required to make additional expenditures to improve reliability. In the event TEP or UNS Electric
are unable to recover such expenditures, their results of operations and net income could be
adversely affected.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
K-26
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
TEP PROPERTIES
TEPs transmission facilities, located in Arizona and New Mexico, transmit electricity from TEPs
remote electric generating stations at Four Corners, Navajo, San Juan, Springerville and Luna to
the Tucson area for use by TEPs retail customers (see
Item 1. Business Generating and Other
Resources
). The transmission system is interconnected at various points in Arizona and New Mexico
with a number of regional utilities. TEP has arrangements with approximately 120 companies to
interchange generation capacity and transmission of energy.
As of December 31, 2009, TEP owned or participated in an overhead electric transmission and
distribution system consisting of:
|
|
|
|
512 circuit-miles of 500-kV lines;
|
|
|
|
|
1,087 circuit-miles of 345-kV lines;
|
|
|
|
|
369 circuit-miles of 138-kV lines;
|
|
|
|
|
477 circuit-miles of 46-kV lines; and
|
|
|
|
|
2,622 circuit-miles of lower voltage primary lines.
|
The underground electric distribution system is comprised of 4,341 cable-miles. TEP owns
approximately 76% of the poles on which the lower voltage lines are located. Electric substation
capacity consisted of 102 substations with a total installed transformer capacity of 13,170,650
kilovolt amperes.
Substantially all of the utility assets owned by TEP are subject to the lien of the 1992 Mortgage.
Springerville Unit 2, which is owned by San Carlos Resources Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of TEP
(San Carlos), is not subject to the lien.
The electric generating stations (except as noted below), operating headquarters, warehouse and
service center are located on land owned by TEP. The electric distribution and transmission
facilities owned by TEP are located:
|
|
|
|
on property owned by TEP;
|
|
|
|
|
under or over streets, alleys, highways and other public places, the public domain and
national forests and state lands under franchises, easements or other rights which are
generally subject to termination;
|
|
|
|
|
under or over private property as a result of easements obtained primarily from the
record holder of title; or
|
|
|
|
|
over American Indian reservations under grant of easement by the Secretary of Interior
or lease by American Indian tribes.
|
It is possible that some of the easements, and the property over which the easements were granted,
may have title defects or may be subject to mortgages or liens existing at the time the easements
were acquired.
Springerville is located on land parcels held by TEP under a long-term surface ownership agreement
with the State of Arizona.
Four Corners and Navajo are located on properties held under easements from the United States and
under leases from the Navajo Nation, respectively. TEP, individually and in conjunction with PNM
in connection with San Juan, has acquired easements and leases for transmission lines and a water
diversion facility located on land owned by the Navajo Nation. TEP has also acquired easements for
transmission facilities, related to San Juan, Four Corners, and Navajo, across the Zuni, Navajo and
Tohono Oodham Indian Reservations. TEP, in conjunction with PNM and Phelps Dodge, holds an
undivided ownership interest in the property on which Luna is located.
TEPs rights under these various easements and leases may be subject to defects such as:
|
|
|
|
possible conflicting grants or encumbrances due to the absence of or inadequacies in the
recording laws or record systems of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the American Indian
tribes;
|
|
|
|
|
possible inability of TEP to legally enforce its rights against adverse claimants and
the American Indian tribes without Congressional consent; or
|
|
|
|
|
failure or inability of the American Indian tribes to protect TEPs interests in the
easements and leases from disruption by the U.S. Congress, Secretary of the Interior, or
other adverse claimants.
|
K-27
These possible defects have not interfered and are not expected to materially interfere with TEPs
interest in and operation of its facilities.
TEP, under separate sale and leaseback arrangements, leases the following generation facilities
(which do not include land):
|
|
|
|
coal handling facilities at Springerville;
|
|
|
|
|
a 50% undivided interest in the Springerville Common Facilities;
|
|
|
|
|
Springerville Unit 1 and the remaining 50% undivided interest in the Springerville
Common Facilities; and
|
|
|
|
|
Sundt Unit 4 and related common facilities.
|
See
Note 6 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Debt, Credit Facilities, and Capital
Lease Obligations and Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations, Tucson Electric Power Company, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Contractual
Obligations
, for additional information on TEPs capital lease obligations.
UES PROPERTIES
UNS Gas
As of December 31, 2009, UNS Gas transmission and distribution system consisted of approximately
58 miles of steel transmission mains, 4,173 miles of steel and plastic distribution mains, and
135,920 customer service lines.
UNS Electric
As of December 31, 2009, UNS Electrics transmission and distribution system consisted of
approximately 56 circuit-miles of 115-kV transmission lines, 264 circuit-miles of 69-kV
transmission lines, and 3,581 circuit-miles of underground and overhead distribution lines. UNS
Electric also owns 39 substations having a total installed capacity of 1,768,050 kilovolt amperes
and the 65 MW Valencia plant.
The gas and electric distribution and transmission facilities owned by UNS Gas and UNS Electric are
located:
|
|
|
|
on property owned by UNS Gas or UNS Electric;
|
|
|
|
|
under or over streets, alleys, highways and other public places, the public domain and
national forests and state lands under franchises, easements or other rights which are
generally subject to termination; or
|
|
|
|
|
under or over private property as a result of easements obtained primarily from the
record holder of title.
|
It is possible that some of the easements, and the property over which the easements were granted,
may have title defects or may be subject to mortgages or liens existing at the time the easements
were acquired.
UED PROPERTIES
As of December 31, 2009, UED owned a 90 MW gas-fired generation facility in Kingman, Arizona, known
as BMGS, that was completed in May 2008. BMGS is located on property that is owned by UNS Electric
and currently leased to UED. BMGS is subject to a lien to secure UEDs obligations under its term
loan facility.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Right of Way Matters
TEP is a defendant in a putative class action filed on February 11, 2009, in the United States
District Court in Albuquerque, New Mexico by members of the Navajo Nation. The plaintiffs allege,
among other things, that the rights of ways for defendants transmission lines on Navajo lands were
improperly granted and that the compensation paid for such rights of way was inadequate. The
plaintiffs are requesting, among other things, that the transmission lines on these lands be
removed. In June 2009, TEP and the other defendants filed motions to dismiss the lawsuit on
procedural grounds and in September 2009, the plaintiffs filed responses. TEP cannot predict the
outcome of this lawsuit.
K-28
Sierra Club San Juan Allegations
In December 2009, the Sierra Club sent TEP, the other owners of the San Juan Generating Station
(SJGS), and San Juan Coal Company (SJCC), a Notice of Intent to Sue (RCRA Notice) under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The RCRA Notice alleges that certain activities at
SJGS and the San Juan mine associated with the treatment, storage and disposal of coal and coal
combustion by-products (CCBs) are causing imminent and substantial harm to the environment and that
placement of CCBs at the mine constitute open dumping in violation of RCRA. Additionally, TEP has
been informed that the Sierra Club sent SJCC a separate Notice of Intent to Sue (SMCRA Notice)
under the Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) in December 2009. The SMCRA Notice
similarly alleges damage to the environment due to activities at the San Juan mine, including the
placement of CCBs from SJGS in the surface pits at the mine. Both Notices state Sierra Clubs
intent to file citizens suits to pursue these claims upon expiration of the RCRA and SMRCA
statutory notice periods. If suits are filed, potential remedies include the imposition of civil
penalties and injunctive relief. TEP and Public Service Company of New Mexico, the SJGS operator,
plan an aggressive defense of the RCRA claims. TEP cannot predict the outcome of these matters at
this time.
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, Tucson Electric Power Company, Factors Affecting Operations
, for litigation related to
ACC orders and retail competition.
In addition, see legal proceedings described in Note 4 of
Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements,
Commitments and Contingencies.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
Not applicable.
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES
OF COMMON EQUITY
Stock Trading
UniSource Energys Common Stock is traded under the ticker symbol UNS and is listed on the New York
Stock Exchange. On February 23, 2010, the closing price was $31.37, with 9,375 shareholders of
record.
Dividends
UniSource Energys Board of Directors currently expects to continue to pay regular quarterly cash
dividends on our Common Stock subject, however, to the Boards evaluation of our financial
condition, earnings, cash flows and dividend policy.
UniSource Energy is the sole shareholder of TEPs common stock and relies on dividends from its
subsidiaries, primarily TEP, to declare and pay dividends. The TEP Board of Directors typically
declares a dividend at the end of each year.
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, UniSource Energy Consolidated, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Dividends on Common
Stock
.
K-29
Common Stock Dividends and Price Ranges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
Market Price per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market Price per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share of Common
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share of Common
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
(1)
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
Stock
(1)
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Declared
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Declared
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
$
|
29.97
|
|
|
$
|
22.76
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
|
$
|
32.18
|
|
|
$
|
21.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
28.76
|
|
|
|
24.78
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
34.49
|
|
|
|
22.33
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
31.11
|
|
|
|
25.96
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
33.42
|
|
|
|
28.10
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
33.11
|
|
|
|
28.04
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
29.67
|
|
|
|
20.91
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
UniSource Energys Common Stock price as reported by the New York Stock
Exchange.
|
On February 12, 2010, UniSource Energy declared a cash dividend of $0.39 per share on its Common
Stock. The dividend will be paid March 8, 2010 to shareholders of record at the close of business
February 23, 2010.
TEPs common stock is wholly-owned by UniSource Energy and is not listed for trading on any stock
exchange. TEP declared and paid cash dividends to UniSource Energy of $60 million in 2009, $3
million in 2008, and $53 million in 2007.
Convertible Senior Notes
In 2005, UniSource Energy issued $150 million of 4.50% Convertible Senior Notes due 2035. Each
$1,000 of Convertible Senior Notes is convertible into 27.427 shares of our Common Stock at any
time, representing a conversion price of approximately $36.46 per share of our Common Stock,
subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, UniSource Energy Consolidated, Liquidity and
Capital Resources, Executive Overview, UniSource Energy Consolidated Cash Flows, Financing
Activities.
Issuer Purchases of Common Equity
UniSource Energy did not purchase any of its Common Stock during 2009, 2008 or 2007.
K-30
ITEM 6. SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
UniSource Energy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
- In Thousands -
|
|
|
|
|
(except per share data)
|
|
|
Summary of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,394,424
|
|
|
$
|
1,397,511
|
|
|
$
|
1,381,373
|
|
|
$
|
1,308,141
|
|
|
$
|
1,224,056
|
|
|
Income Before Discontinued Operations
and Accounting Change
|
|
$
|
104,258
|
|
|
$
|
14,021
|
|
|
$
|
58,373
|
|
|
$
|
69,243
|
|
|
$
|
52,253
|
|
|
Net Income
(1)
|
|
$
|
104,258
|
|
|
$
|
14,021
|
|
|
$
|
58,373
|
|
|
$
|
67,447
|
|
|
$
|
46,144
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Earnings per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before Discontinued Operations &
Accounting Change
|
|
$
|
2.91
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
1.64
|
|
|
$
|
1.96
|
|
|
$
|
1.51
|
|
|
Net Income
|
|
$
|
2.91
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
1.64
|
|
|
$
|
1.91
|
|
|
$
|
1.33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Earnings per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before Discontinued Operations &
Accounting Change
|
|
$
|
2.69
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
1.57
|
|
|
$
|
1.85
|
|
|
$
|
1.44
|
|
|
Net Income
|
|
$
|
2.69
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
1.57
|
|
|
$
|
1.80
|
|
|
$
|
1.28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares of Common Stock Outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
35,858
|
|
|
|
35,632
|
|
|
|
35,486
|
|
|
|
35,264
|
|
|
|
34,798
|
|
|
End of Year
|
|
|
35,851
|
|
|
|
35,458
|
|
|
|
35,315
|
|
|
|
35,190
|
|
|
|
34,874
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year-end Book Value per Share
|
|
$
|
20.94
|
|
|
$
|
19.16
|
|
|
$
|
19.54
|
|
|
$
|
18.59
|
|
|
$
|
17.69
|
|
|
Cash Dividends Declared per Share
|
|
$
|
1.16
|
|
|
$
|
0.96
|
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
$
|
0.84
|
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Position
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Utility Plant Net
|
|
$
|
2,785,714
|
|
|
$
|
2,617,693
|
|
|
$
|
2,407,295
|
|
|
$
|
2,259,620
|
|
|
$
|
2,171,461
|
|
|
Investments in Lease Debt and Equity
|
|
|
132,168
|
|
|
|
126,672
|
|
|
|
152,544
|
|
|
|
181,222
|
|
|
|
156,301
|
|
|
Other Investments and Other Property
|
|
|
60,239
|
|
|
|
64,096
|
|
|
|
70,677
|
|
|
|
66,194
|
|
|
|
58,468
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
3,601,242
|
|
|
$
|
3,509,567
|
|
|
$
|
3,185,716
|
|
|
$
|
3,187,409
|
|
|
$
|
3,180,211
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt
|
|
$
|
1,307,795
|
|
|
$
|
1,313,615
|
|
|
$
|
993,870
|
|
|
$
|
1,171,170
|
|
|
$
|
1,212,420
|
|
|
Non-Current Capital Lease Obligations
|
|
|
488,349
|
|
|
|
513,517
|
|
|
|
530,973
|
|
|
|
588,771
|
|
|
|
665,737
|
|
|
Common Stock Equity
|
|
|
750,865
|
|
|
|
679,274
|
|
|
|
690,075
|
|
|
|
654,149
|
|
|
|
616,741
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capitalization
|
|
$
|
2,547,009
|
|
|
$
|
2,506,406
|
|
|
$
|
2,214,918
|
|
|
$
|
2,414,090
|
|
|
$
|
2,494,898
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selected Cash Flow Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
|
$
|
347,310
|
|
|
$
|
277,011
|
|
|
$
|
322,766
|
|
|
$
|
282,659
|
|
|
$
|
273,883
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
$
|
(287,104
|
)
|
|
$
|
(357,324
|
)
|
|
$
|
(245,366
|
)
|
|
$
|
(238,261
|
)
|
|
$
|
(203,362
|
)
|
|
Other Investing Cash Flows
(2)
|
|
|
(9,540
|
)
|
|
|
(95,493
|
)
|
|
|
27,961
|
|
|
|
(7,820
|
)
|
|
|
32,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
|
$
|
(296,644
|
)
|
|
$
|
(452,817
|
)
|
|
$
|
(217,405
|
)
|
|
$
|
(246,081
|
)
|
|
$
|
(170,568
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
|
$
|
(28,916
|
)
|
|
$
|
140,605
|
|
|
$
|
(119,229
|
)
|
|
$
|
(77,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
(112,664
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed
Charges
(3)
|
|
|
2.47
|
|
|
|
1.24
|
|
|
|
1.68
|
|
|
|
1.73
|
|
|
|
1.55
|
|
K-31
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Net Income includes an after-tax loss for discontinued operations of $2 million in
2006, and $5 million in 2005. Net income includes an after-tax loss of $0.6 million for the
Cumulative Effect of Accounting Change from the implementation of asset retirement accounting in 2005.
|
|
|
|
((2)
|
|
Other Investing Cash Flows
in 2008 includes the $133 million deposit to
Trustee for Repayment of Collateral Trust Bond.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
For purposes of this computation, earnings are defined as pre-tax earnings from
continuing operations before minority interest, or income/loss from equity method investments, plus
interest expense, and amortization of debt discount and expense related to indebtedness. Fixed
charges are interest expense, including amortization of debt discount and expense on indebtedness.
|
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
.
TEP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
-Thousands of Dollars-
|
|
|
Summary of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,096,711
|
|
|
$
|
1,079,253
|
|
|
$
|
1,070,503
|
|
|
$
|
988,994
|
|
|
$
|
937,470
|
|
|
Income Before Accounting Change
|
|
|
89,248
|
|
|
|
4,363
|
|
|
|
53,456
|
|
|
|
66,745
|
|
|
|
48,893
|
|
|
Net Income
(1)
|
|
$
|
89,248
|
|
|
$
|
4,363
|
|
|
$
|
53,456
|
|
|
$
|
66,745
|
|
|
$
|
48,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Position
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Utility Plant Net
|
|
$
|
2,261,325
|
|
|
$
|
2,120,619
|
|
|
$
|
1,957,506
|
|
|
$
|
1,887,387
|
|
|
$
|
1,866,622
|
|
|
Investments in Lease Debt and Equity
|
|
|
132,168
|
|
|
|
126,672
|
|
|
|
152,544
|
|
|
|
181,222
|
|
|
|
156,301
|
|
|
Other Investments and Other Property
|
|
|
31,813
|
|
|
|
31,291
|
|
|
|
35,460
|
|
|
|
30,161
|
|
|
|
27,013
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
2,914,299
|
|
|
$
|
2,841,771
|
|
|
$
|
2,573,036
|
|
|
$
|
2,623,063
|
|
|
$
|
2,617,219
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt
|
|
$
|
903,615
|
|
|
$
|
903,615
|
|
|
$
|
682,870
|
|
|
$
|
821,170
|
|
|
$
|
821,170
|
|
|
Non-Current Capital Lease Obligations
|
|
|
488,311
|
|
|
|
513,370
|
|
|
|
530,714
|
|
|
|
588,424
|
|
|
|
665,299
|
|
|
Common Stock Equity
|
|
|
643,144
|
|
|
|
583,606
|
|
|
|
577,349
|
|
|
|
554,714
|
|
|
|
558,646
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capitalization
|
|
$
|
2,035,070
|
|
|
$
|
2,000,591
|
|
|
$
|
1,790,933
|
|
|
$
|
1,964,308
|
|
|
$
|
2,045,115
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selected Cash Flow Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
|
$
|
268,064
|
|
|
$
|
268,706
|
|
|
$
|
264,112
|
|
|
$
|
227,228
|
|
|
$
|
243,013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
$
|
(235,485
|
)
|
|
$
|
(294,940
|
)
|
|
$
|
(162,539
|
)
|
|
$
|
(156,180
|
)
|
|
$
|
(149,906
|
)
|
|
Other Investing Cash Flows
(2)
|
|
|
(14,116
|
)
|
|
|
(95,814
|
)
|
|
|
25,414
|
|
|
|
(25,786
|
)
|
|
|
21,001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
|
$
|
(249,601
|
)
|
|
$
|
(390,754
|
)
|
|
$
|
(137,125
|
)
|
|
$
|
(181,966
|
)
|
|
$
|
(128,905
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
|
$
|
(29,320
|
)
|
|
$
|
128,713
|
|
|
$
|
(120,088
|
)
|
|
$
|
(78,984
|
)
|
|
$
|
(173,882
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
(3)
|
|
|
2.58
|
|
|
|
1.13
|
|
|
|
1.75
|
|
|
|
1.84
|
|
|
|
1.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Net Income includes an after-tax loss of $0.6 million for the Cumulative Effect of
Accounting Change from the implementation of asset retirement accounting in 2005.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Other Investing Cash Flows
in 2008 includes the $133 million deposit to
Trustee for Repayment of Collateral Trust Bonds.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
For purposes of this computation, earnings are defined as pre-tax earnings from
continuing operations before minority interest, or income/loss from equity method investments,
plus interest expense and amortization of debt discount and expense related to indebtedness. Fixed
charges are interest expense, including amortization of debt discount and expense on indebtedness.
|
|
|
|
Note:
|
|
Disclosure of earnings per share information for TEP is not presented as the common stock of
TEP is not publicly traded.
|
See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
K-32
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Managements Discussion and Analysis explains the results of operations, the general financial
condition, and the outlook for UniSource Energy and its three primary business segments and
includes the following:
|
|
|
|
outlook and strategies,
|
|
|
|
|
operating results during 2009 compared with 2008, and 2008 compared with 2007,
|
|
|
|
|
factors which affect our results and outlook,
|
|
|
|
|
liquidity, capital needs, capital resources, and contractual obligations,
|
|
|
|
|
critical accounting policies.
|
UniSource Energy is a holding company that has no significant operations of its own. Operations
are conducted by UniSource Energys subsidiaries, each of which is a separate legal entity with its
own assets and liabilities. UniSource Energy owns the outstanding common stock of TEP, UniSource
Energy Services, Inc. (UES), UniSource Energy Development Company (UED) and Millennium Energy
Holdings, Inc. (Millennium).
TEP, an electric utility, provides electric service to the community of Tucson, Arizona. UES,
through its two operating subsidiaries, UNS Gas, Inc. (UNS Gas) and UNS Electric, Inc. (UNS
Electric), provides gas and electric service to 30 communities in Northern and Southern Arizona.
UED developed and owns the Black Mountain Generating Station (BMGS), a gas turbine project in
Northern Arizona that provides energy to UNS Electric through a five-year power sale agreement.
Millennium has existing investments in unregulated businesses; however no new investments are
planned at Millennium. We conduct our business in three primary business segments TEP, UNS Gas
and UNS Electric.
At December 31, 2009, the investment in Millennium represented 1% of UniSource Energys total
assets.
UNISOURCE ENERGY CONSOLIDATED
OUTLOOK AND STRATEGIES
Our financial prospects and outlook for the next few years will be affected by many factors
including: TEPs 2008 Rate Order that freezes base rates through 2012, the recent national and
regional economic downturn, the financial market disruptions and volatility, potential regulations
impacting greenhouse gas emissions and other regulatory factors. Our plans and strategies include
the following:
|
|
|
Develop strategic responses to potential new legislation on carbon emissions, including the
evaluation of TEPs existing mix of generation resources, and define steps to achieve
environmental objectives that provide an appropriate return on investment and are consistent
with earnings growth;
|
|
|
|
Obtain ACC approval of rate increases for UNS Gas and UNS Electric to provide adequate
revenues to cover the rising cost of providing reliable and safe service to their customers;
|
|
|
|
Expand TEP and UNS Electrics transmission system to meet increasing loads and provide
access to renewable energy resources;
|
|
|
|
Expand TEP and UNS Electrics portfolio of renewable energy sources and programs to meet
Arizonas renewable energy standards;
|
|
|
|
Create future ownership opportunities for renewable energy projects; and
|
|
|
|
Ensure UniSource Energy continues to have adequate liquidity by maintaining sufficient
lines of credit and regularly reviewing and adjusting UniSource Energys short-term investment
strategies in response to market conditions.
|
K-33
Economic Conditions
Sales and Revenues
As a result of general economic conditions, retail customer growth and energy usage by residential
and commercial customers at UniSource Energys utility subsidiaries is below the average levels
experienced in prior periods. From 2003 to 2007, the growth in number of customers in UniSource
Energys utility service territories averaged 2% per year for TEP, and 3% per year for UNS Gas and
UNS Electric. During 2008 and 2009, UniSource Energys results were impacted by slower retail
customer growth and lower energy consumption.
TEP and UES experienced retail customer growth of less than 1% during 2009. TEPs total retail kWh sales decreased by 1.4% in 2008 compared with 2007.
This was the first year-over-year decrease in TEPs retail kWh sales since 2002. In 2009, TEPs
kWh sales declined by 1.4% over the prior years levels. This compares with average annual
increases in retail kWh sales of 4% from 2003 to 2007. We did not experience a significant
increase in uncollectible accounts at TEP, UNS Gas or UNS Electric in 2008 or 2009.
UniSource Energys future results of operations may continue to be impacted by weak economic
conditions. We cannot predict if the customer growth rate or sales volumes will return to historic
levels. We expect TEPs customer base to grow at a rate of less than 1% in 2010 and approximately
1% in 2011. UES customer base is expected to grow at a rate of less than 1% in 2010 and 2011.
Financial Markets
To date, UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries have not been materially impacted by volatility and
disruptions in the financial markets. Our banking relationships remain stable. UniSource Energy
and its subsidiaries have access to $280 million of revolving credit facilities, of which $202
million was unused as of February 23, 2010, which we believe is sufficient to meet current
operating, capital and financing needs. UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric have not
experienced, nor do they expect to experience, any difficulties obtaining funding under their
respective revolving credit facilities. None of these credit facilities have any bankrupt
financial institutions as lenders, and no lenders in the bank groups have refused to fund when
requested.
UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries are also subject to interest rate risk on variable rate
revolving credit facility borrowings and outstanding long-term variable rate debt. See
Liquidity
and Capital Resources, Interest Rate Risk; Tucson Electric Power, Liquidity and Capital Resources,
Interest Rate Risk; UNS Gas, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Interest Rate Risk; and UNS Electric,
Liquidity and Capital Resources, Interest Rate Risk
below.
Neither UniSource Energy nor any of its subsidiaries have any scheduled long-term debt maturities
until 2011 when $50 million of unsecured notes mature at UNS Gas. The UniSource Energy and TEP
Credit Agreements and the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver also expire in 2011. UniSource Energy is
required to make principal payments on an amortizing term loan, totaling $6 million per year. See
UniSource Energy Credit Agreement
, below.
As of February 23, 2010, TEP, UNS Electric and UNS Gas did not have any material power or gas
trading exposure to financially distressed counterparties. We cannot predict whether in the future
our financial condition or results of operations will be impacted by current economic conditions or
liquidity concerns in the financial markets. See
Liquidity and Capital Resources,
below.
Pension and Post-Retirement Benefits
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric maintain noncontributory, defined benefit pension plans for
substantially all regular employees and certain affiliate employees. Benefits are based on years
of service and the employees average compensation. TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric fund the plans
by contributing at least the minimum amount required under Internal Revenue Service regulations.
Additionally, we provide supplemental retirement benefits to certain employees whose benefits are
limited by Internal Revenue Service benefit or compensation limitations.
K-34
The pension assets are invested in a diversified portfolio of domestic and international equity
securities, fixed income securities, real estate and alternative investments. As of December 31,
2009, the total value of the pension assets was approximately $184 million, compared with $135
million as of December 31, 2008. Our accumulated benefit obligation at December 31, 2009 and at
December 31, 2008 was $210 million and $198 million, respectively. Due to the increase in the
plan total asset value during 2009, projected funding levels are expected to be $22 million in 2010,
compared with the $23 million contribution that was funded in 2009.
Environmental Matters
UniSource Energys utility subsidiaries are subject to numerous federal, state and local
environmental laws and regulations affecting present and future operations, including regulations
regarding air emissions, water quality, wastewater discharges, solid waste and hazardous waste.
These laws and regulations can result in increased capital, operating and other costs, particularly
with regard to enforcement efforts focused on existing power plants and compliance plans with
regard to new and existing power plants. There are proposals and ongoing studies at the state,
federal and international levels to address global climate change that could result in the
regulation of CO
2
and other greenhouse gases. Such legislation or regulation could
produce a number of results including additional costs to fund energy efficiency activities, costly
modifications to, or reexamination of the economic viability of, our existing coal plants or
changes in the overall fuel mix of our generating fleet. The impact of legislation or regulation to
address global climate change would depend on the specific legislation or regulation enacted and
cannot be determined at this time. For further discussion of the possible impact of environmental
matters on our business, see
Item 1. Business -Environmental Matters and Item 1A. Risk Factors
.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Executive Overview
UniSource Energy recorded Net Income of $104 million in 2009, $14 million in 2008 and $58 million
in 2007.
2009 Compared with 2008
The increase in UniSource Energys net income in 2009 is due primarily to three factors: 1) a $40
million increase in TEPs retail revenues (excluding revenues collected from customers for
renewable energy and energy efficiency programs) resulting from a 6% base rate increase and hot
summer weather during the third quarter of 2009; 2) a $30 million decrease in total fuel and
purchased energy expense (net of short-term wholesale revenues); and 3) $50 million of regulatory
expenses, revenue deferrals and accounting adjustments in 2008 that did not recur in 2009. Other
factors include a $6 million pre-tax gain recorded in 2009 resulting from Millenniums sale of an
investment.
See Tucson Electric Power Company, Results of Operations
, below.
2008 Compared with 2007
UniSource Energy recorded net income of $14 million in 2008 compared with net income of $58 million
in 2007. The decrease in UniSource Energys net income in 2008 was due primarily to higher costs
at TEP and the impacts resulting from the 2008 TEP Rate Order. TEP incurred higher coal-related
fuel expense; higher purchased power costs due partially to plant outages in the first and third
quarters of 2008; and higher operations and maintenance (O&M) expense primarily due to generating
plant maintenance.
K-35
Results in 2008 were also impacted by: a $54 million decrease in TRA amortization; the 2008 TEP
Rate Order that included a credit to retail customers that decreased revenue by $58 million; and
adjustments that reduced pre-tax expenses by $32 million related to the reapplication of regulatory
accounting to TEPs generating assets, resulting from the 2008 TEP Rate Order.
See Tucson
Electric Power Company, Results of Operations
, below.
O&M
The table below summarizes the items included in UniSource Energys O&M expense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
TEP Base O&M
|
|
$
|
231
|
|
|
$
|
219
|
|
|
$
|
192
|
|
|
UNS Gas Base O&M
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
UNS Electric Base O&M
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Base Utility O&M
|
|
|
277
|
|
|
|
265
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
Consolidating Adjustments and Other
(1)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Base O&M
|
|
|
270
|
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
|
231
|
|
|
Reimbursed Expenses Related to Springerville Units 3 and 4
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
Gain on the Sale of SO
2
Emissions Allowances
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
Expenses related to customer-funded renewable energy programs
(2)
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Reinstatement of Regulatory Accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total UniSource Energy O&M
|
|
$
|
334
|
|
|
$
|
296
|
|
|
$
|
242
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Includes Millennium, UED and parent company O&M, and inter-company
eliminations
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Represents expenses related to customer-funded renewable energy
programs; the offsetting funds collected from
customers are recorded in other revenue.
|
CONTRIBUTION BY BUSINESS SEGMENT
The table below shows the contributions to our consolidated after-tax earnings by our three
business segments and Other net income (loss).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
$
|
89
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
53
|
|
|
UNS Gas
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
UNS Electric
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
Other
(1)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Net Income
|
|
$
|
104
|
|
|
$
|
14
|
|
|
$
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Includes: UniSource Energy parent company expenses; UniSource Energy parent
company interest expense (net of tax) on the UniSource Energy Convertible Senior Notes and on the
UniSource Energy Credit Agreement; and income and losses from Millennium investments and UED.
|
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Liquidity
The primary source of liquidity for UniSource Energy, the parent company, is dividends from its
subsidiaries, primarily TEP. Also, under UniSource Energys tax sharing agreement, subsidiaries
make income tax payments to UniSource Energy, which makes payments on behalf of the consolidated
group. The table below provides a summary of the liquidity position of UniSource Energy on a
stand-alone basis and each of its segments.
K-36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
|
|
|
Amount Available
|
|
|
Balances As of
|
|
Cash and Cash
|
|
|
under Revolving
|
|
|
under Revolving
|
|
|
February 23, 2010
|
|
Equivalents
|
|
|
Credit Facility
(3)
|
|
|
Credit Facility
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
UniSource Energy stand-alone
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
55
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
UNS Gas
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
(1)
|
|
UNS Electric
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
33
|
(1)
|
|
Other
|
|
|
8
|
(2)
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Currently, either UNS Gas or UNS Electric may borrow up to a maximum of $45 million,
but the total combined amount borrowed cannot exceed $60 million.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Includes cash and cash equivalents at Millennium and UED.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Includes LOCs issued under Revolving Credit Facilities
|
Short-term Investments
UniSource Energy has a short-term investment policy which governs the investment of excess cash
balances by UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries. We review this policy periodically in response
to market conditions to adjust, if necessary, the maturities and concentrations by investment type
and issuer in the investment portfolio. As of December 31, 2009, UniSource Energys short-term
investments include highly-rated and liquid money market funds, certificates of deposit and
commercial paper. These short-term investments are classified as Cash and Cash Equivalents on the
Balance Sheet.
Access to Revolving Credit Facilities
UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are each party to a revolving credit agreement with
a group of lenders, which is available to be used for working capital purposes. Each of these
agreements is a committed facility and expires in August 2011. The TEP and UNS Gas/UNS Electric
Credit Agreements may be used for revolving borrowings, as well as to issue letters of credit.
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric each issue letters of credit from time to time to provide credit
enhancement to counterparties for their power or gas procurement and hedging activities. The
UniSource Energy Credit Agreement may be used only for revolver borrowings.
UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries believe that they have sufficient liquidity under their
revolving credit facilities to meet their short-term working capital needs and to provide credit
enhancement as may be required under their respective energy procurement and hedging agreements.
See Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk, Credit Risk
, below.
Liquidity Outlook
Neither UniSource Energy nor any of its subsidiaries have any long-term debt maturities until 2011
when $50 million of unsecured notes mature at UNS Gas. The UniSource Energy and TEP Credit
Agreements and the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver also expire in 2011. UniSource Energy is required
to make principal payments on an amortizing term loan, totaling $6 million per year. See
UniSource
Energy Credit Agreement
, below.
Executive Overview UniSource Energy Consolidated Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities
|
|
$
|
347
|
|
|
$
|
277
|
|
|
$
|
323
|
|
|
Investing Activities
|
|
|
(297
|
)
|
|
|
(453
|
)
|
|
|
(217
|
)
|
|
Financing Activities
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
141
|
|
|
|
(119
|
)
|
UniSource Energys consolidated cash flows are provided primarily from retail and wholesale energy
sales at TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric, net of the related payments for fuel and purchased power.
Generally, cash from operations is lowest in the first quarter and highest in the third quarter due
to TEPs summer peaking load. As a
result of the varied seasonal cash flow, UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric use, as
needed, their revolving credit facilities to fund their business activities.
K-37
Cash used for investing activities is primarily a result of capital expenditures at TEP, UNS Gas
and UNS Electric.
Cash used for investing and financing activities can fluctuate year-to-year depending on: capital
expenditures, repayments and borrowings under revolving credit facilities; debt issuances or
retirements; capital lease payments by TEP; and dividends paid by UniSource Energy to its
shareholders.
Operating Activities
In 2009, net cash flows from operating activities were $70 million higher than 2008 primarily due
to: lower costs of fuel and purchased energy; increased retail revenues due to base rate increases
at TEP and UNS Electric and hot summer weather; lower interest paid on capital leases and long-term
debt; partially offset by lower wholesale sales, higher O&M and higher wages paid.
Investing Activities
Net cash used for investing activities was $156 million lower in 2009 compared with 2008 due to: a
$133 million deposit made by TEP last year with the trustee for bonds that matured on August 1,
2008; and a $70 million decrease in capital expenditures in 2009; partially offset by a $31 million
investment made by TEP in 2009 to purchase Springerville lease debt; and a $12 million decrease in
proceeds from investment in lease debt.
Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
Estimated
|
|
Business Segment
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
$
|
235
|
|
|
$
|
258
|
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
203
|
|
|
$
|
225
|
|
|
$
|
209
|
|
|
UNS Gas
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
UNS Electric
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Stand-Alone
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Consolidated
|
|
$
|
287
|
|
|
$
|
314
|
|
|
$
|
285
|
|
|
$
|
251
|
|
|
$
|
254
|
|
|
$
|
244
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in TEPs capital expenditures forecast for 2010 is $52 million for the proposed
purchase of Sundt Unit 4.
|
|
|
|
|
Items excluded from TEPs capital expenditures forecast are: the estimated cost to
construct proposed Tucson to Nogales, Arizona transmission line of $120 million; estimated
costs of $300 million between 2011-2014 to construct 75 to 150 MW of local generation that
may be required in 2015.
|
|
|
|
|
The estimated capital expenditures for UniSource Energy Stand-Alone are for the purchase
of land and construction of a new corporate headquarters.
|
For more information see
TEP, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Investing Activities, Capital
Expenditures,
below, and
Item 1. Business, TEP, Transmission Access, Tucson to Nogales Transmission
Line,
above.
Financing Activities
Net cash proceeds from financing activities were $170 million lower in 2009 compared with 2008. In
2008, The Industrial Development Authority of Pima County issued, for the benefit of TEP,
approximately $221 million of tax-exempt industrial development revenue bonds and UNS Electric
issued $100 million of long-term debt used in part to refinance a $60 million debt maturity.
Factors affecting proceeds from financing activities in 2009 included: $30 million of proceeds from
the issuance of short-term debt at UED; a $70 million decrease in payments of long-term debt
compared with 2008; a $50 million decline in payments on capital lease obligations compared with
2008; and a $7 million increase in dividends paid compared with 2008.
K-38
Capital Contributions
In March 2009, UED used loan proceeds to distribute $30 million to UniSource Energy. UniSource
Energy used the proceeds to contribute $30 million of capital to TEP. TEP used the proceeds to
purchase lease debt related to Springerville Unit 1. In February 2010, UED distributed $9 million
to UniSource Energy. See
Other Non-Reportable Business Segments, UED
and
Tucson Electric Power
Company, Liquidity and Capital Resources
, below for more information.
In 2008, UniSource Energy contributed $59 million in capital to UED by canceling an intercompany
promissory note in the amount of $59 million. Borrowings under the promissory note were used to
finance the development of BMGS.
UniSource Energy Credit Agreement
The UniSource Credit Agreement consists of a $30 million amortizing term loan facility and a $70
million revolving credit facility and matures in August 2011. Principal payments of $1.5 million
on the outstanding term loan are due quarterly, with the balance due at maturity. At December 31,
2009, there was $9 million outstanding under the term loan facility and $31 million outstanding
under the UniSource Energy revolving credit facility at a weighted average interest rate of 1.48%.
We have the option of paying interest on the term loan and on borrowings under the revolving credit
facility at adjusted LIBOR plus 1.25% or the sum of the greater of the federal funds rate plus 0.5%
or the agent banks reference rate and 0.25%.
The UniSource Credit Agreement restricts additional indebtedness, liens, mergers, dividends, sales
of assets, and certain investments and acquisitions. We must also meet: (1) a minimum cash flow to
debt service coverage ratio for UniSource Energy on a stand alone basis and (2) a maximum leverage
ratio on a consolidated basis. We may pay dividends if, after giving effect to the dividend
payment, we have more than $15 million of unrestricted cash and unused revolving credit.
In September 2008 and February 2009, as a result of higher than expected fuel and purchased power
costs, UniSource Energy amended its credit agreements to provide more flexibility to meet the
required leverage ratio. Although fuel and purchase power expenses have decreased in recent
months, current economic conditions could result in lower customer growth rates and lower sales and
could impact our ability to comply with these covenants.
As of December 31, 2009, we were in compliance with the terms of the UniSource Credit Agreement.
If an event of default occurs, the UniSource Credit Agreement may become immediately due and
payable. An event of default includes failure to make required payments under the UniSource Credit
Agreement, failure of UniSource Energy or certain subsidiaries to make payments or default on debt
greater than $20 million, or certain bankruptcy events at UniSource Energy or certain subsidiaries.
Interest Rate Risk
UniSource Energy is subject to interest rate risk resulting from changes in interest rates on its
borrowings under the revolving credit facility. The interest paid on revolving credit borrowings
is variable. Given the recent volatility in LIBOR and other benchmark interest rates, UniSource
Energy may be required to pay higher rates of interest on borrowings under its revolving credit
facility. See
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk, Credit Risk
,
below.
Convertible Senior Notes
UniSource Energy has $150 million of 4.50% Convertible Senior Notes due 2035. Each $1,000 of
Convertible Senior Notes is convertible into 27.427 shares of UniSource Energy Common Stock at any
time, representing a conversion price of approximately $36.46 per share of our Common Stock,
subject to adjustments. The closing price of UniSource Energys Common Stock was $31.37 on
February 23, 2010.
Beginning on March 5, 2010, UniSource Energy will have the option to redeem the notes, in whole or
in part, for cash, at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid
interest. Holders of the notes will have the right to require UniSource Energy to repurchase the
notes, in whole or in part, for cash on March 1, 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030, or if certain specified
fundamental changes involving UniSource Energy occur. The repurchase price will be 100% of the
principal amount of the notes plus accrued and unpaid interest.
K-39
Guarantees and Indemnities
In the normal course of business, UniSource Energy and certain subsidiaries enter into various
agreements providing financial or performance assurance to third parties on behalf of certain
subsidiaries. We enter into these agreements primarily to support or enhance the creditworthiness
of a subsidiary on a stand-alone basis. The most significant of these guarantees at December 31,
2009 were:
|
|
|
UES guarantee of senior unsecured notes issued by UNS Gas ($100 million) and UNS Electric
($100 million);
|
|
|
|
|
|
UES guarantee of the $60 million UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver;
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energys guarantee of approximately $2 million in building lease payments for UNS
Gas; and
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energys guarantee of the $26 million of outstanding loans under the UED Credit
Agreement. In February 2010, UED increased its borrowings under this agreement to $35
million. As a result, UniSource Energy increased its guarantee to $35 million.
|
To the extent liabilities exist under these contracts, such liabilities are included in the
consolidated balance sheets.
In January 2010, TEP entered into an agreement to purchase 100% of the equity interest in Sundt
Unit 4. We have indemnified the seller of Sundt Unit 4 from any sales, use, transfer or similar
taxes or fees due relating to the purchase. The terms of the indemnification do not include a
limit on potential future payments; however, we believe that the parties to the agreement have
abided by all tax laws, and we do not have any additional tax obligations. We have not made any
payments under the terms of this indemnification to date.
Contractual Obligations
The following chart displays UniSource Energys consolidated contractual obligations by maturity
and by type of obligation as of December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energys Contractual Obligations
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment Due in Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending December 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
after
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Long Term Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
(1)
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
$
|
578
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
745
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,355
|
|
|
Interest
(2)
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
659
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
929
|
|
|
Capital Lease Obligations
(3)
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
739
|
|
|
Operating Leases
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
Purchase Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel
(4)
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
467
|
|
|
Purchased Power
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
Transmission
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
Other Long-Term Liabilities
(5)
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension & Other Post Retirement
Obligations
(6)
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
Acquisition of Springerville Coal
Handling and Common Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
|
Building Commitments
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Contractual Cash Obligations
|
|
$
|
439
|
|
|
$
|
854
|
|
|
$
|
243
|
|
|
$
|
273
|
|
|
$
|
296
|
|
|
$
|
1,933
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
4,057
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K-40
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
TEPs variable rate IDBs are secured by letters of credit issued pursuant to TEPs
Credit Agreement and 2008 Letter of Credit Facility which expire in 2011. Although the variable
rate IDBs mature between 2018 and 2029, the above maturity reflects a redemption or repurchase of
such bonds in 2011 as though the letters of credit terminate without replacement upon expiration of
the TEP Credit Agreement and 2008 Letter of Credit Facility. In January 2010, TEPs 2008 Letter of
Credit Facility was terminated on conversion of the 2008 Pima B Bonds to a fixed rate.
Effective with the termination of the 2008 Letter of Credit Facility, $130 million of variable rate
IDBs mature in 2029. In February 2010, UED amended its $26 million term loan facility (included in
2010 maturity above) to extend the termination date by two years to March 2012 and had net
additional borrowings of $9 million bringing the outstanding balance to $35 million.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Excludes interest on revolving credit facilities.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Effective with commercial operation of Springerville Unit 3 in July 2006 and Unit 4
in December 2009, Tri-State and SRP are reimbursing TEP for various operating costs related to the
common facilities on an ongoing basis, including 14% each of the Springerville Common Lease
payments and 17% each of the Springerville Coal Handling Facilities Lease payments. TEP remains
the obligor under these capital leases, and Capital Lease Obligations do not reflect any reduction
associated with this reimbursement. In January 2010, TEP entered into an agreement to purchase
100% of the equity interest in Sundt Unit 4 from the owner participant for approximately $52
million. The purchase price is subject to increase by 0.75% of the purchase price per month in the
event that the purchase occurs after March 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
Excludes TEPs liability for final environmental reclamation at the coal mines
which supply the San Juan and Four Corners generating stations as the timing of payment has not
been determined. See Note 4.
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
Excludes asset retirement obligations expected to occur through 2066.
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
|
These obligations represent TEP and UES expected contributions to pension plans in
2010 and TEPs expected postretirement benefit costs to cover medical and life insurance claims as
determined by the plans actuaries. TEP and UES do not know and have not included pension
contributions beyond 2010 due to the significant impact that returns on plan assets and changes in
discount rates might have on such amounts. TEP previously funded the postretirement benefit plan
on a pay-as-you-go basis. In 2009, TEP established a VEBA Trust to partially fund expected future
benefits for union employees. Benefit payments are not expected to be made from the Trust for
several years. The 2010 obligation includes expected VEBA contributions. VEBA contributions for
periods beyond 2010 cannot be determined at this time.
|
We have reviewed our contractual obligations and provide the following additional information:
|
|
|
|
We do not have any provisions in any of our debt or lease agreements that would cause an
event of default or cause amounts to become due and payable in the event of a credit rating
downgrade.
|
|
|
|
|
None of our contracts or financing arrangements contains acceleration clauses or other
consequences triggered by changes in our stock price.
|
Dividends on Common Stock
On February 12, 2010, UniSource Energy declared a first quarter cash dividend of $0.39 per share on
its Common Stock. The first quarter dividend, totaling approximately $14 million, will be paid
March 8, 2010 to shareholders of record at the close of business February 23, 2010. During 2009,
UniSource Energy paid quarterly dividends to its shareholders of 0.29 per share; for all of 2009,
total dividends paid were $41 million. In 2008, UniSource Energy paid quarterly dividends to its
shareholders of $0.24 per share; for all of 2008, total dividends paid were $34 million.
Income Tax Position
At December 31, 2009, UniSource Energy and TEP had federal AMT credit carryforwards of $43 million
and $28 million, respectively, which do not expire. During 2009, UniSource Energy and TEP used all
of their capital loss and state net operating loss carryforwards.
TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Executive Summary
TEP recorded net income of $89 million in 2009 compared with $4 million in 2008. The improvement
in net income during 2009 is due primarily to: TEPs new retail rate structure; hot summer weather;
lower fuel and purchased power costs; no provision for rate refunds recorded in 2009; and the
elimination of TRA amortization expense that was incurred in 2008. In addition, 2008 results
include a reduction in pre-tax expenses related to the reinstatement of regulatory accounting to
TEPs generating assets resulting from the 2008 TEP Rate Order.
K-41
Beginning on January 1, 2009, TEP implemented a PPFAC. The PPFAC allows recovery of actual fuel
and purchased power costs from TEPs retail customers. The fuel and purchased power costs are
off-set by the following, which are credited to the PPFAC: 100% of short-term wholesale revenues,
10% of the profit on trading activity and 50% of the revenues from the sale of SO
2
emission allowances. As a result of the PPFAC, relative to prior periods, TEPs net income is not
as sensitive to changes in fuel and purchased power costs or revenues from short-term wholesale
sales.
The financial condition and results of operations of TEP are currently the principal factors
affecting the financial condition and results of operations of UniSource Energy on an annual basis.
The following discussion relates to TEPs utility operations, unless otherwise noted.
2009 Compared with 2008
The following factors contributed to the change in TEPs net income:
|
|
|
|
a $62 million increase in retail revenues due primarily to: the 6% base rate increase that
took effect in December 2008; a new rate structure that charges higher rates for higher
levels of energy usage; a $23 million increase in revenues collected from customers for
renewable energy and energy efficiency programs; and hot summer weather during the third
quarter of 2009;
|
|
|
|
|
a provision for rate refunds of $58 million recorded in 2008;
|
|
|
|
|
a $9 million decrease in long-term wholesale revenues due primarily to lower kWh sales to
Salt River Project (SRP) and Navajo Tribal Utility Authority (NTUA);
|
|
|
|
|
a $30 million decrease in total fuel and purchased energy expense, net of short-term
wholesale revenues, due to lower generating output; a decline in the market price of
wholesale power and natural gas; and a $24 million gain recorded to fuel expense in 2008
related to the reinstatement of regulatory accounting;
|
|
|
|
|
a $33 million increase in O&M. Excluding a $15 million increase in expenses directly
offset by customer surcharges for renewable energy and energy efficiency programs and a $6
million increase third party reimbursements, the increase in O&M was $12 million, which
resulted primarily from higher pension-related expenses and plant maintenance expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
a $27 million increase in depreciation and amortization expense due to: additions to plant
in service; new depreciation rates for generation assets; and amortization of regulatory
assets resulting from the 2008 TEP Rate Order;
|
|
|
|
|
a $24 million decrease in the amortization of TEPs TRA. In May 2008, the TRA was fully
amortized;
|
|
|
|
|
a $6 million increase in taxes other than income taxes due primarily to a $7 million gain
recorded in 2008 resulting from the reinstatement of regulatory accounting;
|
|
|
|
|
a $10 million increase in total other income due to interest income related to an income
tax refund, income related to an adjustment in the accounting for an investment in lease
equity and income related to an increase in the value of a company owned life insurance
policy; and
|
|
|
|
|
an $11 million decrease in total interest expense resulting primarily from lower interest
rates on variable rate debt and lower interest expense related to capital lease obligations;
|
In 2009 and 2008, the pre-tax benefit recognized by TEP related to Springerville Units 3 and 4 for
operating fees and contributions toward common facility costs was $12 million in each period.
In June 2009, TEP adjusted its accounting for a 2006 investment in 14.14% of Springerville
Unit 1 lease equity. As a result, TEP recorded a net increase to the income statement of $0.6
million, before tax. The adjustment recorded in June 2009 for the period from July 2006 through
June 2009 included additional depreciation expense of $4 million; a reduction of interest expense
on capital leases of $2 million; and $3 million of equity in earnings which is included in Other
Income on the income statement.
K-42
2008 Compared with 2007
The following factors contributed to the decrease in TEPs net income:
|
|
|
|
A $9 million increase in total operating revenues due to:
|
|
|
|
|
a $64 million increase in wholesale revenues due to increased short-term wholesale
activity and related purchased power volumes, lower retail demand resulting in an increase
in the availability of energy to sell into the wholesale market and an increase in the
market price of wholesale power. Wholesale sales volumes increased 13% and the average
price per MWh of wholesale power sold increased by 16%; and
|
|
|
|
|
a $12 million increase in other revenues due primarily to fees and reimbursements
received for fuel and O&M costs related to Springerville Units 3 and 4; partially offset
by:
|
|
|
|
|
a $58 million provision for revenues to be credited equivalent to the Fixed CTC
revenue that was collected from customers after the TRA was fully amortized in early May
2008; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a $9 million decrease in retail revenues due to mild summer weather and a weakening local economy.
|
|
|
|
|
A $92 million increase in fuel and purchased power due to:
|
|
|
|
|
a $98 million increase in purchased power expense. Purchased power volumes increased
by 44% as a result of higher wholesale sales activity and replacement power purchases
during the first and third quarters. The average price paid per MWh increased by 18% due
to higher market prices for wholesale energy; and
|
|
|
|
|
a $6 million decrease in fuel expense. Higher mining costs at San Juan, increased
coal costs at Sundt Unit 4 and a 17% increase in the average cost per kWh of gas-fired
generation due to higher natural gas prices, were offset by a $25 million gain recorded to
fuel expense related to the reinstatement of regulatory accounting.
|
Other factors impacting the comparability of results for 2008 include:
|
|
|
|
a $55 million increase in O&M expense due to: an $11 million increase in O&M related to
Springerville Units 3 and 4, which is reimbursed to TEP by the owners of those units and
recorded in other revenues; an increase in generation plant maintenance of $18 million; a $13
million decrease in pre-tax gains from the sale of excess SO
2
Emission Allowances
which is recorded as an offset to O&M; increased transmission expense; and general cost
pressures resulting from inflation and other economic factors;
|
|
|
|
|
a $6 million increase in depreciation and amortization expense due to additions to plant
in service;
|
|
|
|
|
a $54 million decrease in the amortization of TEPs TRA. In May 2008, the TRA was fully
amortized;
|
|
|
|
|
a $9 million decrease in taxes other than income taxes due primarily to a $7 million gain
resulting from the reinstatement of regulatory accounting;
|
|
|
|
|
a $7 million decrease in other income due in part to lower interest income on investment
in lease debt. The interest income declines over time as the lease debt is amortized; and
|
|
|
|
|
a $15 million decrease in total interest expense resulting primarily from lower balances
on capital lease obligations.
|
In 2008 and 2007, the pre-tax benefit recognized by TEP related to Springerville Units 3 and 4 for
operating fees and contributions toward common facility costs was $12 million in each period.
K-43
Utility Sales and Revenues
Customer growth, weather and other consumption factors affect retail sales of electricity.
Electric wholesale revenues are affected by market prices in the wholesale energy market, the
availability of TEP generating resources, and the level of wholesale forward contract activity.
The table below provides trend information on retail sales by major customer class and electric
wholesale sales made by TEP in the last three years as well as weather data for TEPs service
territory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-08
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy Sales, kWh (in millions)
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
% Change*
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Electric Retail Sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
3,906
|
|
|
|
3,852
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
%
|
|
|
4,005
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
1,988
|
|
|
|
2,034
|
|
|
|
(2.3
|
%)
|
|
|
2,058
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
2,161
|
|
|
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
(4.5
|
%)
|
|
|
2,341
|
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
1,065
|
|
|
|
1,096
|
|
|
|
(2.8
|
%)
|
|
|
983
|
|
|
Public Authorities
|
|
|
251
|
|
|
|
256
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
%)
|
|
|
247
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Retail Sales
|
|
|
9,371
|
|
|
|
9,502
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
%)
|
|
|
9,634
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Wholesale Sales Delivered:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term Contracts
|
|
|
833
|
|
|
|
1,096
|
|
|
|
(24.0
|
%)
|
|
|
1,101
|
|
|
Short-term and Trading
|
|
|
2,222
|
|
|
|
2,873
|
|
|
|
(22.8
|
%)
|
|
|
2,458
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Wholesale Sales
|
|
|
3,055
|
|
|
|
3,969
|
|
|
|
(23.0
|
%)
|
|
|
3,559
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Sales
|
|
|
12,426
|
|
|
|
13,471
|
|
|
|
(7.8
|
%)
|
|
|
13,193
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Retail Revenues (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
$
|
378
|
|
|
$
|
351
|
|
|
|
7.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
363
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
220
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
%)
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
%
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Public Authorities
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues excluding REST & DSM
|
|
$
|
843
|
|
|
|
802
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
%
|
|
|
812
|
|
|
REST and DSM Revenues
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
Provision for Rate Refunds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Retail Revenues
|
|
$
|
868
|
|
|
$
|
747
|
|
|
|
16.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
817
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Wholesale Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term Contracts
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
(17.2
|
%)
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Provision for Wholesale Refunds
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Sales
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
(55.1
|
%)
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
Transmission
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
10.5
|
%
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Wholesale Revenues
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
260
|
|
|
|
(43.9
|
%)
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Retail and Wholesale Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,012
|
|
|
$
|
1,007
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-08
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weather Data:
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Cooling Degree Days
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
1,599
|
|
|
|
1,336
|
|
|
|
19.7
|
%
|
|
|
1,517
|
|
|
10-Year Average
|
|
|
1,419
|
|
|
|
1,431
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
1,424
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heating Degree Days
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
1,287
|
|
|
|
1,367
|
|
|
|
(5.9
|
%)
|
|
|
1,506
|
|
|
10-Year Average
|
|
|
1,481
|
|
|
|
1,444
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
1,497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Percent change calculated on un-rounded data; may not correspond to data shown in table
|
K-44
2009 Compared with 2008
Residential and Commercial
Residential kWh sales increased by 1.4% in 2009 due primarily to hotter than normal weather during
the third quarter. Residential revenues increased $27 million or 7.6% during 2009, benefitting
from hot summer weather, as well as a base rate increase that became effective in December 2008.
Commercial kWh sales during 2009 were 2.3% below 2008. The decrease in commercial kWh sales was
driven primarily by weak economic conditions. Revenues from commercial kWh sales increased by $8
million, or 3.8%, as a result of the base rate increase that became effective in December 2008.
Industrial, Mining and Public Authorities
Sales volumes to industrial, mining and public authority customers decreased by a combined 3.8% in
2009 due primarily to the weak economy. Associated revenues were $5 million higher than the same
period last year as a result of the base rate increase that became effective in December 2008.
Retail Margin Revenues
The table below provides a summary of the margin revenues (retail revenues excluding base fuel,
PPFAC and REST and DSM charges) on TEPs retail sales for 2009. Comparable data is not available
for 2008 since TEPs new rate structure went into effect in December 2008.
2009 Year-End
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-millions-
|
|
|
-cents / kWh-
|
|
|
Retail Margin Revenues (non-GAAP)*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
$
|
253
|
|
|
|
6.48
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
8.04
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
4.59
|
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
2.93
|
|
|
Public Authorities
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail Margin Revenues (Non-GAAP)*
|
|
$
|
556
|
|
|
|
5.94
|
|
|
Base Fuel & PPFAC Revenues
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
3.05
|
|
|
REST & DSM Revenues
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
0.27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Electric Retail Sales (GAAP)
|
|
$
|
868
|
|
|
|
9.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Retail Margin Revenues, a non-GAAP financial measure, should not be considered as an alternative
to Net Electric Retail Sales, which is determined in accordance with GAAP. TEP believes that
Retail Margin Revenues, which is Net Electric Retail Sales less base fuel and PPFAC revenues, and
revenues for DSM and REST programs, provides useful information to investors as a measure of TEPs
ability to pay for operating expenses with retail revenues, after giving effect to related fuel and
purchased power expenses.
|
Long-Term Wholesale Revenues
Revenues from long-term wholesale contracts decreased by $10 million in 2009 compared with last
year primarily due to lower sales volumes to NTUA. In 2009, NTUA received a greater allotment of
federal hydro power as hydro conditions in the Colorado River basin have been above normal. In
addition, low gas prices made it more economic for one of their major customers to self-generate
than to purchase power from NTUA. These factors led NTUA to purchase 17% less energy under its
agreement with TEP compared with 2008. The gross margin (long-term wholesale revenues less the
cost of energy, which is based on TEPs average fuel and purchased power costs) on TEPs long-term
wholesale sales for 2009 was $24 million. Prior to the implementation of the PPFAC in January
2009, TEP did not allocate fuel and purchased power costs to long-term wholesale sales.
K-45
2008 Compared with 2007
Residential and Commercial
Residential kWh sales were 4% lower in 2008, resulting in a $12 million or 3% decline in
residential revenues. Mild weather accounted for $7 million of the decrease, while other factors
such as slower customer growth, economic conditions and customer usage patterns accounted for the
remaining decrease.
Commercial kWh sales were 1% lower in 2008, resulting in a $2 million or 1% decline in commercial
revenues. Mild weather accounted for most of the decrease, while weak economic conditions and
slower customer growth also contributed to the decline.
Industrial, Mining and Public Authorities
Industrial kWh sales were 3% lower in 2008, resulting in a $3 million or 2% decline in industrial
revenues. The decrease is due primarily to regional and national economic conditions. kWh sales
and revenues to mining customers increased 11% and 12%, respectively, in 2008 compared with 2007.
The increase is due to higher mining production as well as an increase in the rate charged to one
of TEPs mining customers.
CTC Revenue to be Refunded
TEP deferred $58 million of retail revenues in 2008 that is being credited to customers according
to the 2008 TEP Rate Order. See
Factors Affecting Results of Operations, 2008 TEP Rate Order,
below for more information.
Long-Term Wholesale Revenues
Revenues from long-term wholesale contracts increased by $2 million in 2008 compared with 2007.
The average price per MWh sold under long-term contracts averaged $53 per MWh in 2008 compared with
$51 per MWh in 2007. See
Factors Affecting Results of Operations, Long-Term Wholesale Contracts,
below for more information.
Short-Term Wholesale and Trading Revenues
Short-term wholesale sales volumes increased 23%, and revenues from short-term wholesale and
trading activity increased by $60 million or 48% compared with 2007. In 2008, 405,000 MWh of
wholesale sales and purchases were due to a single transaction involving a purchase and resale
between TEP and two wholesale counterparties. The wholesale revenues and purchased power expenses
associated with this transaction were $34 million and $31 million, respectively. Lower retail
demand also contributed to higher sales volumes and a 34% increase in the average market price of
wholesale power contributed to higher revenue compared with 2007. All revenues from short-term
wholesale sales and 10% of the profit on trading activity is credited to costs included in TEPs
PPFAC.
Other Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Reimbursements related to Springerville Units 3 and 4
(1)
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
$
|
53
|
|
|
$
|
42
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Revenue
|
|
$
|
83
|
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Represents reimbursements from Tri-State and SRP, the owners of
Springerville Units 3 and 4, respectively, for expenses incurred by TEP related to
the operation of these plants.
|
In addition to reimbursements related to Springerville Units 3 and 4, TEPs other revenues include:
inter-company revenues from UNS Gas and UNS Electric for corporate services provided by TEP;
miscellaneous service-related revenues such as power pole attachments; damage claims; and customer
late fees.
K-46
Operating Expenses
2009 Compared with 2008
Generation and Purchased Power Summary
TEPs fuel and purchased power expense, and energy resources for 2009, 2008 and 2007 are detailed
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Generation/Purchases
|
|
|
Expense
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of kWh-
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Coal-Fired Generation
|
|
|
9,272
|
|
|
|
10,573
|
|
|
|
10,970
|
|
|
$
|
202
|
|
|
$
|
235
|
|
|
$
|
213
|
|
|
Gas-Fired Generation
|
|
|
986
|
|
|
|
871
|
|
|
|
1,088
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
Renewable Generation
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
10,288
|
|
|
|
11,478
|
|
|
|
12,090
|
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
309
|
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
Regulatory Accounting Reinstatement
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Generation
(2)
|
|
|
10,288
|
|
|
|
11,478
|
|
|
|
12,090
|
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
285
|
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
Purchased Power
|
|
|
3,086
|
|
|
|
2,948
|
|
|
|
2,047
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
238
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
Transmission
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
Increase (Decrease) to Reflect PPFAC Recovery
Treatment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Resources
|
|
|
13,374
|
|
|
|
14,426
|
|
|
|
14,137
|
|
|
$
|
402
|
|
|
$
|
534
|
|
|
$
|
441
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Line Losses and Company Use
|
|
|
948
|
|
|
|
955
|
|
|
|
944
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Energy Sold
|
|
|
12,426
|
|
|
|
13,471
|
|
|
|
13,193
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
See
Note 2
.
Regulatory Matters,
for more information.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Fuel expense excludes $5 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007, related to Springerville
Unit 3; the fuel costs incurred on behalf of Unit 3 are recorded in Fuel Expense and the
reimbursement by Tri-State is recorded in Other Revenue.
|
PPFAC
TEPs PPFAC became effective in January 2009 and allows TEP to pass through its actual fuel,
purchased power and transmission costs net of short-term wholesale revenues and other offsets to
its retail customers. For comparative purposes, those PPFAC related costs decreased by $30.5
million in 2009 compared with 2008. The decrease was due primarily to lower wholesale market prices
for energy and natural gas. See
2008 TEP Rate Order
,
Purchased Power and Fuel Adjustment Clause
,
below for more information.
Energy Resources
In 2009, coal-fired generation decreased by 12% due to: fuel switching at Sundt Unit 4 from coal to
natural gas; a 1% decrease in retail kWh sales; and lower coal plant availability. Coal-related
fuel expense, excluding a $24 million gain recorded in 2008 related to the adoption of regulatory
accounting, decreased by $33 million during 2009. The lower generating output, as well as $9
million of expenses recorded in the third quarter of 2008 related to a settlement of mining-related
costs, led to the decrease in coal-related fuel expense in 2009.
Fuel switching at Sundt Unit 4 led to a 13% increase in gas-fired generating output in 2009
compared with 2008; however, gas-related fuel expense increased by just $1 million due to a
decrease in the average price for natural gas. Under TEPs new rate structure, hedging activities
are reflected in the PPFAC.
Purchased power volumes increased by 5% in 2009 compared with 2008, as it was more economic for TEP
to purchase power in the wholesale energy market rather than run certain of its less efficient
gas-fired units. The average price paid by TEP for purchased power during 2009 was approximately
$46 per MWh, compared with an average cost of $76 per MWh for generating output from TEPs
gas-fired generating resources.
K-47
The table below summarizes TEPs cost per kWh generated or purchased.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-cents per
|
|
|
|
|
kWh generated-
|
|
|
Coal
|
|
|
2.18
|
|
|
|
2.22
|
|
|
|
1.93
|
|
|
Gas
|
|
|
7.60
|
|
|
|
8.49
|
|
|
|
7.26
|
|
|
Purchased Power
|
|
|
4.57
|
|
|
|
8.07
|
|
|
|
6.84
|
|
Market Prices
As a participant in the Western U.S. wholesale power markets, TEP is directly and indirectly
affected by changes in market conditions. The average annual market price for around-the-clock
energy based on the Dow Jones Palo Verde Index and the average annual price for natural gas based
on the Permian Index were higher in 2009 compared with 2008. We cannot predict whether changes in
various factors that influence demand and supply will cause prices to change during 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avg. Market Price for Around-the-Clock Energy $/MWh
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Year ended December 31
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
63
|
|
|
$
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avg. Market Price for Natural Gas $/MMBtu
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Year ended December 31
|
|
$
|
3.34
|
|
|
$
|
7.41
|
|
|
$
|
6.11
|
|
TRA Amortization
TEP did not record any TRA amortization during 2009, as the TRA balance was amortized to zero in
May 2008. TRA amortization was $24 million in 2008. Amortization of the TRA was the result of the
1999 Settlement Agreement with the ACC, which changed the accounting method for TEPs generation
operations. This item reflected the recovery, through 2008, of transition recovery assets which
were previously regulatory assets related to the generation business.
O&M
The table below summarizes the items included in TEPs O&M expense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Base O&M
|
|
$
|
231
|
|
|
$
|
220
|
|
|
$
|
192
|
|
|
Reimbursed Expenses Related to Springerville Units 3 and 4
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
Gain on the Sale of SO
2
Emissions Allowances
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
Expenses related to customer-funded renewable energy
programs
(1)
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Reinstatement of Regulatory Accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total O&M
|
|
$
|
290
|
|
|
$
|
257
|
|
|
$
|
203
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Represents expenses related TEPs customer-funded renewable energy
programs; the offsetting funds collected from customers are recorded in other
revenue.
|
Income Tax Expense
In 2009, TEPs effective tax rate was 38% compared with 71% in 2008. In 2008, it was determined
that the environmental penalties at San Juan would not be deductible for income tax purposes. As a
result, an additional $3 million of tax expense was recognized in 2008 for penalties incurred in
the current and prior years. Other items included in GAAP expense which will not be deductible for
tax were offset by the recognition of income tax credits. See
Note 9. Income Taxes
, for more
information.
K-48
Operating Expenses
2008 Compared with 2007
Coal
Coal-fired generating output decreased by 4% compared with 2007, due to lower coal plant
availability resulting from planned and unplanned outages. Coal-related fuel expense, excluding
the gain related to the reinstatement of regulatory accounting, increased by $22 million due
primarily to higher mining-related costs at San Juan and Navajo, and increased coal costs at Sundt
Unit 4.
Gas
Gas-fired generating output decreased by 20% due primarily to slower customer growth and mild
weather. Gas-related fuel expense was $5 million, or 6%, lower than 2007 due in part to a decrease
in realized losses on gas hedging activity. The average cost per kWh generated by TEPs gas-fired
fleet for 2008 increased 17% compared with 2007.
Purchased Power
Power purchase volumes increased 42% in 2008 compared with 2007, leading to a $98 million increase
in purchased power expense. The higher purchased power volume and expense is due partially to
higher short-term wholesale sales activity and replacement power purchases related to lower coal
plant availability. In 2008, 405,000 MWh of wholesale sales and purchases were due to a single
transaction involving a purchase and resale between TEP and two wholesale counterparties. The
wholesale revenues and purchased power expenses associated with this transaction were $34 million
and $31 million, respectively.
FACTORS AFFECTING RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
2008 TEP Rate Order
Base Rate Increase
TEP received a base rate increase, effective December 1, 2008, of approximately 6% over its
previous average retail rate of 8.4 cents per kWh. TEPs new base rates are expected to increase
retail revenue by approximately $50 million annually. The average base rate is 8.8 cents per kWh
and includes approximately 2.9 cents per kWh for fuel and purchased power costs.
Purchased Power and Fuel Adjustment Clause
The PPFAC became effective starting January 1, 2009. The PPFAC allows recovery of fuel and
purchased power costs, including demand charges, transmission costs and the prudent costs of
contracts for hedging fuel and purchased power costs. The PPFAC consists of a forward component
and a true-up component.
|
|
|
|
The forward component was established as of April 1, 2009 and will be updated on April
1 of each year. The forward component is based on the forecasted fuel and purchased power
costs for the 12-month period from April 1 to March 31, less the base cost of fuel and
purchased power of 2.9 cents per kWh, which is embedded in base rates. The ACC approved a
forward component of 0.18 cents per kWh, effective April 1, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
The true-up component will reconcile any over/under collected amounts from the
preceding 12 month period and will be credited to or recovered from customers in the
subsequent year.
|
As part of the reconciliation of fuel and purchased power costs and PPFAC revenues, TEP credits the
following against the recoverable costs: 100% of short-term wholesale revenues; 10% of the profit
on trading activity; and 50% of the revenues from the sales of SO
2
emission allowances.
On a cash basis, Fixed CTC revenue to be refunded ($58 million collected from May 2008 to November
30, 2008) will be credited to customers as an offset to the PPFAC. This credit will off-set the
forward and true-up
components of the PPFAC, resulting in a PPFAC charge of zero until the Fixed CTC revenue to be
refunded is fully credited, which is expected to occur over 36 to 48 months beginning April 1,
2009.
K-49
Base Rate Increase Moratorium
TEPs base rates are frozen through December 31, 2012. TEP is prohibited from submitting a base
rate application before June 30, 2012. The test year to be used in TEPs next base rate
application must be no earlier than December 31, 2011.
Notwithstanding the rate increase moratorium, base rates and adjustor mechanisms may be changed in
emergency conditions which are beyond TEPs control if the ACC concludes such changes are required
to protect the public interest. The moratorium does not preclude TEP from seeking rate relief in
the event of the imposition of a federal carbon tax or related federal carbon regulations.
Springerville Units 3 and 4
TEP operates Springerville Unit 3 on behalf of Tri-State and receives annual benefits in the form
of rental payments and other fees and cost savings. TEP recorded pre-tax benefits of $12 million
in 2009 and 2008.
Springerville Unit 4 was completed in December 2009. TEP operates Springerville Unit 4 on behalf
of SRP and expects to receive annual pre-tax benefits beginning in 2010 of approximately $8 million
in the form of rental payments and other fees and cost savings.
Depreciation
In January 2010, TEP completed an updated depreciation study which indicated that its transmission
assets depreciable lives should be extended. As a result, TEP adopted new transmission
depreciation rates effective January 2010 which will have the effect of reducing depreciation
expense by approximately $14 million in 2010.
Sundt Unit 4
Sundt Unit 4 is leased by TEP and the term of the lease expires in January 2011. In January 2010,
TEP entered into an agreement to purchase 100% of the equity interest in Sundt Unit 4 from the
equity owner for approximately $52 million. The purchase price is subject to increase by 0.75% of
the purchase price per month in the event that the purchase occurs after March 31, 2010. TEP
expects to finalize the purchase prior to March 31, 2010. Following the completion of the
transaction, TEP expects to redeem the outstanding Sundt Unit 4 lease debt of $5 million, terminate
the lease agreement and cause title of Sundt Unit 4 to be transferred to TEP.
Refinancing Activity
The TEP Credit Agreement, which consists of a $150 million revolving credit facility and a $341
million letter of credit facility, matures in August 2011. Interest rates and fees under the TEP
Credit Agreement are based on a pricing grid tied to TEPs credit ratings. Letter of credit fees
are 0.45% per annum and amounts drawn under a letter of credit would bear interest at LIBOR plus
0.45% per annum. Based on our current estimates, we believe that the interest costs associated
with TEPs credit agreement after it is refinanced will increase over current levels. At December
31, 2009, there were $35 million of borrowings at an interest rate of 0.68% and $1 million in
letters of credit outstanding under the Revolving Credit Facility. We are continuously monitoring
conditions in the capital markets in order to achieve favorable terms and conditions. See
Liquidity and Capital Resources, TEP Credit Agreement,
below for more information
.
Pension and Postretirement Benefit Expense
In 2009 and 2008, TEP charged $17 million and $10 million, respectively, of pension and
postretirement benefit expenses to O&M expense. In 2010, TEP expects to charge $15 million of
pension and postretirement benefit expense to O&M expense. The expected decrease in 2010 compared
with 2009 is due primarily to the increase in the market value of the pension asset values. See
Note 10. Employee Benefit Plans
, for more information.
K-50
El Paso Electric Dispute
TEP was a party to a proceeding at FERC that involved the interpretation of the 1982 Power Exchange
and Transmission Agreement (1982 Agreement) between TEP and El Paso. The dispute related to TEPs
ability to use existing rights for the transmission of power from Luna into TEPs system. On
November 13, 2008, the FERC issued a decision that supported TEPs position. As a result of the
ruling, El Paso refunded to TEP pre-tax amounts of $10 million in disputed transmission charges and
$1 million of accrued interest. TEP is no longer accruing transmission charges under this
agreement. In January 2009, FERC granted El Pasos request for a rehearing in this matter. As a
result of the pending appeal process, TEPs net income in 2008 or 2009 does not reflect the refund made by El
Paso. TEP does not expect to recognize any income related to this refund until the appeals process
is fully resolved.
In December 2008, TEP filed a complaint in the U.S. Federal District Court against El Paso seeking
a $2 million reimbursement for transmission charges paid by TEP to PNM for transmission service in
an attempt to mitigate TEPs damages before FERC issued its decision in November 2008. On February
23, 2009, El Paso filed a motion to dismiss TEPs complaint, or in the alternative, requested a
stay in the proceeding pending further resolution by FERC. In April 2009, TEP filed a response
requesting that the court deny El Pasos motion, followed by an El Paso reply in May 2009. On
September 10, 2009, the District Court denied El Pasos motion to dismiss and stayed the proceeding
pending a final resolution of the FERC proceeding and any appeal. TEP cannot predict the timing or
outcome of this lawsuit.
Emission Allowances
TEP has SO
2
Emission Allowances in excess of what is required to operate its generating
units. The excess results primarily from a higher removal rate of SO
2
emissions at
Springerville Units 1 and 2 following recent upgrades to environmental plant components and related
changes to plant operations. From time to time, TEP will sell a portion of its excess
SO
2
Emission Allowances.
The table below summarizes sales made since 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax Gain
|
|
|
Delivery
|
|
Allowances Sold
|
|
|
(millions)
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
22,000
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Existing regulations call for a reduction to the EPA SO
2
Emissions Allowances allocation
beginning in 2010. As a result, starting in 2010 and for the remaining life of the program, TEPs
annual SO
2
Emissions Allowance allocation will be approximately 28,000 allowances. The
exact number of excess allowances for future years cannot be determined until the SO
2
allowance consumption for each year is verified by EPA. TEP expects to have approximately 13,000
excess SO
2
Emission Allowances annually beginning in 2010 and for the remaining life of
the program. The decline in sales of SO
2
allowances from 2007 to 2009 is a result of a
decrease in the market price for the allowances.
As part of the 2008 TEP Rate Order, TEP will credit 50% of the revenue from the sales of its
SO
2
Emissions Allowances to the PPFAC. As of January 1, 2010, the average market price
of SO
2
Emissions Allowances was $59. On December 31, 2008 and 2007, the market price of
SO
2
Emissions Allowances was $205 and $534, respectively.
Competition
TEPs customers have the ability to install renewable energy technologies and conventional
generation units that could reduce their reliance on TEPs services in the future. Self-generation
by TEPs customers has not had a significant impact to date. In the wholesale market, TEP competes
with other utilities, power marketers and independent power producers in the sale of electric
capacity and energy.
Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff
TEP began implementing its ACC approved REST plan on June 1, 2008. In 2009 and 2008 TEP collected
$29 and $9 million in REST surcharges, of which $25 million and $3 million, respectively, were
expensed for REST projects, respectively. Any surcharge collections above or below the amount of
renewable expenditures will be deferred and reflected in TEPs financial statements as a regulatory
liability or asset. In 2010, TEP expects to collect $32 million from customers through the REST.
REST implementation plans and the associated surcharge must be submitted annually to the ACC for
review and approval. For more information, see
Item 1. Business, TEP, Renewable, Energy Standard
and Tariff
, above.
K-51
Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
In December 2009, the ACC established a process to adopt new Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
(EE Standards) designed to require TEP, UNS Electric and other affected utilities to implement DSM
programs, only to the extent that they are cost effective. The proposed EE Standards target cost
effective total kWh savings in 2011 of 1.25% and ramping up each year to reach a targeted
cumulative annual reduction in retail kWh sales of 22% by 2020. Savings from Direct Load Control
programs, previously implemented DSM programs and from a portion of energy efficient building codes
may be counted towards meeting the target. The proposed EE Standards provide for recovery of costs
incurred to implement cost effective DSM programs. TEPs DSM programs and rates charged to
customers for such programs are subject to ACC approval. If the ACC approves EE Standards, they
must be certified by the Arizona Attorney General before taking affect.
Rosemont Copper Mine
In 2007, Augusta
Resources Corporation (Augusta) filed a plan of operations with
the United States Forest Service (USFS) for the proposed Rosemont Copper
Mine near Tucson, Arizona. Augusta is waiting for an environmental
impact statement from the USFS before it can begin construction
and operation of the mine. If the Rosemont Copper
Mine begins full production, it would become TEPs
largest retail customer, with an estimated annual
load of up to 110 MW. TEP cannot predict if or when the mine will commence operations.
Fair Value Measurements
As described in Note 12 to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, TEP adopted fair value
accounting, on January 1, 2008 which, among other things, establishes a three-tier value hierarchy,
based on the valuation techniques used to determine the fair value of derivative assets and
liabilities.
The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, TEPs financial assets
and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2009.
As required by fair value accounting, financial assets and liabilities are classified in their
entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEP
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Equivalents
(1)
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
Rabbi Trust Investments to
support the Deferred Compensation
and SERP Plans
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
Energy Contracts
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy Contracts
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
Interest Rate Swaps
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Total Assets and (Liabilities)
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Cash Equivalents are based on observable market prices and are comprised of the fair value of
money market funds and certificates of deposit.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Level 2 investments comprise amounts held in mutual and money market funds related to deferred
compensation and Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (SERP) benefits. The valuation is based on
quoted prices, traded in active markets. These investments are included in Investments and Other
Property Other in the UniSource Energy and TEP balance sheets.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Energy contracts include gas swap agreements (Level 2), forward power purchase and sales
contracts (Level 3), and forward power purchase contracts indexed to gas (Level 3), entered into to
take advantage of favorable market conditions and reduce exposure to energy price risk. The
valuation techniques are described below.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
Interest Rate Swaps are valued based on the six month LIBOR index or the Securities Industry
and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) Municipal Swap Index.
|
K-52
TEP recorded in 2009, net unrealized losses of $2 million in net Regulatory Assets and $1 million
as other comprehensive income due to the change in the fair value of commodity derivative contracts
classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
Valuation Techniques
TEP values its energy derivative contracts by obtaining market quotes for periods and delivery
points where an active market exists. For both power and gas prices, TEP obtains quotes from
brokers, major market participants, exchanges or industry publications. TEP primarily uses one set
of quotations each for power and for gas, and then use the other sources as validation of those
prices. The broker providing quotes for power prices states that the market information provided
is indicative only, but believes it to be reflective of market conditions as of the time and date
indicated.
TEPs Level 3 derivatives include certain energy contracts where published prices are not readily
available. These include contracts for delivery periods during non-standard time blocks, contracts
for delivery during only a few months of a given year when prices are quoted only for the annual
average, or contracts for delivery at illiquid delivery points. In these cases, TEP applies
certain management assumptions to value such contracts. These assumptions include applying
percentage multipliers to value non-standard time blocks, applying historical price curve
relationships to calendar year quotes, and including adjustments for transmission and line losses
to value contracts at illiquid delivery points. We also consider the impact of counterparty credit
risk using current and historical default and recovery rates as well as our own credit risk using
credit default swap data. The fair value of TEPs purchase power call option is estimated using an
internal pricing model which includes assumptions about market risks such as liquidity, volatility,
and contract valuation. TEPs model also considers credit and non-performance risk. TEP reviews
these assumptions on a quarterly basis.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
TEP Cash Flows
The table below shows the cash available to TEP after capital expenditures, scheduled debt payments
and payments on capital lease obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows Operating Activities (GAAP)
|
|
$
|
268
|
|
|
$
|
269
|
|
|
$
|
264
|
|
|
Amounts from Statements of Cash Flows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
(235
|
)
|
|
|
(295
|
)
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows after Capital Expenditures (non-GAAP)*
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts from Statements of Cash Flows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Retirement of Capital Lease Obligations
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
|
Plus: Proceeds from Investment in Lease Debt
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows after Capital Expenditures and
Required Payments on Debt and Capital Lease
Obligations (non-GAAP)*
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
$
|
(75
|
)
|
|
$
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows Operating Activities (GAAP)
|
|
$
|
268
|
|
|
$
|
269
|
|
|
$
|
264
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows Investing Activities (GAAP)
|
|
|
(250
|
)
|
|
|
(391
|
)
|
|
|
(137
|
)
|
|
Net Cash Flows Financing Activities (GAAP)
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
Net Cash Flows after Capital Expenditures (non-GAAP)*
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
Net Cash Flows after Capital Expenditures and
Required Payments on Debt and Capital Lease
Obligations (non-GAAP)*
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
(75
|
)
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Net Cash Flows after Capital Expenditures and Net Cash Flows Available after Required Payments,
both non-GAAP measures of liquidity, should not be considered as alternatives to Net Cash Flows -
Operating Activities, which is determined in accordance with GAAP as a measure of liquidity. We
believe that Net Cash Flows after Capital Expenditures and Net Cash Flows Available after Required
Payments provide useful information to investors as measures of liquidity and our ability to fund
our capital requirements, make required payments on debt and capital lease obligations, and pay
dividends to UniSource Energy.
|
K-53
Liquidity Outlook
During 2010, TEP expects to generate sufficient internal cash flows to fund the majority of its
capital expenditures and operating activities. Cash flows may vary during the year, with cash flow
from operations typically the lowest in the first quarter and highest in the third quarter due to
TEPs summer peaking load. As a result of the varied seasonal cash flow, TEP will use, as needed,
its revolving credit facility to fund its business activities.
Operating Activities
In 2009, net cash flows from operating activities decreased by $1 million compared with 2008. Net
cash flows were impacted by:
|
|
|
|
a $65 million increase in cash receipts from retail and wholesale electric sales, less
fuel and purchased power costs, due to: an increase in retail electric cash receipts
resulting from the rate increase that became effective in December 2008 and cash
collections from retail customers that are used to offset expenses related to renewable
energy and energy efficiency programs; and lower market prices for natural gas and
purchased power;
|
|
|
|
|
an $11 million decrease in total interest paid resulting from lower rates on variable
rate debt and lower capital lease interest paid; offset by
|
|
|
|
|
a $39 million increase in O&M costs related to: costs associated with renewable energy
and energy efficiency programs that are offset by funds collected from retail customers; an
increase in pension-related costs; extensive planned generating plant outage and
maintenance costs; general cost pressures resulting from inflation; and O&M related to
Springerville Units 3 and 4 that is reimbursed by the plant owners;
|
|
|
|
|
a $27 million increase in total taxes paid (net of refunds received) due primarily to
higher taxable income; and
|
|
|
|
|
a $12 million increase in wages paid.
|
Investing Activities
Net cash used for investing activities was $141 million lower in 2009 compared with 2008 primarily
due to: a $133 million deposit made last year by TEP to the trustee for bonds that matured in
August 2008; and a $59 million decrease in capital expenditures; partially offset by a $31 million
investment in Springerville Unit 1 lease debt; and a $12 million decrease in proceeds from
investments in lease debt and equity. See
Financing Activities
,
Investments in Springerville Lease
Debt and Equity,
below for more information.
Capital Expenditures
TEPs forecasted capital expenditures are summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transmission and Distribution
|
|
$
|
107
|
|
|
$
|
117
|
|
|
$
|
91
|
|
|
$
|
99
|
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
Generation Facilities
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
Environmental
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
General and Other
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
258
|
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
203
|
|
|
$
|
225
|
|
|
$
|
209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K-54
|
|
|
|
Included in TEPs capital expenditures forecast for 2010 is $52 million for the
proposed purchased of Sundt Unit 4. See
Sundt Unit 4
, above, for more information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Items excluded from TEPs capital expenditures forecast are: the estimated cost to
construct proposed Tucson to Nogales, Arizona transmission line of $120 million; estimated
costs of $300 million between 2011-2014 to construct 75 to 150 MW of local generation that
may be required in 2015.
|
See Item 1
. Business, Tucson Electric Utility Operations, Transmission Access, Tucson to Nogales
Transmission Line
for more information.
All of these estimates are subject to continuing review and adjustment. Actual capital
expenditures may be different from these estimates due to changes in business conditions,
construction schedules, environmental requirements, and changes to TEPs business arising from
retail competition. TEP plans to fund its capital expenditures through internally generated cash
flow.
Investments in Springerville Lease Debt
At December 31, 2009, TEP had $95 million of investments in lease debt on its balance sheet. In
March 2009, TEP made a $31 million purchase of Springerville Unit 1 lease debt. The table below
provides a summary of the investment balances in lease debt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease Debt Investment Balance
|
|
|
Leased Asset
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
- In Millions -
|
|
|
Investments in Lease Debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Springerville Unit 1
|
|
$
|
88
|
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
Springerville Coal Handling Facilities
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Investment in Lease Debt
|
|
$
|
95
|
|
|
$
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unless TEP makes new investments in lease debt, the investment in lease debt balance declines over
time due to the amortization of lease debt that occurs as a result of the normal payments TEP makes
on its capital lease obligations. The Springerville Unit 1 and Springerville Coal Handling
Facilities leases expire in 2015.
See
Note
6
of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Debt, Credit Facilities and Capital
Lease Obligations
Financing Activities
Net cash proceeds from financing activities were $158 million lower in 2009 compared with 2008 due
to: proceeds of $221 million received in 2008 related to long-term debt issuances; and a $58
million increase in dividends paid to UniSource Energy in 2009; partially offset by a $25 million
increase in net proceeds from revolving credit facility borrowings; a $30 million capital
contribution from UniSource Energy; a decrease in payments for capital lease obligations of $50
million; and a $10 million decrease in repayments of long-term debt.
TEP Credit Agreement
The TEP Credit Agreement consists of a $150 million revolving credit facility and a $341 million
letter of credit facility which supports $329 million of tax-exempt variable rate bonds. The TEP
Credit Agreement matures in 2011 and is secured by $491 million of Mortgage Bonds. At December 31,
2009, there were $35 million of borrowings at an interest rate of 0.68% and $1 million in letters
of credit outstanding under the Revolving Credit Facility.
Interest rates and fees under the TEP Credit Agreement are based on a pricing grid tied to TEPs
credit ratings. Letter of credit fees are 0.45% per annum and amounts drawn under a letter of
credit would bear interest at LIBOR plus 0.45% per annum. TEP has the option of paying interest on
borrowings under the revolving credit facility at LIBOR plus 0.45% or the greater of the federal
funds rate plus 0.5% or the agent banks reference rate.
The TEP Credit Agreement restricts additional indebtedness, liens, sale of assets and
sale-leaseback agreements. The TEP Credit Agreement also requires TEP to meet a minimum cash
coverage ratio and a maximum leverage ratio. If TEP complies with the terms of the TEP Credit
Agreement, it may pay dividends to UniSource Energy.
K-55
In September 2008, as a result of higher than expected fuel and purchased power costs, TEP amended
its credit agreements to provide more flexibility to meet the required leverage ratio. The
leverage ratio is calculated as a ratio of total indebtedness to earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation and amortization. Although fuel and purchase power expenses have decreased in recent
months, current economic conditions could result in lower customer growth rates and lower sales.
If TEPs financial results are impacted by the economic downturn, our ability to comply with
financial covenants could be jeopardized and we may seek waivers or amendments of the covenants.
As of December 31, 2009, TEP was in compliance with the terms of the TEP Credit Agreement.
If an event of default occurs, the TEP Credit Agreement may become immediately due and payable. An
event of default includes failure to make required payments under the TEP Credit Agreement; change
in control, as defined; failure of TEP or certain subsidiaries to make payments or default on debt
greater than $20 million; or certain bankruptcy events at TEP or certain subsidiaries.
TEP Letter of Credit Facility
In 2008, TEP entered into a three-year $132 million letter of credit and reimbursement agreement
(2008 TEP Letter of Credit Facility). The 2008 TEP Letter of Credit Facility supported $130
million aggregate principal amount of variable rate tax-exempt IDBs that were issued on behalf of
TEP in June 2008.
The 2008 TEP Letter of Credit Facility was terminated in January 2010 upon the conversion of the
interest rate mode on the tax-exempt IDBs from variable to fixed rate, and the mortgage bonds
securing the facility were cancelled. See
Bond Issuances
, below.
Capital Contribution from UniSource Energy
In March 2009, UniSource Energy contributed $30 million of capital to TEP. TEP used the proceeds
to purchase Springerville Unit 1 lease debt. There were no capital contributions from UniSource
Energy to TEP in 2008.
Bond Issuances
In October 2009, the Pima Authority issued approximately $80 million of its 2009 Series A
tax-exempt pollution control bonds (2009 Pima A San Juan Bonds) for TEPs benefit. At the same
time, the Coconino County, Arizona Pollution Control Corporation issued approximately $15 million
of its 2009 Series A tax-exempt pollution control bonds (2009 Coconino A Bonds) for TEPs benefit.
The 2009 Pima A San Juan bonds are unsecured, bear interest at a rate of 4.95%, mature on October
1, 2020, and are not callable prior to maturity. The 2009 Coconino A Bonds are unsecured, bear
interest at 5.125%, mature on October 1, 2032, and are callable at par beginning October 1, 2019.
Semi-annual interest payments on both series of bonds are payable beginning April 1, 2010. TEP
capitalized approximately $1 million in costs related to the issuance of these bonds and will
amortize the costs for each through the respective maturity dates.
The proceeds from the issuance of the 2009 Pima A San Juan Bonds and the 2009 Coconino A Bonds were
deposited with a trustee and were used in November 2009 to redeem approximately $80 million of
6.95% 1997 Series A City of Farmington, New Mexico Pollution Control Bonds and approximately $15
million of 7.0% 1997 Series B Coconino County Pollution Control Bonds, respectively. The average
annual interest savings is expected to be approximately $2 million.
In March 2008, the Pima Authority issued approximately $91 million of its 2008 Series A tax-exempt
IDBs (2008 Pima A Bonds) for TEPs benefit. The proceeds were used to redeem a corresponding
principal amount of bonds previously issued by the Pima Authority for TEPs benefit which TEP
repurchased in 2005. TEP did not cancel the Repurchased Bonds, which remained outstanding under
their respective indentures but were not reflected as debt on the balance sheet. As holder of the
Repurchased Bonds being redeemed, TEP received the payment of the redemption price. TEP used $75
million of the redemption price proceeds to repay loans outstanding under its revolving credit
facility and $10 million to redeem a portion of TEPs Collateral Trust Bonds that matured on August
1, 2008. The 2008 Pima A Bonds are unsecured, bear interest at the rate of 6.375%, mature on
September 1, 2029 and are callable at par in March 2013.
K-56
In June 2008, the Pima Authority issued $130 million of its 2008 Series B tax-exempt IDBs (2008
Pima B Bonds) for TEPs benefit. The proceeds were used to redeem a corresponding principal amount
of bonds previously issued by the Pima Authority for TEPs benefit which TEP repurchased in 2005.
TEP did not cancel the Repurchased Bonds, which remained outstanding under their respective
indentures but were not reflected as debt on the balance sheet. As holder of the Repurchased
Bonds being redeemed, TEP received the payment of the redemption price. TEP used $128 million of
the redemption price proceeds to redeem the remaining 7.5% Collateral Trust Bonds that matured on
August 1, 2008. The 2008 Pima B Bonds were supported by a letter of credit (LOC) issued under the
2008 TEP Letter of Credit Facility. See
TEP Letter of Credit Facility
, above.
In January 2010, TEP converted the interest mode on the 2008 Pima B Bonds to a fixed rate. The
2008 Pima B bonds were reoffered in January 2010 with a term rate of 5.75% through maturity of
September 2029. Interest is payable semi-annually beginning June 1, 2010. The bonds are callable
at par beginning January 2015. Although the fixed interest rate is higher than the variable
interest rate that was in effect at the time of the conversion, the fixed rate conversion reduced
TEPs future interest rate risk and allowed TEP to terminate the LOC and cancel the mortgage bonds.
See
Interest Rate Risk
and
Tax Exempt Local Furnishing Bonds,
below for additional information.
Interest Rate Risk
TEP is exposed to interest rate risk resulting from changes in interest rates on certain of its
variable rate debt obligations, as well as borrowings under its revolving credit facility. As a
result, TEP may be required to pay significantly higher rates of interest on outstanding variable
rate debt and borrowings under its revolving credit facility. At December 31, 2009 and December
31, 2008, TEP had $459 million in tax-exempt variable rate debt outstanding. The interest rates on
TEPs tax-exempt variable rate debt are reset weekly by its remarketing agents. The maximum
interest payable under the indentures for the bonds was 10% on the $130 million of 2008 Pima B
Bonds and is 20% on the other $329 million in IDBs. During 2008, the average rates paid ranged
from 0.55% to 8.09%. During 2009, the average rates paid have ranged from 0.25% to 0.79%. At
February 23, 2010, the average rate on the debt was 0.24%.
In August 2009, TEP reduced its exposure to variable interest rate risk by entering into an
interest rate swap that had the effect of converting $50 million of its variable rate IDBs to a
fixed interest rate from September 2009 to September 2014. See Item 7A.
Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk, Interest Rate Risk
, below.
In January 2010, TEP completed a transaction that converted the interest rate on the $130 million
of 2008 Pima B Bonds to a fixed rate of 5.75%. See
Bond Issuances
, above.
Interest Rate Swaps Springerville Common Facilities Lease Debt
In 2006 and May 2009, TEP entered into interest rate swaps to hedge the floating interest rate risk
associated with the Springerville Common Facilities Lease Debt. Interest on the lease debt is
payable at six-month LIBOR plus a spread. The applicable spread was 1.625% as of December 31,
2009 and 1.5% as of December 31, 2008. The swaps have the effect of fixing the interest rates on
$65 million of the lease debt outstanding at December 31, 2009 at rates ranging from 3.18% to
5.77%.
Mortgage Indenture
TEPs Mortgage creates a lien on and security interest in most of TEPs utility plant assets.
Springerville Unit 2, which is owned by San Carlos, is not subject to this lien and security
interest. The Mortgage allows TEP to issue additional mortgage bonds on the basis of (1) a
percentage of net utility property additions and/or (2) the principal amount of retired mortgage
bonds. The amount of bonds that TEP may issue is also subject to a net earnings test under the
Mortgage.
TEPs Credit Agreement, which totals $491 million and is secured by Mortgage Bonds, limits the
amount of mortgage bonds that may be outstanding to no more than $840 million. At December 31,
2009, TEP had a total of $623 million in outstanding Mortgage Bonds, consisting of $491 million in
bonds securing the TEP Credit Agreement, and $132 million in bonds securing the 2008 TEP Letter of
Credit Facility. The $132 million in bonds securing the TEP 2008 Letter of Credit Facility were
cancelled in January 2010 when the LOC was terminated. Although the Mortgage would allow TEP to
issue additional bonds, the limit imposed by the TEP Credit Agreement is more restrictive and is
currently the governing limitation. See
Bond Issuances
, above.
K-57
Tax-Exempt Local Furnishing Bonds
TEP has financed a substantial portion of utility plant assets with industrial development revenue
bonds issued by the Industrial Development Authorities of Pima County and Apache County. The
interest on these bonds is excluded from gross income of the bondholder for federal tax purposes.
This exclusion is allowed because the facilities qualify as facilities for the local furnishing of
electric energy as defined by the Internal Revenue Code. These bonds are sometimes referred to as
tax-exempt local furnishing bonds. To qualify for this exclusion, the facilities must be part of
a system providing electric service to customers within not more than two contiguous counties. TEP
provides electric service to retail customers in the City of Tucson and certain other portions of
Pima County, Arizona and to Fort Huachuca in contiguous Cochise County, Arizona.
TEP has financed the following facilities, in whole or in part, with the proceeds of tax-exempt
local furnishing bonds: Springerville Unit 2, Sundt Unit 4, a dedicated 345-kV transmission line
from Springerville Unit 2 to TEPs retail service area (the Express Line), and a portion of TEPs
local transmission and distribution system in the Tucson metropolitan area. During 2008, the Pima
Authority issued $221 million of tax-exempt local furnishing bonds for TEPs benefit. See
Bond
Issuances,
above.
As of December 31, 2009, TEP had approximately $580 million of tax-exempt local furnishing bonds
outstanding. Approximately $331 million in principal amount of such bonds financed Springerville
Unit 2 and the Express Line. In addition, approximately $11 million of remaining lease debt
related to the Sundt Unit 4 lease obligation was issued as tax-exempt local furnishing bonds.
In December 2008, the Arizona Department of Commerce allocated $200 million of tax-exempt financing
volume cap to TEP for purposes of financing local furnishing transmission and distribution projects
in Pima County, Arizona. Any new IDBs issued under this allocation would be issued in one or more
series by the Pima Authority for the benefit of TEP. TEP has until December 2011 to use this
volume cap allocation. Upon receipt of this allocation in December 2008, TEP paid a $2 million
security deposit to the Arizona Department of Commerce. This security deposit is refundable on a
pro rata basis after each new series of IDBs is issued.
Capital Lease Obligations
At December 31, 2009, TEP had $529 million of total capital lease obligations on its balance sheet.
The table below provides a summary of the outstanding lease amounts in each of the obligations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Lease Obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Renewal/Purchase
|
|
Leased Asset
|
|
at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
- In Millions -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Springerville Unit 1
|
|
$
|
321
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
Fair market value purchase option
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Springerville Coal Handling Facilities
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
Fixed price purchase option of $120 million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Springerville Common Facilities
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
2017 & 2021
|
|
|
Fixed price purchase
option of $106 million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sundt Unit 4
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Agreement to purchase equity entered into January 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capital Lease Obligations
|
|
$
|
529
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In January 2010, TEP entered into an agreement to purchase 100% of the equity interest in
Sundt Unit 4. See
Sundt Unit 4
, above, for more information.
Except for Sundt Unit 4, TEPs 14% equity ownership in the Springerville Unit 1 Leases and its 13%
equity ownership in the Springerville Coal Handling Facilities, TEP will not own these assets at
the expiration of the leases. The renewal and purchase option for Springerville Unit 1 is for fair
market value as determined at that time, while the purchase price option is fixed for the
Springerville Coal Handling Facilities and Common Facilities.
K-58
TEPs capital lease obligation balances decline over time due to the normal capital lease payments
made by TEP. See
Note 6. Debt, Credit Facilities and Capital Lease Obligations
for more
information about the fixed purchase price amounts.
The following chart displays TEPs contractual obligations as of December 31, 2009 by maturity and
by type of obligation.
TEPs Contractual Obligations
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment Due in Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending December 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
and after
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Long Term Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
494
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
445
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
939
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
484
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
663
|
|
|
Capital Lease Obligations
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
739
|
|
|
Operating Leases
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
Purchase Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel (including Transportation)
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
Purchased Power
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
Transmission
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
Other Long-Term Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension & Other Post
Retirement Obligations
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
Acquisition of Springerville
Coal Handling and Common
Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
|
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Contractual Cash
Obligations
|
|
$
|
294
|
|
|
$
|
709
|
|
|
$
|
205
|
|
|
$
|
206
|
|
|
$
|
276
|
|
|
$
|
1,434
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
3,143
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
UniSource Energy Consolidated, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Contractual Obligations
,
above, for a description of these obligations.
We have reviewed our contractual obligations and provide the following additional information:
|
|
|
|
TEPs Credit Agreement contains pricing based on TEPs credit ratings. A change in
TEPs credit ratings can cause an increase or decrease in the amount of interest TEP pays
on its borrowings, and the amount of fees it pays for its letters of credit and unused
commitments. A downgrade in TEPs credit ratings would not cause a restriction in TEPs
ability to borrow under its revolving credit facility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEPs Credit Agreement contains certain financial and other restrictive covenants,
including interest coverage and leverage tests. Failure to comply with these covenants
would entitle the lenders to accelerate the maturity of all amounts outstanding. At
December 31, 2009, TEP was in compliance with these covenants. See
TEP Credit Agreement
above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEP conducts its wholesale marketing and risk management activities under certain master
agreements whereby TEP may be required to post credit enhancements in the form of cash or a
letter of credit due to exposures exceeding unsecured credit limits provided to TEP,
changes in contract values, a change in TEPs credit ratings or if there has been a
material change in TEPs creditworthiness. As of December 31, 2009, TEP had posted a $1
million letter of credit as collateral with counterparties for credit enhancement.
|
K-59
Dividends on Common Stock
TEP declared and paid dividends to UniSource Energy of $60 million in 2009, $3 million in 2008, and
$53 million in 2007.
TEP can pay dividends if it maintains compliance with the TEP Credit Agreement and certain
financial covenants. As of December 31, 2009, TEP was in compliance with the terms of the TEP
Credit Agreement.
The Federal Power Act states that dividends shall not be paid out of funds properly included in
capital accounts. Although the terms of the Federal Power Act are unclear, we believe that there
is a reasonable basis for TEP to pay dividends from current year earnings.
UNS GAS
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
UNS Gas reported net income of $7 million in 2009, $9 million in 2008, and $4 million in 2007. We
expect operations at UNS Gas to vary with the seasons, with peak energy usage occurring in the
winter months.
The table below provides summary financial information for UNS Gas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Gas Revenues
|
|
$
|
149
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
|
$
|
149
|
|
|
Other Revenues
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Operating Revenues
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
|
174
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Purchased Gas and PGA Expense
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
Other Operations and Maintenance Expense
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
Taxes other than Income Taxes
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Operating Expenses
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
152
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Interest Expense
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
Total Other Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss)
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The table below shows UNS Gas therm sales and revenues for 2009, 2008 and 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas Sales (Millions of Therms)
|
|
|
Gas Revenues (Millions of Dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
%Chng
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
% Chng
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Retail Therm Sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
(3.4
|
%)
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
$
|
91
|
|
|
$
|
97
|
|
|
|
(6.5
|
%)
|
|
$
|
90
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
%)
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
(9.1
|
%)
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
15.4
|
%
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
7.6
|
%
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Public Authorities
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
(7.7
|
%)
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
(11.4
|
%)
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Retail Therm
Sales
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
%)
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
(7.3
|
%)
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
Transport
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
(7.0
|
%)
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
(2.7
|
%)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
Negotiated Sales
Program (NSP)
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
(7.7
|
%)
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
(48.7
|
%)
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Therm Sales
|
|
|
174
|
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
(5.1
|
%)
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
$
|
149
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
|
|
(13.1
|
%)
|
|
$
|
149
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail therm sales in 2009 decreased by 3.6% compared with 2008 due to mild weather and weak
economic conditions. Heating degree days were down 3% compared with 2008 and use per customer also
decreased. Economic conditions have resulted in lower customer growth rates than experienced in
prior years. As of
December 31, 2009, UNS Gas had approximately 145,000 retail customers, which represents an increase
of less than 1% compared with year end 2008. The lower gas sales volumes resulted in an $11
million, or 7.3%, decrease in retail revenues.
K-60
Through a Negotiated Sales Program (NSP) approved by the ACC, UNS Gas supplies natural gas to some
of its large transportation customers. Approximately one half of the margin earned on these NSP
sales is retained by UNS Gas while the remainder benefits retail customers through a credit to the
Purchased Gas Adjustor (PGA) mechanism which reduces the gas commodity price. See
Factors
Affecting Results of Operations, Rates and Regulation, Energy Cost Adjustment Mechanism
, below.
FACTORS AFFECTING RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Rates
Energy Cost Adjustment Mechanism
UNS Gas retail rates include a PGA mechanism intended to address the volatility of natural gas
prices and allow UNS Gas to recover its actual commodity costs, including transportation, through a
price adjustor. The difference between UNS Gas actual monthly gas and transportation costs and
the rolling 12-month average cost of gas and transportation is deferred and recovered from or
returned to customers through the PGA mechanism.
The PGA mechanism has two components, the PGA factor and the PGA surcharge or credit. The PGA
factor is a mechanism that calculates the twelve-month rolling weighted average gas cost and
automatically adjusts monthly, subject to limitations on how much the price per therm may change in
a twelve month period. In 2007, the ACC increased the annual cap on the maximum increase in the
PGA factor from $0.10 per therm to $0.15 per therm in a twelve month period.
At any time UNS Gas PGA bank balance is under-recovered, UNS Gas may request a PGA surcharge with
the goal of collecting the amount deferred from customers over a period deemed appropriate by the
ACC. When the PGA bank balance reaches an over-collected balance of $10 million on a billed to
customers basis, UNS Gas is required to make a filing so that the ACC can determine how the
over-collected balance should be returned to customers. On December 31, 2009, the PGA bank balance
was over-collected by $10 million. In October 2009, the ACC approved a $0.08 cent per therm PGA
surcredit, effective November 2009 through October 2010 or until the balance reaches zero.
2008 General Rate Case Filing
Due to increases in capital and operating costs related to providing safe and reliable service to
customers of UNS Gas, UNS Gas believes the rates approved by the ACC in 2007 are inadequate for UNS
Gas to recover its costs and earn a reasonable return on its investments.
In November 2008, UNS Gas filed a general rate case with the ACC on a cost of service basis. Below
is a table that summarizes UNS Gas request:
|
|
|
|
|
Test year 12 months ended June 30, 2008
|
|
Requested by UNS Gas
|
|
Original cost rate base
|
|
$182 million
|
|
Revenue deficiency
|
|
$9.5 million
|
|
Total rate increase (over test year revenues)
|
|
6%
|
|
Cost of long-term debt
|
|
6.5%
|
|
Cost of equity
|
|
11.0%
|
|
Actual capital structure
|
|
50% equity / 50% debt
|
|
Weighted average cost of capital
|
|
8.75%
|
|
Rate of return on fair value rate base
|
|
6.80%
|
In June 2009, ACC staff recommended a rate increase of $3.4 million based on an original cost rate
base of $178 million and a 10% return on equity. Hearings before the ALJ concluded in August 2009.
UNS Gas expects the ACC to issue a final order in the first half of 2010. UNS Gas cannot predict
the outcome of this general rate case proceeding.
K-61
Fair Value Measurements
UNS Gas adopted fair value measurements, on January 1, 2008. See
Tucson Electric Power
,
Factors
Affecting Results of Operations
, above, for more information about fair value measurements.
The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, UNS Gas financial assets
and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2009.
Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of
input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
UNS Gas
December 31, 2009
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets (Level 1)
|
|
|
Inputs (Level 2)
|
|
|
Inputs (Level 3)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Equivalents
(1)
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
Cash Collateral
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Energy Contracts
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
(5
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Cash Equivalents are based on observable market prices and are comprised of the fair value
of money market funds and certificates of deposit.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Collateral provided to energy contract counterparties to reduce credit risk exposure.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Energy contracts include gas swap agreements (Level 2) entered into to take advantage of
favorable market conditions and reduce exposure to energy price risk. The amounts include current
and non-current assets and are net of current and non-current liabilities.
|
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Liquidity Outlook
UNS Gas capital requirements consist primarily of capital expenditures. In 2009, capital
expenditures were $13 million. UNS Gas expects internal cash flows to fund its future operating
activities and a large portion of its construction expenditures. If natural gas prices rise and UNS
Gas is not allowed to recover its projected gas costs or PGA bank balance on a timely basis, UNS
Gas may require additional funding to meet operating and capital requirements. Sources of funding
future capital expenditures could include draws on the revolving credit facility, additional credit
lines, the issuance of long-term debt, or capital contributions from UniSource Energy. The rate
increase approved by the ACC in November 2007 covers some, but not all, of UNS Gas higher costs
and capital investments.
K-62
Operating Cash Flow and Capital Expenditures
The table below provides summary cash flow information for UNS Gas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
28
|
|
|
Investing Activities
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
Financing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning Cash
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending Cash
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating cash flows increased in 2009 due to a net over-recovery of PGA gas costs and cash inflows
related to the return of cash collateral deposited in prior periods with gas supply and hedging
counterparties.
Forecasted capital expenditures for UNS Gas are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
UNS Gas
|
|
$
|
14
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver
The UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver is a $60 million unsecured revolving credit facility which
matures in August 2011. Either borrower may borrow up to a maximum of $45 million so long as the
combined amount borrowed does not exceed $60 million.
UNS Gas is only liable for UNS Gas borrowings, and similarly, UNS Electric is only liable for UNS
Electrics borrowings under the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver. UES guarantees the obligations of
both UNS Gas and UNS Electric.
UNS Gas and UNS Electric have the option of paying interest on borrowings at LIBOR plus 1.0% or the
greater of the federal funds rate plus 0.5% or the agent banks reference rate. Letter of credit
fees are 1.0% per annum.
The UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver contains restrictions on additional indebtedness, liens,
dividends, mergers and sales of assets; it also contains a maximum leverage ratio and a minimum
cash flow to interest coverage ratio for each borrower. As of December 31, 2009, UNS Gas and UNS
Electric were each in compliance with the terms of the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver.
If an event of default occurs, the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver may become immediately due and
payable. An event of default includes failure to make required payments under the UNS Gas/UNS
Electric Revolver, certain change in control transactions, certain bankruptcy events of UNS Gas or
UNS Electric, or failure of UES, UNS Gas or UNS Electric to make payments or default on debt
greater than $4 million.
UNS Gas expects to draw upon the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver from time to time for seasonal
working capital purposes, to fund a portion of its capital expenditures, or to issue letters of
credit to provide credit enhancement for its natural gas procurement and hedging activities. As of
February 23, 2010, UNS Gas had no outstanding letters of credit under the UNS Gas/UNS
Electric Revolver.
Interest Rate Risk
UNS Gas is subject to interest rate risk resulting from changes in interest rates on its borrowings
under its revolving credit facility. The interest paid on revolving credit borrowings is variable.
As a result of recent volatility in interest rates, UNS Gas may be required to pay higher rates of
interest on borrowings under its revolving credit facility. See
Item 7A. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk, Credit Risk
, below.
K-63
Senior Unsecured Notes
UNS Gas has $100 million of 6.23% senior unsecured notes outstanding of which $50 million matures
in 2011 and $50 million matures in 2015. These notes are guaranteed by UES. The note purchase
agreement for UNS Gas restricts transactions with affiliates, mergers, liens, restricted payments
and incurrence of indebtedness, and also contains a minimum net worth test. As of December 31,
2009, UNS Gas was in compliance with the terms of its note purchase agreement.
UNS Gas must meet a leverage test and an interest coverage test to issue additional debt or to pay
dividends. However, UNS Gas may, without meeting these tests, refinance existing debt and incur up
to $7 million in short-term debt.
Contractual Obligations
UNS Gas Supply Contracts
UNS Gas directly manages its gas supply and transportation contracts. The market price for gas
varies based upon the period during which the commodity is purchased. UNS Gas has firm
transportation agreements with capacity sufficient to meet its current load requirements. These
contracts expire in various years between 2011 and 2023. These costs are passed through to UNS
Gas customers via the PGA.
UNS Gas hedges its gas supply prices by entering into fixed price forward contracts and financial
swaps at various times during the year to provide more stable prices to its customers. These
purchases and hedges are made up to three years in advance with the goal of hedging at least 45% of
the expected monthly gas consumption with fixed prices prior to entering into the month. UNS Gas
hedged approximately 45% of its expected monthly consumption for the 2009/2010 winter season
(November through March). Additionally, UNS Gas has approximately 40% of its expected gas
consumption hedged for April through October 2010, and 35% hedged for the period November 2010
through March 2011.
The following table displays UNS Gas contractual obligations as of December 31, 2009 by maturity
and by type of obligation.
UNS Gas Contractual Obligations
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment Due in Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending December 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
after
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Long Term Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
Purchase Obligations Fuel
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
Pension & Other Post
Retirement Obligations
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Contractual Cash
Obligations
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
70
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
77
|
|
|
$
|
193
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNS Gas conducts certain of its gas procurement and risk management activities under certain
agreements whereby UNS Gas may be required to post margin due to changes in contract values, a
change in UNS Gas creditworthiness or exposures exceeding credit limits provided to UNS Gas. As
of December 31, 2009, UNS Gas had posted $2 million in such credit enhancements.
Dividends on Common Stock
The note purchase agreement for UNS Gas contains restrictions on dividends. UNS Gas may pay
dividends so long as (a) no default or event of default exists and (b) it could incur additional
debt under the debt incurrence test. As of December 31, 2009, UNS Gas was in compliance with the terms of its note purchase agreement.
See
Senior Unsecured Notes
, above.
K-64
UNS ELECTRIC
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
UNS Electric reported net income of $6 million in 2009, $4 million in 2008 and $5 million in 2007.
Similar to TEPs operations, we expect UNS Electrics operations to be seasonal in nature, with
peak energy demand occurring in the summer months.
The table below provides summary financial information for UNS Electric.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Retail Electric Revenues
|
|
$
|
180
|
|
|
$
|
183
|
|
|
$
|
165
|
|
|
Wholesale Electric Revenues
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Revenues
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Operating Revenues
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased Energy and Fuel Expense
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
Other Operations and Maintenance Expense
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
Taxes other than Income Taxes
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Operating Expenses
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
183
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Income
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Total Interest Expense
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
Income Tax Expense
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The table below shows UNS Electrics kWh sales and revenues for 2009, 2008 and 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Sales - Millions of kWh
|
|
|
Electric Revenues - Millions of Dollars
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
%Chng
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
%Chng
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Electric Retail
Sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
814
|
|
|
|
822
|
|
|
|
(1.1
|
%)
|
|
|
854
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
$
|
92
|
|
|
|
(10.6
|
%)
|
|
$
|
86
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
608
|
|
|
|
620
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
%)
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
(9.9
|
%)
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
189
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
%
|
|
|
199
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
(2.2
|
%)
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
Mining
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(0.8
|
%)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric
Retail Sales
|
|
|
1,784
|
|
|
|
1,663
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
%
|
|
|
1,682
|
|
|
$
|
174
|
|
|
$
|
182
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
%)
|
|
$
|
165
|
|
|
REST & DSM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wholesale Electric
Sales
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Sales
|
|
|
1,938
|
|
|
|
1,816
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
|
|
1,682
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
193
|
|
|
|
(4.0
|
%)
|
|
$
|
165
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 2009, retail kWh sales increased by 7.3% compared to 2008. The increase is due primarily to
increased usage by a new copper mining customer in UNS Electrics service area. Excluding mining
sales, UNS Electrics retail kWh sales decreased by 0.8% compared with last year as a result of
weak economic conditions.
UNS Electrics retail customer base did not increase during 2009. As of December 31, 2009, UNS
Electric had approximately 90,000 retail customers, which is comparable with the prior year.
Wholesale revenues decreased by $5 million in 2009 due to lower market prices for wholesale power.
Wholesale sales are made primarily from contract and resource capacity agreements that became
effective June 1, 2008, subsequent to the expiration of UNS Electrics full requirements contract
with Pinnacle West Marketing and Trading (PWMT). All revenues from wholesales sales are credited
against costs recovered through UNS Electrics PPFAC.
K-65
FACTORS AFFECTING RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Competition
As required by the ACC order approving UniSource Energys acquisition of the Citizens Arizona gas
and electric assets, in 2003 UNS Electric filed with the ACC a plan to open its service territories
to retail competition by December 31, 2003. The plan is subject to review and approval by the ACC,
which has not yet considered the plan. As a result of the court decisions concerning the ACCs
Rules, we are unable to predict when and how the ACC will address this plan. See
Item 1.
Business, TEP, Rates and Regulation, Retail Electric Competition Rules,
for more information.
Rates
2008 UNS Electric Rate Order
In May 2008, the ACC issued an order authorizing a 2.5%, or $4 million base rate increase effective
June 1, 2008. UNS Electric had requested a 5.5%, or $8.5 million base rate increase.
Purchased Power and Fuel Adjustment Clause
As part of the 2008 ACC order, a new PPFAC mechanism took effect on June 1, 2008. The PPFAC
mechanism has a forward component and a true-up component. The forward component of the PPFAC rate
is based on forecasted fuel and purchased power costs. The true-up component reconciles actual fuel
and purchased power costs with the amounts collected in the prior year and any amounts
under/over-collected will be collected/credited from/to customers. The ACC approved a cap on the
PPFAC forward component of 1.73 cents per kWh, resulting in total fuel and purchased power recovery
of approximately 8.7 cents per kWh, an increase of approximately 1.7 cents per kWh in UNS
Electrics average retail rate. On April 1, 2009, UNS Electric filed a request with the ACC for a
PPFAC rate that credits 1.06 cents per kWh. This results in a total fuel and purchased power
recovery of approximately 6.06 cents per kWh that became effective on June 1, 2009.
2009 General Rate Case Filing
On April 30, 2009, UNS Electric filed a rate case application with the ACC seeking a base rate
increase of 7.4% or $13.5 million. UNS Electrics filing also included a proposal to acquire, and
put into its rate base, BMGS, the gas-fired facility in UNS Electrics service territory that is
owned and operated by UED. The proposed acquisition and inclusion of BMGS in rate base would not
impact the amount of the total rate increase requested by UNS Electric. The ACC staff testimony
recommended a base revenue increase of approximately $8 million. A hearing before an ACC administrative law
judge concluded in February 2010.
Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
In December 2009, the ACC established a process to adopt new Electric Energy Efficiency Standards
(EE Standards) designed to require UNS Electric, TEP and other affected utilities to implement DSM
programs, only to the extent that they are cost effective. The proposed EE Standards target cost
effective total kWh savings in 2011 of 1.25% and ramping up each year to reach a targeted
cumulative annual reduction in retail kWh sales of 22% by 2020. Savings from Direct Load Control
programs, previously implemented DSM programs and from a portion of energy efficient building codes
may be counted towards meeting the target. The proposed EE Standards provide for recovery of costs
incurred to implement cost effective DSM programs. UNS Electrics DSM programs and rates charged to
customers for such programs are subject to ACC approval. If the ACC approves EE Standards, they
must be certified by the Arizona Attorney General before taking affect.
Purchased Power Agreement
In May 2008, UNS Electric and UED entered into a Power Purchase and Sales Agreement (PPA) under
which UED sells all the output of the 90 MW gas-fired Black Mountain Generating Station (BMGS) to
UNS Electric over a five-year term. The PPA is a tolling arrangement in which UNS Electric takes
operational control of BMGS and assumes all risk of operation and maintenance costs, including
fuel. Under the terms of the PPA, UNS Electric pays UED a capacity charge. The costs associated
with the PPA are recoverable through UNS Electrics PPFAC.
K-66
Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff
UNS Electric began implementing its ACC approved REST plan on June 1, 2008. In 2009 and 2008, UNS
Electric collected $5 million and $3 million in REST surcharges, of which $6 million and $1 million
were expensed for REST projects, respectively. Any surcharge collections above or below the amount
of renewable expenditures will be deferred and reflected in UNS Electrics financial statements as
a regulatory liability or asset. In 2010, UNS Electric expects to collect $8 million from
customers through the REST surcharge. REST implementation plans and the associated surcharge must be
submitted annually to the ACC for review and approval. For more information, see
Item 1. Business,
UNS Electric, Renewable, Energy Standard and Tariff
, above.
Fair Value Measurements
UNS Electric adopted fair value measurements on January 1, 2008. See
Tucson Electric Power
,
Factors Affecting Results of Operations
, above, for more information about fair value measurements.
The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, UNS Electrics financial
assets and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December
31, 2009. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest
level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
UNS Electric
December 31, 2009
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets (Level 1)
|
|
|
Inputs (Level 2)
|
|
|
Inputs (Level 3)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Equivalents
(1)
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
Energy Contracts
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Cash Equivalents are based on observable market prices and are comprised of the fair value of
money market funds and certificates of deposit.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Energy contracts include gas swap agreements (Level 2), forward power purchase and sales
contracts (Level 3), and forward power purchase contracts indexed to gas (Level 3), entered into to
take advantage of favorable market conditions and reduce exposure to energy price risk. The
amounts include current and non-current assets and are net of current and non-current liabilities.
The level 3 valuation techniques are described below.
|
UNS Electric recorded in 2009, net unrealized gains of $7 million in net Regulatory Assets due to
the change in the fair value of forward power purchase contracts classified as Level 3 in the fair
value hierarchy. These changes in fair value were primarily due to older fixed price contracts
settling during the year and entering into new fixed price forward power contracts at lower prices.
UNS Electrics Level 3 derivatives include certain energy contracts where published prices are not
readily available. These include contracts for delivery periods during non-standard time blocks,
contracts for delivery during only a few months of a given year when prices are quoted only for the
annual average, or contracts for delivery at illiquid delivery points. In these cases, UNS
Electric applies certain management assumptions to value such contracts. These assumptions include
applying percentage multipliers to value non-standard time blocks, applying historical price curve
relationships to calendar year quotes, and including adjustments for transmission and line losses
to value contracts at illiquid delivery points. We also consider the impact of counterparty credit
risk using current and historical default and recovery rates as well as our own credit risk using
credit default swap data. UNS Electric reviews these assumptions on a quarterly basis.
K-67
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Liquidity Outlook
In 2009, UNS Electrics capital expenditures were $28 million. UNS Electric expects internal cash
flows to fund a portion of its construction expenditures. Additional sources of funding future
capital expenditures could include draws on the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver, additional credit
lines, the issuance of long-term debt, or capital contributions from UniSource Energy. In April
2007, UniSource Energy contributed $10 million of capital to UNS Electric.
UNS Electric implemented an average base rate increase of approximately 2.5% in June 2008, however
the increase does not provide sufficient cash flow to cover UNS Electrics higher costs and fund
all of its capital expenditures. UNS Electric may need to rely more heavily on external funding
sources for capital expenditures until it receives a decision in the rate case filed in April 2009.
See
UniSource Energy Consolidated
,
Outlook and Strategies, Economic Conditions and UniSource
Energy Consolidated, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Liquidity, Access to Revolving Credit
Facilities
, above for more information regarding the potential impact of current financial market
conditions.
In August 2008, UNS Electric issued $100 million of unsecured debt. A portion of the proceeds was
used to redeem $60 million of notes that matured on August 11, 2008. The remaining proceeds were
used to repay outstanding borrowings by UNS Electric under the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver and
for general corporate purposes. See
Senior Unsecured Notes,
below.
Operating Cash Flow and Capital Expenditures
The table below provides summary cash flow information for UNS Electric.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities
|
|
$
|
37
|
|
|
$
|
14
|
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
Investing Activities
|
|
|
(28
|
)
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
|
Financing Activities
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
Beginning Cash
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending Cash
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating cash flows increased in 2009 because of the higher mining kWh sales, an increase in base
rates, and the PPFAC charge that went into effect on June 1, 2008.
Forecasted capital expenditures for UNS Electric are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
UNS Electric
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver
See
UNS Gas, Liquidity and Capital Resources, UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver
above for description
of UNS Electrics unsecured revolving credit agreement.
UNS Electric expects to draw upon the UNS Gas/UNS Electric Revolver from time to time for seasonal
working capital purposes, to fund a portion of its capital expenditures or to issue letters of
credit to provide credit enhancement for its energy procurement and hedging activities. At
February 23, 2010, UNS Electric had $12 million outstanding under the UNS Gas/UNS Electric
Revolver.
K-68
Senior Unsecured Notes
UNS Electric has $100 million of senior unsecured notes outstanding, consisting of $50 million of
6.50% notes due in 2015 and $50 million of 7.10% notes due August 2023. The notes are guaranteed
by UES. The note purchase agreement for UNS Electric contains certain restrictive covenants,
including restrictions on transactions with affiliates, mergers, liens to secure indebtedness,
restricted payments, and incurrence of indebtedness. As of December 31, 2009, UNS Electric was in
compliance with the terms of its note purchase agreement.
UNS Electric must meet a leverage test and an interest coverage test to issue additional debt or to
pay dividends. However, UNS Electric may, without meeting these tests, refinance existing debt and
incur up to $5 million in short-term debt.
Contractual Obligations
UNS Electric Power Supply and Transmission Contracts
UNS Electric enters into various power supply agreements for periods of one to five years. Certain
of these contracts are at a fixed price per MW and others are indexed to natural gas prices.
UNS Electrics power purchase contracts and risk management activities are subject to master
agreements whereby UNS Electric may be required to post margin due to changes in contract values or
if there has been a material change in UNS Electrics creditworthiness, or exposures exceeding
credit limits provided to UNS Electric. As of December 31, 2009, UNS Electric had posted $11
million of such credit enhancements in the form of letters of credit.
UNS Electric imports the power it purchases over the Western Area Power Administrations (WAPA)
transmission lines. UNS Electrics transmission capacity agreements with WAPA provide for annual
rate adjustments and expire in 2017 and 2011.
The following table displays UNS Electrics contractual obligations as of December 31, 2009 by
maturity and by type of obligation.
UNS Electrics Contractual Obligations
-Millions of Dollars-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment Due in Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending December 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
after
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Long Term Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
Purchase Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased Power
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
|
Transmission
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
Pension & Other Post
Retirement Obligations
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Contractual Cash
Obligations
|
|
$
|
77
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
$
|
54
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
134
|
|
|
$
|
326
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K-69
Dividends on Common Stock
The note purchase agreement for UNS Electric contains restrictions on dividends. UNS Electric may
pay dividends so long as (a) no default or event of default exists and (b) it could incur
additional debt under the debt incurrence test. As of December 31, 2009, UNS Electric was in compliance with the terms of its note purchase agreement.
See
Senior Unsecured Notes
, above. As of December
31, 2009, UNS Electric has not paid dividends to UniSource Energy. UNS Electrics ability to pay
dividends will depend on the outcome of the rate case filed in April 2009, the need for capital
expenditures and various other factors.
OTHER NON-REPORTABLE BUSINESS SEGMENTS
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The table below summarizes the income (loss) for the Other non-reportable segments in the last
three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Parent Company
|
|
$
|
(6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5
|
)
|
|
Millennium
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
UED
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Net Loss
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UniSource Energy Parent Company
UniSource Energy parent company expenses include interest expense (net of tax) related to the
UniSource Energy Convertible Senior Notes and the UniSource Credit Agreement. In 2009, UniSource
Energy had capital expenditures of $8 million related to the purchase of land and site development
to construct a new headquarters building.
UED
UED completed the construction of the 90 MW BMGS in Kingman, Arizona in May 2008. UED sells the
output of BMGS to UNS Electric through a PPA. See
UNS Electric, Factors Affecting Results of
Operation, Purchased Power Agreement
, above.
In December 2008, UniSource Energy contributed $59 million of equity to UED by canceling an
intercompany promissory note in the amount of $59 million. Borrowings under the promissory note
were used to finance the development of BMGS.
In March 2009, UED entered into a 364-day $30 million term loan facility that is guaranteed by
UniSource Energy and is secured by substantially all of the assets of UED, which primarily consist
of BMGS and a mortgage on UEDs leasehold interest in the real property on which BMGS is located.
UED used the loan proceeds to pay a $30 million dividend to UniSource Energy, which in turn made
a capital contribution to TEP. UED has the option of paying interest at LIBOR plus 3% or an
alternate base rate plus 2%. As of December 31, 2009, UED owed $26 million under this term loan
facility. In February 2010, UED made an additional borrowing under the facility, resulting in $35
million of outstanding debt, and extended the maturity of the debt for two years to March 2012.
The loan proceeds were used to pay a $9 million dividend to UniSource Energy.
In 2009 and 2008, UED recorded after-tax income of $5 million and $3 million, respectively, related
to the operation of BMGS.
In 2008, UED made distributions to UniSource Energy of less than $1 million. The $30 million
dividend paid in 2009 represented a return of capital distribution, as did $4 million of the $9
million dividends paid in February 2010.
K-70
FACTORS AFFECTING RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Millennium Investments
Millennium is in the process of exiting its remaining investments which may yield gains or losses.
At December 31, 2009, Millenniums key assets included: a $15 million note receivable related to
the sale of Sabinas; a $10 million investment balance in various energy technology projects; and $7
million in cash.
In June 2009, Millennium finalized a sale of its 50% interest in Sabinas to Mimosa. The terms
called for an upfront $5 million payment to Millennium which was received in January 2009. Other
key terms of the transaction include a three year, 6% interest-bearing, collateralized $15 million
note from Mimosa. In June 2009, Millennium recorded a $6 million pre-tax gain on the sale.
Millennium made $3 million in dividend payments to UniSource Energy in 2009, $25 million in 2008
and $15 million in 2007. In January 2010, Millennium made a $4 million dividend payment to
UniSource Energy. All of these dividends represented return of capital distributions.
Millenniums remaining commitment for all of its investments combined is less than $1 million,
which is expected to be funded over the next one to two years.
The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, Millenniums financial
assets and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December
31, 2009. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest
level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
December 31, 2009
- Millions of Dollars -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets (Level 1)
|
|
|
Inputs (Level 2)
|
|
|
Inputs (Level 3)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Investments
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
Level 1 Investments represent the fair value of money market funds based on observable market
prices. Level 3 Investments represent Millenniums equity investment in unregulated businesses
that, in the absence of readily ascertainable market values, is based on the investment partners
valuations.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
In preparing financial statements under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), management
exercises judgment in the selection and application of accounting principles, including making
estimates and assumptions. UniSource Energy and TEP consider Critical Accounting Policies to be
those that could result in materially different financial statement results if our assumptions
regarding application of accounting principles were different. UniSource Energy and TEP describe
their Critical Accounting Policies below. Other significant accounting policies and recently
issued accounting standards are discussed in Note 1 of
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Nature of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Estimates
.
Accounting for Rate Regulation
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric generally use the same accounting policies and practices used by
unregulated companies for financial reporting under GAAP. However, sometimes these principles
require special accounting treatment for regulated companies to show the effect of regulation. For
example, in setting retail rates for TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric, the ACC may not allow TEP, UNS
Gas or UNS Electric to currently charge their customers to recover certain expenses, but instead
may require that these expenses be charged to customers in the future. In this situation,
regulatory accounting requires that TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric defer these items and show them
as regulatory assets on the balance sheet until TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are allowed to charge
their customers. TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric then amortize these items as expense to the income
statement as these charges are recovered from customers. Similarly, certain revenue items may be
deferred as regulatory liabilities, which are also eventually amortized to the income statement as
rates to customers are reduced.
K-71
TEP
Upon approval by the ACC of a settlement agreement in November 1999, TEP discontinued application
of regulatory accounting for its generation operations. Beginning in December 2008, as a result of
the 2008 TEP rate order, TEP reapplied regulatory accounting to its generation related operations.
Throughout this period, TEP continued to apply regulatory accounting to its transmission and
distribution operations.
TEPs generation, transmission and distribution regulatory liabilities, net of regulatory assets,
totaled $42 million at December 31, 2009. If TEP stopped applying regulatory accounting to its
remaining regulated operations, it would write off the related balances of its regulatory assets as
an expense and its regulatory liabilities as income on its income statement. TEP regularly
assesses whether it can continue to apply regulatory accounting to its cost-based rate regulated
operations. Expectations of future recovery are generally based on orders issued by regulatory
commissions or historical experience. There are no current or expected proposals or changes in the
regulatory environment that impact the probability of future recovery of these assets.
UNS Gas and UNS Electric
UNS Gass regulatory liabilities, net of regulatory assets, totaled $19 million at December 31,
2009. UNS Electrics regulatory liabilities, net of regulatory assets, totaled $4 million at
December 31, 2009. UNS Gas and UNS Electric regularly assess whether they can continue to apply
regulatory accounting to their cost-based rate regulated operations. If UNS Gas and UNS Electric
stopped applying regulatory accounting to their regulated operations, they would write off the
related balances of regulatory assets as an expense and regulatory liabilities as income on their
income statements. There are no current or expected proposals or changes in the regulatory
environment that impact the probability of future recovery of these assets.
Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations
TEP
TEP is required to record the fair value of a liability for a legal obligation to retire an asset
in the period in which the liability is incurred. A legal obligation can also be associated with
the retirement of a long-lived asset whose timing and/or method of settlement are conditional on a
future event. TEP incurs legal obligations as a result of environmental and other governmental
regulations, contractual agreements and other factors. To estimate the liability, management must
use significant judgment and assumptions in: determining whether a legal obligation exists to
remove assets; estimating the probability of a future event for a conditional obligation;
estimating the fair value of the cost of removal; estimating when final removal will occur; and
estimating the credit-adjusted risk-free interest rates to be used to discount the future
liabilities. Changes that may arise over time with regard to these assumptions and determinations
will change amounts recorded in the future as expense for asset retirement obligations.
The initial liability is recorded by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived
asset. Over time, the liability is adjusted to its present value by recognizing accretion expense
as an operating expense in the income statement each period, and the capitalized cost of the
long-lived asset is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the
liability, TEP will pay the recorded liability or incur a gain or loss if the actual costs differ
from the recorded amount. If TEP retires any asset at the end of its useful life, without a legal
obligation to do so, TEP will record retirement costs at that time as incurred or accrued.
TEP has identified legal obligations to retire generation plant assets specified in land leases for
its jointly-owned Navajo and Four Corners Generating Stations. The land on which these stations
reside is leased from the Navajo Nation. The provisions of the leases require the lessees to
remove the facilities upon request of the Navajo Nation at the expiration of the leases. TEP also
has certain environmental obligations at the San Juan Generating Station. TEP has estimated that
its share of the cost to remove the Navajo and Four Corners facilities and settle the San Juan
environmental obligations will be approximately $40 million at the date of retirement. No other
legal obligations to retire generation plant assets were identified.
In 2004, TEP, Phelps Dodge Energy Services, LLC and PNM Resources, Inc. each purchased from Duke
Energy North America, LLC a one-third interest in a limited liability company which owns the
natural gas-fired Luna Energy Facility (Luna) in Southern New Mexico. Luna is a 570-MW combined
cycle plant and was placed into commercial operation in April 2006. See
Item 1. Business, TEP,
Generating and Other Resources, Future Generating Resources
. The new owners assumed asset
retirement obligations to remove certain piping and evaporation
ponds and to restore the ground to its original condition. TEP has estimated its share of the
obligations will be approximately $2 million at the date of retirement.
K-72
As of December 31, 2009, TEP had a liability of $5 million associated with its final asset
retirement obligations.
TEP has various transmission and distribution lines that operate under leases and rights-of-way
that contain end dates and restrictive clauses. TEP operates its transmission and distribution
lines as if they will be operated in perpetuity and would continue to be used or sold without land
remediation. As such there are no legal obligations that require application of the accounting
requirements for asset retirement obligations. Nevertheless, included in the revenue requirement
underlying the Companys electric service rates is a component of depreciation expense intended to
enable TEP to accrue for such future costs of retiring assets for which no legal obligations
exists. The accumulated balance of such accruals, less actual removal costs incurred, net of
salvage proceeds realized, is reported as a regulatory liability. As of December 31, 2009, such
liability is reported as $163 million.
UNS Gas and UNS Electric
UNS Gas and UNS Electric have various transmission and distribution lines that operate under land
leases and rights-of-way that contain end dates and restorative clauses. UNS Gas and UNS Electric
operate their transmission and distribution lines as if they will be operated in perpetuity and
would continue to be used or sold without land remediation. As a result, UNS Gas and UNS Electric
are not recognizing the cost of final removal of the transmission and distribution lines in the
financial statements
.
For the net cost of removal for interim retirements from transmission, distribution and general
plant, UNS Gas accrued $20 million as of December 31, 2009. UNS Electric accrued $12 million as
of December 31, 2009. The amounts are recorded as regulatory liabilities.
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plan Assumptions
We record plan assets, obligations, and expenses related to pension and other postretirement
benefit plans based on actuarial valuations, which include key assumptions on discount rates,
expected returns on plan assets, compensation increases and health care cost trend rates. These
actuarial assumptions are reviewed annually and modified as appropriate. The effect of
modifications is generally recorded or amortized over future periods. We believe that the
assumptions used in recording obligations under the plans are reasonable based on prior experience,
market conditions and the advice of plan actuaries.
TEP
TEP is required to recognize the underfunded status of its defined benefit pension and other
postretirement plans as a liability. The underfunded status is measured as the difference between
the fair value of the plans assets and the projected benefit obligation for pension plans or
accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for other postretirement benefit plans. We expect
volatility in the liability recognized in the balance sheet in future years as the funded status of
our plans can change significantly due to discount rate changes and investment and actuarial
experience. TEP recorded the underfunded amount at December 31, 2009 of $58 million for its
pension obligations and $69 million for its other post-retirement obligations as a liability and a
regulatory asset to reflect expected recovery of pension and other post-retirement costs through
rates.
TEP is required to measure the funded status of its pension plans as of the date of its year-end
balance sheet, beginning with the year ended December 31, 2008. On January 1, 2008, TEP recorded a
reduction to retained earnings of less than $1 million to move the measurement date from December 1
to December 31 for all of its pension and other postretirement plans.
TEP discounted its future pension plan obligations at 6.3% at December 31, 2009 and its other
postretirement plan obligations at a rate of 6%. TEP determines the discount rate annually based
on the rates currently available on high-quality, non-callable, long-term bonds. TEP looks to
bonds that receive one of the two highest ratings given by a recognized rating agency whose future
cash flows match the timing and amount of expected future benefit payments. For TEPs pension
plans, a 25-basis point change in the discount rate would increase or decrease the projected
benefit obligation (PBO) by approximately $7 million and the 2010 plan expense by $1 million. For
TEPs other postretirement benefit plan, a 25-basis point change in the discount rate would
increase or decrease the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation (APBO) by approximately $2
million. A 25-basis point change in the discount rate would impact plan expense by less than $1
million.
K-73
TEP calculates the market-related value of plan assets using the fair value of plan assets on the
measurement date. TEP assumed that its plans assets would generate a long-term rate of return of
7.5% at December 31, 2009. In establishing its assumption as to the expected return on plan
assets, TEP reviews the plans asset allocation and develops return assumptions for each asset
class based on advice from an investment consultant and the plans actuary that includes both
historical performance analysis and forward looking views of the financial markets. Pension
expense decreases as the expected rate of return on plan assets increases. A 25-basis point change
in the expected return on plan assets would impact pension expense in 2010 by less than $1 million.
TEP used a current year health care cost trend rate of 7.9% in valuing its postretirement benefit
obligation at December 31, 2009. This rate reflects both market
conditions and the plans experience. Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant
effect on the amounts reported for health care plans. A one-percentage point change in assumed
health care cost trend rates would change the postretirement benefit obligation by approximately $5 million and the related plan expense in 2010 by less than $1 million.
TEP will record pension expense of approximately $12 million and other postretirement benefit
expense of $5 million ratably through 2010, of which approximately $2 million will be capitalized.
TEP expects to make pension plan contributions of $20 million in 2010. In 2009, TEP established a
Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association (VEBA) to fund its other postretirement benefit plan.
TEP expects to make benefit payments to retirees under the postretirement benefit plan of
approximately $5 million in 2010 and contributions to the VEBA trust of $1 million in 2010.
UNS Gas and UNS Electric
UNS Gas and UNS Electric discounted their future pension plan obligations using a rate of 6.3% at
December 31, 2009. For UNS Gas and UNS Electrics pension plan, a 25-basis point change in the
discount rate would impact the benefit obligation and 2010 pension expense by less than $1 million.
UNS Gas and UNS Electric will record pension expense of $2 million in 2010, of which less than $1
million will be capitalized. UNS Gas and UNS Electric expects to make combined pension plan
contributions of $2 million in 2010.
UNS Gas and UNS Electric discounted their other postretirement plan obligations using a rate of 6%
at December 31, 2009. UNS Gas and UNS Electric will record postretirement medical benefit expense
and make benefit payments to retirees under the postretirement benefit plan of less than $1 million
in 2010.
Accounting for Derivative Instruments, Trading Activities and Hedging Activities
Commodity Derivative Contracts
TEP, UNS Electric and UNS Gas enter into forward contracts to purchase or sell a specified amount
of capacity or energy at a specified price over a given period of time, typically for one month,
three months, or one year, within established limits to take advantage of favorable market
opportunities. In general, TEP enters into forward purchase contracts when market conditions
provide the opportunity to purchase energy for its load at prices that are below the marginal cost
of its supply resources or to supplement its own resources (e.g., during plant outages and summer
peaking periods). TEP enters into forward sales contracts when it forecasts that it has excess
supply and the market price of energy exceeds its marginal cost. TEP and UNS Gas also enter into
forward gas commodity price swap agreements to lock in fixed prices on a portion of forecasted
summer gas purchases.
As a result of the 2008 TEP Rate Order, which permits recovery in the PPFAC of hedging
transactions, unrealized gains and losses on commodity derivative contracts entered into for retail
customer load are recorded as either a regulatory asset or regulatory liability. UNS Electric and
UNS Gas are also permitted to record unrealized gains and losses on commodity derivative contracts
as either a regulatory asset or regulatory liability. There are no current or expected proposals
or changes in the regulatory environment that impact the probability of future recovery of these
assets through the PPFAC or PGA mechanisms.
K-74
Interest Rate Swaps
TEP hedges the cash flow risk associated with unfavorable changes in the variable interest rates
related to LIBOR on the Springerville Common Facilities Lease. TEP entered into swaps that had the
effect of converting approximately $30 million and $35 million of variable rate lease debt payments
for the Springerville Common Facilities Lease to a fixed rate from May 2009 through July 1, 2014,
and June 2006 through January 2, 2020, respectively. In August 2009, TEP entered into a swap that
had the effect of converting $50 million of variable rate industrial development bonds to a fixed
rate from September 2009 through September 2014. At December 31, 2009, the fair value of these
interest rate swaps is a liability of $6 million.
Commodity Cash Flow Hedge
TEP hedges the cash flow risk associated with a six-year power wholesale supply agreement using a
six-year power purchase swap agreement. Unrealized gains and losses are recorded in Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI). At December 31, 2009, the fair value of this contract is a
liability of $1 million.
The market prices used to determine fair values for TEP, UNS Electric and UNS Gas derivative
instruments at December 31, 2009, are estimated based on various factors including broker quotes,
exchange prices, over the counter prices and time value.
TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric manage the risk of counterparty default by performing financial
credit reviews, setting limits, monitoring exposures, requiring collateral when needed, and using a
standardized agreement, which allows for the netting of current period exposures to and from a
single counterparty.
See
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk, Commodity Price Risk.
Unbilled Revenue TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric
TEPs, UNS Gass and UNS Electrics retail revenues include an estimate of MWhs/therms delivered
but unbilled at the end of each period. Unbilled revenues are dependent upon a number of factors
that require managements judgment including estimates of retail sales and customer usage patterns.
The unbilled revenue is estimated by comparing the estimated MWhs/therms delivered to the
MWhs/therms billed to TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric retail customers. The excess of estimated
MWhs/therms delivered over MWhs/therms billed is then allocated to the retail customer classes
based on estimated usage by each customer class. TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric then record revenue
for each customer class based on the various bill rates for each customer class. Due to the
seasonal fluctuations of TEPs actual load, the unbilled revenue amount increases during the spring
and summer months and decreases during the fall and winter months. The unbilled revenue amount for
UNS Gas sales increases during the fall and winter months and decreases during the spring and
summer months, whereas, the unbilled revenue amount for UNS Electric sales increases during the
spring and summer months and decreases during the fall and winter months.
Plant Asset Depreciable Lives TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric
We calculate depreciation expense based on our estimate of the useful lives of our plant assets.
The estimated useful lives, and resulting depreciation rates presently used to calculate
depreciation expense for electric generation and distribution assets for TEP, UNS Gas and UNS
Electric have been approved by the ACC in prior rate decisions. Depreciation rates for such assets
cannot be changed without ACC approval. Depreciation rates for electric transmission assets fall
under the jurisdiction of the FERC.
In January 2010, TEP obtained an updated depreciation study which indicated that its transmission
assets depreciable lives should be extended. As a result, TEP adopted new transmission
depreciation rates effective January 2010 which will have the effect of reducing depreciation
expense by approximately $14 million annually.
Deferred Tax Valuation
Due to the differences between GAAP and income tax laws, many transactions are treated differently
for income tax purposes than they are in the financial statements. This difference is accounted
for by recording deferred income tax assets and liabilities on our balance sheets. These assets
and liabilities are recorded using the income tax rates in effect on the balance sheet date.
K-75
Federal and state income tax credits are treated as a reduction to income tax expense in the year
the credit arises.
Prior to 1990, we flowed through to ratepayers certain accelerated tax benefits related to utility
plant as the benefits were recognized on the income tax return. Income Taxes Recoverable Through
Future Rates on the balance sheet reflects the future revenues due us from ratepayers as these tax
benefits reverse. See Note 2.
Consolidated income tax liabilities are allocated to subsidiaries based on their taxable income and
deductions as reported in the consolidated tax return.
UniSource Energy and TEP record net interest expense associated with uncertain tax positions as
Interest Expense in the income statements. No income tax penalties have been accrued.
At December 31, 2009, TEP had no valuation allowance. See
Note 9 of Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements.
As of December 31, 2009, UniSource Energys deferred income tax assets include $8 million related
to unregulated investment losses of Millennium. These losses have not been reflected on UniSource
Energys consolidated income tax returns. If UniSource Energy were unable to recognize such losses
through its consolidated income tax return in the foreseeable future, UniSource Energy would be
required to write off these deferred tax assets.
RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
The following recently issued accounting standards are not yet reflected in the UniSource Energy
and TEP financial statements:
|
|
|
|
The FASB issued authoritative guidance for transfers of financial assets that clarify
and change the criteria for a transfer to be accounted for as a sale, change the amount of
a recognized gain/loss on a sale when beneficial interests are received by the transferor,
and requires extensive disclosures. This standard is effective for interim and annual
periods beginning January 1, 2010. To date, we have not participated in any transfers to
which this guidance is applicable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The FASB issued authoritative guidance for variable interest entities requiring an
analysis to determine whether the enterprises variable interest or interests give it a
controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity. This standard did not have a
material impact on our financial statements on adoption on January 1, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The FASB issued authoritative guidance for multiple deliverable revenue arrangements
that provides another alternative for determining the selling price of deliverables and
eliminates the residual method of allocating consideration. In addition, this
pronouncement requires expanded Quantitative and Qualitative disclosures and is effective
for revenue arrangements entered into after January 1, 2011. We are evaluating the impact
of this pronouncement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The FASB issued amendments that require some new disclosures and clarify some existing
disclosure requirements about fair value measurements. The amendments are effective for
interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2010, except for disclosures
about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward of activity in level
3 fair value measurements, which are effective for interim and annual reporting periods
beginning January 1, 2011. We are evaluating the impact of these new and revised
disclosures on our financial statements.
|
SAFE HARBOR FOR FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements as defined by the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. UniSource Energy and TEP are including the following
cautionary statements to make applicable and take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 for any forward-looking statements made by or for
UniSource Energy or TEP in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Forward-looking statements include
statements concerning plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events or performance and
underlying assumptions and other statements that are not statements of historical facts.
Forward-looking statements may be identified by the use of words such as anticipates,
estimates, expects, intends, plans, predicts, projects, and similar expressions. From
time to time, we may publish or
otherwise make available forward-looking statements of this nature. All such forward-looking
statements, whether written or oral, and whether made by or on behalf of UniSource Energy or TEP,
are expressly qualified by these cautionary statements and any other cautionary statements which
may accompany the forward-looking statements. In addition, UniSource Energy and TEP disclaim any
obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the
date of this report.
K-76
Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results or
outcomes to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements. We express
our expectations, beliefs and projections in good faith and believe them to have a reasonable
basis. However, we make no assurances that managements expectations, beliefs or projections will
be achieved or accomplished. We have identified the following important factors that could cause
actual results to differ materially from those discussed in our forward-looking statements. These
may be in addition to other factors and matters discussed in Item 1A. Risk Factors, Item 7.
Managements Financial Discussion and Analysis, and other parts of this report: state and federal
regulatory and legislative decisions and actions; regional economic and market conditions which
could affect customer growth and energy usage; weather variations affecting energy usage; the cost
of debt and equity capital and access to capital markets; the performance of the stock market and
changing interest rate environment, which affect the value of the companys pension and other
postretirement benefit plan assets and the related contribution requirements and expense;
unexpected increases in O&M expense; resolution of pending litigation matters; changes in
accounting standards; changes in critical accounting estimates; the ongoing restructuring of the
electric industry; changes to long-term contracts; the cost of fuel and power supplies; and
performance of TEPs generating plants.
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Market Risks
We are exposed to various forms of market risk. Changes in interest rates, returns on marketable
securities, and changes in commodity prices may affect our future financial results.
For additional information concerning risk factors, including market risks, see Safe
Harbor for
Forward-Looking Statements
, above.
Risk Management Committee
We have a Risk Management Committee responsible for the oversight of commodity price risk and
credit risk related to the wholesale energy marketing activities of TEP and the fuel and power
procurement activities at TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric. Our Risk Management Committee, which
meets on a quarterly basis and as needed, consists of officers from the finance, accounting, legal,
wholesale marketing, transmission and distribution operations, and generation operations
departments of UniSource Energy. To limit TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electrics exposure to commodity
price risk, the Risk Management Committee sets trading and hedging policies and limits, which are
reviewed frequently to respond to constantly changing market conditions. To limit TEP, UNS Gas and
UNS Electrics exposure to credit risk, the Risk Management Committee reviews counterparty credit
exposure as well as credit policies and limits.
Interest Rate Risk
TEP is exposed to interest rate risk resulting from changes in interest rates on certain of its
variable rate debt obligations. At December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, TEP had $459 million
in tax-exempt variable rate debt outstanding. The interest rates on TEPs tax-exempt variable
rate debt are reset weekly by its remarketing agents. The maximum interest rate payable under the
indentures for these bonds is 10% on the 2008 Pima B Bonds and 20% on the other $329 million in
IDBs. The average interest rate on TEPs variable rate debt (excluding letter of credit fees) was
0.41% in 2009 and 2.11% in 2008. The average weekly interest rate ranged from 0.25% to 0.79% in
2009 and 0.55% to 8.09% during 2008. The peak average interest rate of 8.09% occurred in September
2008 when the short-term debt markets began to experience significant disruptions following the
bankruptcy filing of Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. and the deterioration of creditworthiness of
other large financial institutions. Although short-term markets were less volatile in 2009, TEP
may still be subject to volatility in its tax-exempt variable rate debt. A 100 basis point
increase in average interest rates on this debt, over a twelve month period, would result in a
decrease in TEPs pre-tax net income of approximately $5 million.
K-77
To reduce its exposure to variable interest rate risk, in August 2009, TEP entered into an interest
rate swap that had the effect of converting $50 million of variable rate industrial revenue bonds
to a fixed rate of 2.4% from September 2009 through September 2014. To further reduce its variable
interest rate exposure, in January 2010, TEP converted the interest rate on its $130 million
principal amount of 2008 Pima B Bonds from a variable rate to a fixed rate of 5.75% through
maturity in 2029.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, TEPs debt also included variable rate lease debt totaling $65
million related to its Springerville Common Facilities Leases. The notes underlying the leases
mature in June 2017 and January 2020. Interest is payable at six-month LIBOR plus an applicable
spread. The applicable spread was 1.625% at December 31, 2009 and 1.5% at December 31, 2008.
In June 2006 and May 2009, TEP entered into interest rate swaps to hedge the floating interest rate
risk associated with the Springerville Common Facilities lease debt. The swaps have the effect of
fixing the interest rates on the amortizing principal balances as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at Dec. 31, 2009
|
|
Fixed Rate
|
|
|
LIBOR Spread
|
|
|
$35 million
|
|
|
5.77
|
%
|
|
|
1.625
|
%
|
|
$23 million
|
|
|
3.18
|
%
|
|
|
1.625
|
%
|
|
$7 million
|
|
|
3.32
|
%
|
|
|
1.625
|
%
|
To adjust the value of TEPs interest rate swaps, classified as a cash flow hedge, to fair value in
Other Comprehensive Income, TEP recorded the following net unrealized gains (losses):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
- In Millions-
|
|
|
Unrealized Gains (Losses)
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
(5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric are also subject to interest rate risk
resulting from changes in interest rates on their borrowings under revolving credit facilities.
Revolving credit borrowings may be made on the basis of a spread over LIBOR or an Alternate Base
Rate. With the recent disruptions in the financial markets, the spread between LIBOR and other
similar maturity short-term rates, such as U.S. Treasury securities, has been significantly higher
than historical relationships. As a result, UniSource Energy, TEP, UNS Gas and UNS Electric may
experience significant volatility in the rates paid on LIBOR borrowings under their revolving
credit facilities.
Marketable Securities Risk
UniSource Energy has a short-term investment policy which governs the investment of excess cash
balances by UniSource Energy and its subsidiaries. We review this policy periodically in response
to market conditions to adjust, if necessary, the maturities and concentrations by investment type
and issuer in the investment portfolio. As of December 31, 2009, UniSource Energys short-term
investments consisted of highly-rated and liquid money market funds, commercial paper, and
certificates of deposit. These short-term investments are classified as Cash and Cash Equivalents
on the Balance Sheet.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, TEP had marketable securities comprised of investments in lease debt
and equity with an estimated fair value of $132 million and $127 million, respectively. At
December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value exceeded the carrying value by $8 million and $17
million, respectively. These securities represent TEPs investments in lease debt and equity
underlying certain of TEPs capital lease obligations. Changes in the fair value of such debt
securities do not present a material risk to TEP, as TEP intends to hold these investments to
maturity.
K-78
Commodity Price Risk
TEP
TEP is exposed to commodity price risk primarily relating to changes in the market price of
electricity, natural gas, coal and emission allowances. Beginning January 1, 2009, this risk is
mitigated through a PPFAC mechanism which fully recovers the actual retail fuel and purchased power
costs incurred on a timely basis from TEPs retail customers. The PPFAC mechanism has a forward
component and a true-up component. The forward component of the PPFAC rate is based on forecasted
fuel and purchased power costs. The true-up component reconciles
actual fuel and purchased power costs with the amounts collected in the prior year and any amounts
under/over-collected will be collected from/credited to customers. If the actual price of power
is higher than the forecasted PPFAC rate, TEP is exposed to the price difference until the
subsequent 12-month period when the true-up component is adjusted to allow the recovery of this
difference. In 2009, the ACC approved a PPFAC rate of 0.18 cents per kWh, resulting in total fuel
and purchased power recovery of approximately 3.08 cents per kWh.
Purchases and Sales of Energy
To manage its exposure to energy price risk, TEP enters into forward contracts to buy or sell
energy at a specified price and future delivery period. Generally, TEP commits to future sales
based on expected excess generating capability, forward prices and generation costs, using a
diversified market approach to provide a balance between long-term, mid-term and spot energy sales.
TEP generally enters into forward purchases during its summer peaking period to ensure it can meet
its load and reserve requirements and account for other contracts and resource contingencies. TEP
also enters into limited forward purchases and sales to optimize its resource portfolio and take
advantage of locational differences in price. These positions are managed on both a volumetric and
dollar basis and are closely monitored using risk management policies and procedures overseen by
the Risk Management Committee. For example, the risk management policies provide that TEP should
not take a short physical position in the third quarter and must have owned generation backing up
all physical forward sales positions at the time the sale is made. TEPs risk management policies
also restrict entering into forward positions with maturities extending beyond the end of the next
calendar year except for approved hedging purposes.
TEPs risk management policies also allow for financial purchases and sales of energy subject to
specified risk parameters established and monitored by the Risk Management Committee. These
include financial trades in a futures account on an exchange, with the intent of optimizing market
opportunities.
The majority of TEPs forward contracts are considered to be normal purchases and sales of
electric energy and are therefore not accounted for as derivatives. TEP records revenues on its
normal sales and expenses on its normal purchases in the period in which the energy is
delivered. From time to time, however, TEP enters into forward contracts that meet the definition
of a derivative. When TEP has derivative forward contracts, it marks them to market using actively
quoted prices obtained from brokers for power traded over-the-counter at Palo Verde and at other
Southwestern U.S. trading hubs. TEP believes that these broker quotations used to calculate the
mark-to-market values represent accurate measures of the fair values of TEPs positions because of
the short-term nature of TEPs positions, as limited by risk management policies, and the liquidity
in the short-term market.
Natural Gas
TEP is also subject to commodity price risk from changes in the price of natural gas. In addition
to energy from its coal-fired facilities, TEP typically uses purchased power, supplemented by
generation from its gas-fired units to meet the summer peak demands of its retail customers and to
meet local reliability needs. Some of these purchased power contracts are price indexed to natural
gas prices. Short-term and spot power purchase prices are also closely correlated to natural gas
prices. Due to its increasing seasonal gas and purchased power usage, TEP hedges a portion of its
total natural gas exposure from plant fuel, gas-indexed purchase power and spot market purchases
with fixed price contracts for a maximum of three years. TEP purchases its remaining gas fuel
needs and purchased power in the spot and short-term markets.
As required by fair value accounting rules, for the year ended December 31, 2009, TEP considered
the impact of non-performance risk in the measurement of fair value of its derivative assets and
derivative liabilities net of collateral posted. The adjustment required for TEP was less than
$0.5 million at December 31, 2009.
K-79
To adjust the value of its commodity derivatives to fair value in Regulatory Assets or Regulatory
Liabilities, TEP recorded the following net unrealized gains (losses):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
- In Millions-
|
|
|
Unrealized Gains (Losses)
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
(19
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
The chart below displays the valuation methodologies and maturities of TEPs power and gas
derivative contracts.
Unrealized Gain (Loss) of TEPs
Hedging and Trading Activities
- Millions of Dollars -